Measuring

Sustainability
Performance
S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment
Contents
Overview 3
CSA at a Glance 3
Focus on Financial Materiality 5
A Structured Approach 6
A Comprehensive Analysis With 8
an Industry-Specific Focus
What Is S&P Global ESG Research 10
Looking For?
Scoring the Questions 10
Media and Stakeholder Analysis (MSA) 13
Measuring MSA Impact 13
Updating the Questionnaire — Raising the Bar 16
External Verification 17
Leveraging Sustainability Insights 18
Annual Milestone 18
Conclusions: The Benefits 19
of Measuring Intangibles

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 2

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Overview CSA at a Glance

At S&P Global Sustainability Research, we have always • Since 1999, the annual Corporate Sustainability Assessment
believed that financial analysis is incomplete if it ignores (CSA) has been conducted to serve as the framework for
material extra-financial factors. Sustainability trends such as measuring corporate sustainability performance.
resource scarcity, climate change or an aging population
continuously reshape a company’s competitive environment. • As of March 2024, S&P Global produced 2023 ESG Scores for
We are convinced that companies that can adapt to such 13,500 companies. These companies were selected to be
challenges in material topics through innovation, quality and assessed based on their market relevance and to ensure
productivity enhance their ability to generate long-term consistency in coverage over time. Each year, S&P Global
enterprise value. S&P Global Sustainable1 defines a invites all companies that will receive a public ESG Score to
sustainability issue as material if it presents a significant participate in the assessment process. The S&P Global
impact on society or the environment and a significant impact Invited Universe is generally comprised of:
on the company's value drivers, competitive positioning, and
long-term shareholder value creation. The annual Corporate o Companies that are eligible for the Dow Jones
Sustainability Assessment (CSA) was developed more than 20 Sustainability Indices (DJSI). The underlying rules can
years ago in order to identify companies that are better be found here: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/
equipped to recognize and respond to emerging sustainability methodology/article/dow-jones-sustainability-
opportunities and challenges presented by global and indices-methodology/
industry trends.
o Companies that form part of S&P Dow Jones Indices
We pursue a truly integrated approach to analyzing benchmark indices. The underlying rules can be
sustainability performance. An interdisciplinary team of found here: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/
analysts designs, monitors and refines the CSA with the methodology/article/sp-esg-index-series-
purpose of generating additional insights into the value- methodology/
creating and risk-mitigating potential of companies, ensuring
that the assessment focuses on sustainability criteria that are S&P Global regularly evaluates its universe of
materially relevant to corporate performance, valuation and assessed companies so that it stays relevant to the
security selection. needs of the investment community, for example
using the S&P Global Broad Market Index and market
Not only does this make the results of the CSA assessment capitalization as a reference . 1

particularly relevant for investors, but it also helps companies

to focus on sustainability issues that are more directly linked
• 62 industries derived from the Global Industry classification
system (GICS).
to their success as a business.

The CSA’s approach is also unique in that it is based on

• No industries are excluded from the assessment
information provided by the companies directly through the
online questionnaire. This allows us to analyze sustainability
• Companies are evaluated based on materially relevant
sustainability criteria covering the economic, environmental
at a much deeper level than frameworks based on public and social dimensions.
disclosure alone.

We are often asked how the CSA works and how the
information provided is used to calculate the S&P Global CSA
Score, a key component of the S&P Global ESG Score. This
paper seeks to offer some insights into how the
questionnaire is structured, how the score is calculated, and
by using examples from three different industries, how
specific questions can have an impact on a company’s S&P
Global CSA Score.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 3

Measuring Sustainability Performance

• Companies receive a S&P Global ESG Score between 0–100

and are ranked against other companies in their industry.
The S&P Global ESG Score measures a company
sustainability performance informed by a combination of
company disclosures, media and stakeholder analysis,
modelling approaches and in-depth company engagement
via the CSA.

• The CSA identifies sustainability leaders across all

industries, enabling investors to track their performance
and integrate sustainability considerations into their
portfolios.

“The CSA’s rules-based assessment methodology allows us to assess companies

following a best-in-class approach, focusing on on long-term sustainability factors that
Score.
are under-researched in conventional financial analysis and are relevant to each industry,
material to the society and material for the company’s financial performance”

— Lotte Griek, Global Head of ESG Research, S&P Global

1 S&P Global may add additional, currently non-invited companies to the broader Research Universe. Moreover, non-invited issuers (I.e.,

individual companies) have the option to solicit a Corporate Sustainability Assessment and obtain an S&P Global ESG Score.
Invited Universe: determined by a Rules-based approach. A list of companies for which S&P Global S1 is going to perform a Corporate
Sustainability Assessment (CSA) on and produce ESG scores on a regular basis. These companies will be actively contacted (“invited”) to
contribute to the assessment process. The Invited universe always refers to a specific methodology year.
Research Universe: All companies for which S&P Global S1 is going to perform a Corporate Sustainability Assessment (CSA) and produce ESG
scores, irrespective of their invitation status. This can include companies that are not part of the Invited Universe. The Research Universe always
refers to a specific methodology year.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 4

