Posicionamento Crítico e Social acerca do Índice ICO2 da B3
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21446/scg_ufrj.v18i3.61017Keywords:
ICO2, Indicadores Econômico-Financeiros, Governança Corporativa, Riscos Climáticos, Métodos Mistos.Abstract
Este artigo tem como objetivo discutir acerca das possibilidades de aprimoramento da representação dos interesses da sociedade frente aos desafios das mudanças climáticas a partir da análise do índice ICO2 da B3. Para ensejar a discussão as análises foram conduzidas em três dimensões: a dimensão da metodologia do índice, englobando os aspectos metodológicos do indicador; a dimensão dos elementos capturados pelo indicador em relação às emissões do GEE, a partir de uma regressão logística; e a dimensão dos marcos políticos. As informações quantitativas referentes ao índice ICO2 foram obtidas da B3, enquanto informações financeiras foram coletadas na Economática®, ambas para um quantitativo de 68 empresas, referente ao ano de 2021, tendo como suporte o emprego do método de regressão múltipla linear. Ao confrontar a estrutura metodológica do indicador, os dados resultantes do modelo econométrico e as recomendações de organismos oficiais a luz da teoria proposta, sugerimos aprimoramentos situados em duas dimensões. A primeira vertente se dirige à condução do processo de elaboração e monitoramento do índice, os quais poderiam instar a participação democrática de segmentos como a academia para auxiliar na proposição da métrica e a segunda vertente é informada pelo conjunto de critérios metodológicos com potencial de aprimoramento da métrica considerando as vulnerabilidades e riscos socioambientais do sul global. São levantados aspectos concernentes as condições dos países emergentes e a exposição a múltiplos riscos frente a mensuração do índice de carbono, sinalizando a necessidade de criação de uma nova forma de evidenciação relevante para a sociedade ao incorporar aspectos relacionado ao compliance social e ambiental mais robustos. Esta pesquisa visa oferecer uma dupla contribuição: inspirar a área com o uso de métodos mistos e propõe ampliar a representação social no índice, além de lançar discussões sobre as possibilidades de aprimoramento do indicador.
References
Al-Tuwaijri S.A, Christensen T.E, Hughes K.E. (2004). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(5–6), 447–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(03)00032-1
B3. (2020). Metodologia Do Índice Carbono Eficiente (Ico2). São Paulo.
Banco Central do Brasil. (2023). Annual Conference of the Banco Central do Brasil. Recuperado de: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-8thq-XLjI&t=3774s
Bebbington, J., Gray, R., & Owen, D. (1999). Seeing the wood for the trees Seeing the wood for the trees Taking the pulse of social and environmental accounting. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579910259906
Bingler, J. A., Kraus, M., Leippold, M., & Webersinke, N. (2022). Cheap talk and cherry-picking: What climatebert has to say on corporate climate risk disclosures. Finance Research Letters, 47, 102776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.102776
Bingler, J. A., Kraus, M., Leippold, M., & Webersinke, N. (2023). Cheap Talk and Cherry-Picking: What ClimateBert has to say on Corporate Climate Risk Disclosures. Recuperado de: https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/supporters
BM&FBOVESPA. (2014). Manual de Definições e Procedimentos dos Índices Da BM&FBOVESPA. Recuperado de https://bvmf.bmfbovespa.com.br/indices/download/Manual-de-procedimentos-pt-br
Brown, J. (2009). Democracy, sustainability and dialogic accounting technologies: Taking pluralism seriously. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(3), 313-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2008.08.002
Carvalho, F. P. D., & Maia, V. M. (2017). Perfi l do ICO2: sua Evolução ao Longo do Tempo. Pensar Contábil, 19(68). Recuperado de http://atena.org.br/revista/ojs-2.2.3-08/index.php/pensarcontabil/article/view/3050
Cavanagh, C., & Benjaminsen, T. A. (2014). Virtual nature, violent accumulation: The ‘spectacular failure’ of carbon offsetting at a Ugandan National Park. Geoforum, 56, p. 55-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.06.013
Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (Eds.). (2022). World inequality report 2022. Harvard University Press. https://wir2022.wid.world/www-site/uploads/2022/03/0098-21_WIL_RIM_RAPPORT_A4.pdf
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2008). Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4-5), p. 303-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003
Conselho Federal de Contabilidade - CFC. (2019). Norma Brasileira de Contabilidade (NBC): NBC PG 01, de 7 de fevereiro de 2019. https://www2.cfc.org.br/sisweb/sre/detalhes_sre.aspx?Codigo=2019/NBCPG01&arquivo=NBCPG01.doc
Creswell, J.W. (2015), A Concise Introduction to MixedMethods Research, Sage, Oaks, CA.
Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983-1997: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 312-343. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435861
Dillard, J., & Vinnari, E. (2019). Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 62, 16-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2018.10.003
Faria, J. A., Andrade, J. C. S., & Gomes, S. M. da S. (2020). Evidenciação das Ações diante das Mudanças Climáticas Nos Relatórios Das Empresas Participantes do Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) BRASIL. Contabilidade Vista & Revista, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.22561/cvr.v31i2.5276
Gonzalez-Gonzalez, J. M., & Zamora Ramírez, C. (2016). Voluntary carbon disclosure by Spanish companies: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-09-2014-0114
Gray, R. (2002). The social accounting project and Accounting Organizations and Society Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique? Accounting, Organization and Society, 27, 687–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(00)00003-9
Gray, R. (2006). Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value creation?: Whose value? Whose creation? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 19(6), 793–819. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570610709872
Gray, R., Dey, C., Owen, D., Evans, R., & Zadek, S. (1997). Struggling with the praxis of social accounting: Stakeholders, accountability, audits and procedures. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 10(3), 325–364. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579710178106
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255
Hines, R. D. (1988). Financial accounting: In communicating reality, we construct reality. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13(3), 251–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(88)90003-7
IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 3056 pp. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844
Kalu, J. U., Buang, A., Aliagha, G.U. (2016), Determinants of voluntary carbon disclosure in the corporate real estate sector of Malaysia. Journal of Environmental Management, 182, 519-524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.08.011
Koçak, E., Bulut, U., & Menegaki, A. N. (2022). The resilience of green firms in the twirl of COVID‐19: Evidence from S&P500 Carbon Efficiency Index with a Fourier approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 32-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2872
Kouloukoui, D., Marinho, M. M. de O., Gomes, S. M. da S., Kiperstok, A., & Torres, E. A. (2019). Corporate climate risk management and the implementation of climate projects by the world’s largest emitters. Journal of Cleaner Production, 238, 117935. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.117935
Lamprecht, C., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Mixed methods in accounting: a field based analysis. Meditari Accountancy Research, 27(6), 921–938. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2018-0403
Mazzacurati, J., Guagliano, C., & Spolaore, A. (2021). ESMA. Report on Trends, Risks and Vulnerabilities. Working Paper. Recuperado de https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/esma_wp-2021-01.pdf
Menezes, R. G., & Kraychete, E. S. (2022). Desigualdade Global E Desenvolvimento. Caderno CRH, 35, e022001. http://dx.doi.org/10.9771/ccrh.v35i0.49040
OECD (2023), Sustainability Policies and Practices for Corporate Governance in Latin America, Corporate Governance, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/76df2285-en
Pigatto, G., Cinquini, L., Dumay, J., & Tenucci, A. (2022). A critical reflection on voluntary corporate non-financial and sustainability reporting and disclosure lessons learnt from two case studies on integrated reporting. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-03-2022-0055
Prado‐Lorenzo, J. M., Rodríguez‐Domínguez, L., Gallego‐Álvarez, I., & García‐Sánchez, I. M. (2009). Factors influencing the disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions in companies world‐wide. Management Decision, 47(7), 1133-1157. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910978340
