Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41693965›Full record

Articlenpj climate action2026

Empirically assessing corporate adaptation and resilience disclosure using AI.

Roberto Spacey Martín, Nicola Ranger, Tobias Schimanski, Markus Leippold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in npj climate action, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Roberto Spacey MartínLondon School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Nicola RangerLondon School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Tobias SchimanskiUniversity of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Markus LeippoldUniversity of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The extent to which firms are adapting and building resilience to environmental change is crucial information for financial institutions, regulators and governments. While corporates' physical climate risk exposure of their assets to environmental change can be calculated using models, additional information is needed to evaluate their vulnerability to physical climate change, how well they are adapting and broader alignment with societal adaptation and resilience (A&R) goals. This paper empirically evaluates the extent of A&R-related information in current corporate sustainability reports to provide such insights. We build on established sustainability disclosure frameworks and develop an A&R disclosure framework that we combine with the latest advances in large language models to assess S&P 500 company sustainability reports. We prove that corporate A&R information in sustainability reports is lacking, particularly around risks, metrics and targets, underlining the need to consider other data sources when assessing firm-level risks and contributions to societal A&R goals.

Indexed as

Climate sciencesEnvironmental sciencesEnvironmental social sciencesEnvironmental studies

Identifiers

PMID41693965
PMCPMC12900641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.