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Focus on Double Materiality

The starting point for the CSA is our materiality framework, Over time external impacts on society and
which draws upon more than 20 years of experience in environmenttranslate into internal impact on a company
integrating sustainability into the investment process. For itself, including its financial value drivers. These impacts
each of the 62 industries evaluated through the CSA, our may be positive or negative, direct or indirect, including
analysts conduct a materiality analysis to identify those ripple effects through the value chain, upstream or
sustainability factors that drive social and environmental downstream. As such, S&P Global Sustainable1 considers
impact as well as business value. Considering the dual double materiality as an integral part of the analysis of
nature of materiality, we pay close attention to the corporate sustainability performance. In a broader
interrelation between external impact and internal impact understanding of enterprise value today, including
on enterprise value creation. This analysis results in a stakeholder perspectives, the interrelation between external
materiality matrix for each industry, which serves as the and internal impact is a core part of determining materiality.
basis for determining the applicability and weights of the The industry level matrices positions 22 Materiality Core
various sustainability criteria in the CSA. Subjects to reflect their relative significance at industry
level. These findings also inform our annual adjustment of
The materiality analysis considers global megatrends and criteria weighting in the CSA. An example of a hypothetical
industry specific value drivers that contextualizes company industry materiality matrix is provided in Figure 1.
performance. It leverages our quantitative research, internal
and external data sources, and pays due attention to both
risks and opportunities closely associated with financial
performance in the short, medium, and long-term.

Figure 1

Industry-level Materiality Matrix - Hypothetical Example

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 5

Measuring Sustainability Performance

A Structured Approach
The starting point for our annual corporate assessment is an While each year the CSA collects fresh data on corporate
industry-specific questionnaire focusing on relevant sustainability practices, the reported results are
economic, environmental, and social criteria. We center supplemented with a Media and Stakeholder Analysis (MSA)
attention on sustainability actions that can have an impact that examines controversy developments which have
on companies’ long-term value creation. surfaced via the media and other channels. The MSA
monitors a company’s sustainability performance on an
Calculating a company’s S&P Global CSA Score is a process ongoing basis by assessing current controversies which
of applying sub-level scores which are progressively weighted could have potentially negative reputational or financial
and summed until a final aggregated score is reached. impact on a company. The MSA is an additional overlay used
to modify criteria scores downward based on evidence
The starting point consists of individual questions, the values ranging from deliberate involvement and mismanagement of
of which are weighted, summed and aggregated into broader controversial incidents to negligent lapses in oversight (see
areas called criteria. Similarly, criteria scores are weighted, page 7 for more detail).
summed and aggregated into even broader areas called
dimensions. Following the same pattern, dimensions values For more information on the MSA process, please refer to our
are then weighted and summed to find a maximum “MSA Methodology Guidebook”.
sustainability score. See Figure 2 for a visual overview of the
process. In 2023 an additional overlay was introduced to integrate
modelling into the S&P Global ESG Score. The scoring
approach within the CSA allocates a ‘0’ score to all questions
where no information is disclosed to S&P Global, or where no
information is found in the public domain. The outcome of
this disclosure-based score is referred to as the S&P Global
Corporate Sustainability Assessment (CSA) Score. To provide
a more complete and holistic assessment of a company’s
sustainability performance, modelling approaches based on
imputation are applied and aggregated into the S&P Global
ESG Score to address gaps in disclosure. The purpose of this
modelling approach is to emulate the performance-based
scoring that could have been applied if reported data were
available.

For more information on the integration of modelling into the

S&P Global ESG Scores please refer to the “S&P Global ESG
Scores Methodology”.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 6

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Figure 2
Structure of the Corporate Sustainability Assessment

Question level MSA impact Criterion level Dimension level Total score

Each CSA question Each criterion is

For relevant criteria,
receives a score assigned a
an MSA impact**
from 0 – 100 pre-defined weight
is applied using Each dimension
and is assigned out of the total
a MSA multiplier weight is the sum of
a pre-defined questionnaire;
calculation. The the criterion weights
weight within the criteria weights
magnitude of the within the respective
criterion. Weights within each
MSA multiplier can dimension.
for questions within dimension roll
significantly reduce
each criterion add up to the total
the criterion score.
up to 100. dimension weight.

