Evaluating ESG Measurement Approaches: Systematic Review and Methodological Implications for Empirical Research in Emerging Economies

Purpose: Environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure has become a central construct in accounting, finance and management research, but empirical findings remain surprisingly inconsistent. This inconsistency is often due to the contextual or theoretical differences, while the fundamental role of ESG measurement has received relatively limited scholarly attention. Design/Methodology/Approach: Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol were used to study 352 peer-reviewed empirical articles published in 2010-2024. And analyze how ESG measurement approaches vary across different contexts’ Findings: The results show that there are strong and systematic measurement asymmetries in economic settings. The dominating ESG rating agencies are found in developed economies, By contrast, ESG measures based on content analysis are dominant in emerging economies, where ESG disclosure is more voluntary and less standardized. Proxy-based measures are consistent in all contexts, but they are linked with high levels of measurement error and lower reliability. Implications/Originality/Value: This study contributes to ESG scholarship by promoting methodological sensitivity, providing context-sensitive measurement guidelines, and outlining a future research agenda focused on measurement alignment and transparency. These insights have important implications for researchers, editors and policy makers seeking to strengthen the credibility and cumulative growth of ESG research, particularly in emerging markets.