Symbolic Versus Substantive <scp>ESG</scp> Practices: A Systematic Review and Integrative Framework

ABSTRACT ESG reporting is widespread, but symbolic commitments do not always reflect substantive practices. This study conducts a systematic literature review of 62 empirical articles published between 2021 and 2025 to synthesize the main determinants and consequences of this disclosure–performance misalignment in ESG reporting (commonly referred to as ESG decoupling). Following the SPAR‐4‐SLR protocol and applying the TCCM framework, the review organizes evidence across theories, contexts, characteristics, and methodological approaches. Drawing on systems theory and performance feedback logic, the study develops an integrative conceptual framework explaining how symbolic and substantive ESG practices interact over time. The framework identifies four recurring mechanism clusters—agency and governance, institutional and regulatory, information asymmetry and signaling, and resource and capability—that shape short‐term tactical responses and longer‐term structural misalignment. The review provides a coherent, theory‐informed synthesis and offers structured insights for future research and for policymakers, managers, and investors concerned with the credibility of ESG reporting.