From Text Analysis to Metrics: AI Approaches to ESG Assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/wr1teh04Keywords:
ESG measurement, natural language processing, Transformer models, sentence-level multi-label classification, FinBERT sentiment.Abstract
In ESG assessments, disclosure-centric scorecards are being replaced by AI-based sentence-level systems, which offer organized aggregate based on precise criteria. The shift from topic models and human supervision to domain-adaptive Transformer classifiers and evidence-based language models with retrieval capabilities is traced in this work. In order to create trustworthy textual metrics from news, earnings calls, and reports, we concentrate on multi-label phrase annotation by combining non-ESG controls, industry materiality, and financial sentiment. The evaluation takes precision/recall, external validity, and structural variations among rating agencies into account. Decision-making applications in supply chain visibility, investment research, and disclosure assurance are covered, as well as governance elements like documentation, energy use, and human-computer interaction. We conclude by outlining potential avenues for future research and development, such as cross-lingual robustness, retrieval stability, benchmark design, and low-carbon AI. Our suggested "text → metrics → econometrics" approach complements current ratings while improving the scalability, timeliness, comparability, and auditability of ESG measurement.
Downloads
References
[1] GRI. GRI universal standards 2021 [S]. 2021.
[2] IFRS Foundation/International Sustainability Standards Board. IFRS S1: General requirements for disclosure of sustainability-related financial information [S]. 2023.
[3] SASB/IFRS Foundation. Materiality finder / materiality map [EB/OL]. (n.d.).
[4] MSCI. MSCI ESG ratings—Methodology [EB/OL]. (n.d.).
[5] Sustainalytics (Morningstar). ESG risk ratings—Methodology v3.1 (abstract) [EB/OL]. 2024.
[6] LSEG/Refinitiv. LSEG ESG scores—Methodology [EB/OL]. 2025.
[7] Bloomberg. Environmental & social (ES) scores—Methodology overview [EB/OL]. (n.d.).
[8] MSCI/KLD. KLD (ESG) STATS—Data overview (1991–2014) [EB/OL]. 2015.
[9] Berg F, Kölbel J F, Rigobon R. Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings [J]. Review of Finance, 2022, 26(6): 1315–1344.
[10] Goloshchapova I, Poon S-H, Pritchard M, Reed P. Corporate social responsibility reports: Topic analysis and big data approach [J]. The European Journal of Finance, 2019, 25(17): 1637–1654.
[11] Schimanski T, Reding A, Reding N, Bingler J, Kraus M, Leippold M. Bridging the gap in ESG measurement: Using NLP to quantify environmental, social, and governance communication [J]. Finance Research Letters, 2024, 61: 104979.
[12] Lee H, Kim J H, Jung H S. ESG-KIBERT: A new paradigm in ESG evaluation using NLP and industry-specific customization [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2025, 193: 114440.
[13] Kang J, El Maarouf I. FinSim4-ESG shared task: Learning semantic similarities for the financial domain [C]// ESG insights. 2022: 211–217.
[14] Bronzini M, Nicolini C, Lepri B, Passerini A, Staiano J. Glitter or gold? Deriving structured insights from sustainability reports via large language models [J]. EPJ Data Science, 2024, 13(1): 41.
[15] Zou Y, Shi M, Chen Z, Deng Z, Lei Z, Zeng Z, Yang S, Tong H, Xiao L, Zhou W. ESGReveal: An LLM-based approach for extracting structured data from ESG reports [EB/OL]. arXiv:2312.17264, 2023.
[16] Araci D. FinBERT: Financial sentiment analysis with pre-trained language models [EB/OL]. arXiv:1908.10063, 2019.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Academic Journal of Science and Technology

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.








