ArticlePloS one2025
Green accounting and ESG-driven eco-efficiency in European financial institutions: A two-stage DEA-CRITIC-TOPSIS evaluation.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluation of the eco-efficiency of financial institutions and their underlying green accounting practices is imperative as Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles become ingrained in financial regulation and investment strategy. Nevertheless, the current ESG assessments frequently suffer from a lack of a dual focus on governance quality and performance, which raises concerns about misaligned reporting and Greenwashing.
objectiveThis investigation suggests a two-stage methodological framework for evaluating the eco-efficiency of European financial institutions that is driven by ESG and evaluating the impact of internal green accounting practices on sustainability performance.
methodsData Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is implemented in the initial phase to calculate eco-efficiency scores that are determined by financial outputs and environmental inputs (GHG emissions, energy consumption, assets). The second stage employs the CRITIC-TOPSIS method to rank 365 institutions according to seven governance-related green accounting criteria. These criteria are derived from the Refinitiv ESG Screener CO₂ dataset. The performance frontiers are identified by DEA, while the contribution of internal sustainability mechanisms is assessed by CRITIC-TOPSIS.
resultsAccording to the DEA results, only 38% of institutions are entirely efficient, with a substantial degree of variation across the sample. The results of the CRITIC-TOPSIS analysis indicate that the most reliable predictors of green accounting quality are governance indicators, including the presence of an ESG committee and board supervision of climate risks. According to a moderate positive correlation between DEA scores and TOPSIS rankings, eco-efficiency and green accounting maturity are related, but they are not entirely aligned.
conclusionsThe results underscore the importance of integrating institutional governance evaluations with operational performance metrics to accurately evaluate sustainability. Theoretical and methodological contributions to the disciplines of environmental accounting and sustainable finance are made by this integrated framework, which provides regulators, rating agencies, and institutional decision-makers with valuable insights.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.