Väitös (laskentatoimi ja rahoitus): MBA Zachary Sherman

MBA Zachary Sherman esittää väitöskirjansa ”ESG and Sustainable Finance: Navigating Networks, Examining Hypocrisy, and Promoting Prosociality” julkisesti tarkastettavaksi Turun yliopistossa perjantaina 12.6.2026 klo 12.00 (Turun yliopisto, Turun kauppakorkeakoulu, Lähitapiola-sali, Rehtorinpellonkatu 3, Turku).

Vastaväittäjänä toimii professori Jari Huikku (Aalto-yliopisto) ja kustoksena apulaisprofessori Jan Pfister (Turun yliopisto). Tilaisuus on englanninkielinen. Väitöksen alana on laskentatoimi ja rahoitus.

Tiivistelmä väitöstutkimuksesta:

In my doctoral dissertation, I set out to understand more about the notion of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) in sustainable finance. Many actors talk about responsible investing that benefits both financial returns and the planet, yet the field is frequently marked by inconsistencies, selective reporting, and behaviours that fall short of stated goals. To explore this, I conducted in-depth interviews with professionals, consultants, academics, and students across Europe and North America, combined with careful analysis of documents, regulations, and industry materials. I followed both the people involved and the tools they use through a focused application of Actor-Network Theory. This is a bit of a departure from quantitative methods used in most finance studies. I also drew on the prosocial paradigm to help distinguish observed behaviours.

The first discovery describes ESG as not existing as one single, agreed-upon concept. Instead, it functions as contested interpretations that different groups understand and apply in very different ways.

Specified ESG: This is the dominant view among seasoned professionals and academics. To them, ESG is mainly about scores, ratings, compliance, and standardised reporting. It is seen as a practical tool for risk management.

Broad ESG: Most students and some younger professionals hold this perspective. They see ESG as largely the same thing as wider sustainability efforts and societal impact. This can be seen as something much more ambitious.

Hybrid view: A smaller but emerging group tries to make sense of the notion by combining elements of both approaches. This is something to follow in future studies.

The second discovery finds a distinction between two contrasting types of real-life behaviour in ESG as practised. On one side are gaming behaviours which erode trust and widen the gap between ideals and reality. On the other side are prosocial behaviours that act more genuinely to support sustainability. These prosocial behaviours, if strengthened, help counteract gaming in ESG and bring practice closer to its intentions.

This work matters because ESG now influences trillions of dollars in investment decisions worldwide. My findings help describe the persistence of hypocrisy and opportunism in the industry by mapping the networks, discourses, and everyday practices of its actors. For finance professionals, the research offers practical insights into recognising behaviours and actively fostering prosocial approaches. For policymakers and regulators, it points to realistic ways of supporting self-governance mechanisms that could combat unfair opportunism in the system.

In the end, my thesis shows that although ESG remains contested, the foundations for more effective and trustworthy sustainable finance may already be present in the industry. This research bridges insights from finance and accounting and offers a practical path toward addressing unfair opportunism with help from the prosocial paradigm. Ultimately, it supports a real shift from superficial compliance toward something that contributes to planetary stewardship and societal well-being through reinforced prosocial principles.