Prata, D. A. (2022). ESG e Sustentabilidade Corporativa: estamos no caminho certo? In ESG e Justiça Climática (Vol. 8, pp. 248–272). Titant lo Blanch. Recuperado de www.editorial.tirant.com/br/
Prates, J. C. R., Cabral, A. M. R., Avelino, B. C., & Lamounier, W. M. (2023). Afinal, vale a pena divulgar emissões de carbono no Brasil?. Enfoque: Reflexão Contábil, 42(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.4025/enfoque.v42i1.58220
Rufino, M. A., & Monte, P. A. D. (2014). Fatores que explicam a divulgação voluntária das 100 empresas com ações mais negociadas na BM&FBovespa. Sociedade, Contabilidade e Gestão, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.21446/scg_ufrj.v9i3.13332
S&P Dow Jones Indices. (2023a). S&P500 Carbon Efficiency. Recuperado de: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/idsenhancedfactsheet/file.pdf?calcFrequency=M&force_download=true&hostIdentifier=48190c8c-42c4-46af-8d1a-0cd5db894797&indexId=92364883
S&P Dow Jones Indices. (2023b). S&P Paris-Aligned and Climate Transition Index Series Rebalance Schedule Modification. Recuperado de: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/indexnews/announcements/20230517-1464001/1464001_sppactmethodologyupdate5-17-2023.pdf
Sarmiento Barletti, J. P., & Larson, A. M. (2017). Rights abuse allegations in the context of REDD+ readiness and implementation: A preliminary review and proposal for moving forward. https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/006630
Shannon-Baker, P. (2016). Making Paradigms Meaningful in Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815575861
Shue, H. (2015). Historical responsibility, harm prohibition, and preservation requirement: Core practical convergence on climate change. Moral Philosophy and Politics, 2(1), 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2013-0009
Sousa, F. S., & Zucco, A. (2020). Indicador de desenvolvimento de ecoeficiência das empresas listadas no índice de carbono eficiente da bolsa de valores, mercadorias e futuros de São Paulo. Brazilian Journal of Business, 2(2), 1115-1139. https://doi.org/10.34140/bjbv2n2-020
Stanny, E., & Ely, K. (2008). Corporate environmental disclosures about the effects of climate change. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management, 15(6), 338-348. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.175
UN. (2015). Paris Agreement. In: UNFCCC, COP Report.
UNEP Finance Initiative and UN Global Compact. (2017). Managing ESG risk in the Supply chains of private Companies and assets.
Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(3), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048
Velte, P., Stawinoga, M., & Lueg, R. (2020). Carbon performance and disclosure: A systematic review of governance-related determinants and financial consequences. Journal of Cleaner Production, 254, 120063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120063
WRI Brasil. (2022). Em avanço histórico, COP27 estabelece fundo para ajudar países vulneráveis a enfrentar impactos climáticos. Recuperado de: https://www.wribrasil.org.br/imprensa/posicionamento-cop27-fundo-perdas-danos
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Luciana da Silva Moraes Sardeiro, Paulo Vitor Souza de Souza, João Abreu de Faria Bilhim
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
COPYRIGHT: The author retains, without restrictions, the rights to his work.
REUSE RIGHTS: The SCG Journal adopts the Creative Commons License, CC BY-NC, non-commercial attribution according to the Open Access Policy to knowledge adopted by the UFRJ Journal Portal. With this license it is allowed to access, download, copy, print, share, reuse, and distribute the articles, as long as it is for non-commercial use and with the citation of the source, giving due credit of authorship and mentioning the SCG Journal. In such cases, no permission is required from the authors or publishers.
AUTHORS' DEPOSIT RIGHTS/SELF ARCHIVING: Authors are encouraged to archive the published version with the link to their article in the SCG Journal in institutional repositories.