Question 1 (25/100)
Question 2 (25/100)
MSA impact
Question 3 (25/100)
Question 4 (25/100) Criterion 1 (7)***
Criterion 2 (10) Economic
Criterion 3 (8) dimension
Criterion 4 (5) (38/100)
Question 1 (25/100) Criterion 5 (8)
Question 2 (25/100) MSA impact
Question 3 (25/100)
Maximum
S&P Global
Question 1 (25/100) ESG Score = 100
Criterion 1 (8)
Question 2 (25/100) Economic
MSA impact Criterion 2 (7)
Question 3 (25/100) dimension
Criterion 3 (5)
Question 4 (25/100) (27/100)
Criterion 4 (7)

Question 1 (25/100)
Question 2 (25/100) Criterion 1 (15) Social
MSA impact
Question 3 (25/100) Criterion 2 (9) dimension
Question 4 (25/100) Criterion 3 (11) 35/100)

*Pre-defined question weight

** Media and Stakeholder Analysis (MSA). Selected criteria in the CSA are assigned an MSA impact. The MSA impact is used to adjust criterion scores
downward based on the magnitude of negative impact stemming from an MSA case. For detailed information, please refer to page 10 of this document
and to the MSA Methodology Guidebook
*** Pre-defined criterion weight

Question, criteria, and dimension weights provided in the diagram above are for illustrative purposes only. The actual number of questions, criteria and
their corresponding weights will vary from industry to industry.

Source: S&P Global ESG Research

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 7

 Measuring Sustainability Performance

A Comprehensive Analysis With an Industry-Specific Focus

Based on major global sustainability challenges identified by identify sustainability leaders. For instance, a manufacturing
our analysts at S&P Global Sustainability Research & company’s management of its exposures to climate change
Methodology team, general criteria relating to standard risks cannot be compared to a bank’s response to climate
management practices and performance measures such as change. Therefore, for industries with complex supply chains
Corporate Governance, Human Capital Development and Risk and logistics, the assessment focuses on evaluating their
and Crisis Management are defined and applied to each of the efforts to manage carbon emissions, whereas for financial
62 industries. The general criteria account for approximately services providers, the assessment focuses on whether
40–50% of the assessment, depending on the industry. companies address climate change through their financial
products or by offering innovative funding schemes that
The remaining part of the CSA is made up of industry specific encourage a transition towards a low-carbon economy.
risks and opportunities that focus on economic,
environmental and social challenges and trends that are The relative weights of the economic, environmental and
relevant to companies within that industry. This focus on social dimension of the questionnaire vary by industry. For
industry-specific criteria reflects our conviction that example, as shown in Figure 3, the environmental dimension
industry-specific sustainability opportunities and risks play warrants a higher weighting in the Electric Utilities industry
a key role in a company’s long-term success and allows us to than in the Banking or Pharmaceuticals industries.
compare companies against their own peers in order to

Figure 3
General versus Industry specific Weights by Dimension4
% in Corporate Sustainability Assessment

Governance and Economic Environmental Social

Industry-specific General

Source: S&P Global ESG Research

Criteria and weights are based on the 2021 CSA for Banking, Electric Utilities, and Pharmaceuticals industries and are provided for illustrative
purposes only. Criteria and weights will differ for other industries. Specific criteria and their corresponding weights for subsequent years may
change.
4
For a complete overview of the criteria weights for each of the 62 industries, please refer to the Criteria Weights document in the CSA Resource
Center at www.spglobal.com/esg/csa/csa-resources/csa-methodology.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 8

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Criteria within the questionnaire will vary from industry to questionnaires, but the relative weight assigned to Climate
industry to reflect industry-specific drivers, as shown in Strategy is 8%, 8%, and 2%, respectively. These differences
Figure 4, which provides a comparison of the criteria applied stem from S&P Global Sustainability Research &
to the Banks, Electric Utilities and Pharmaceuticals Methodology analysts’ fundamental bottom-up analysis of
industries. each industry. While “Climate Strategy” is more relevant for
Banks’ product portfolios and Electric Utilities’ own
Moreover, certain criteria — even when applied to more than operations, the focus for Pharmaceuticals is placed on the
one industry — can have different weights within the CSA. other dimension criteria. Furthermore, the same criterion,
For example, the Banks, Electric Utilities and when applied to different industries, may contain a slightly
Pharmaceuticals industries each contain the “Climate different set of questions to reflect industry-specific issues.
Strategy” criterion within the Governance and Economic
Dimension of their respective

Figure 4

Comparison of criteria and relative dimension weights for the Banks, Electric Utilities and
Pharmaceuticals industries

* General criteria for all industries.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 9

Measuring Sustainability Performance

What Is S&P Global ESG Research Looking For?

In line with our conviction at S&P Global Sustainability • Implementation of strategies to manage these
Research that material nonfinancial factors contribute to sustainability risks or to capitalize on related opportunities
better informed investment decisions, the methodology in a manner that is consistent with its business models
focuses on long-term sustainability factors that are • Measurement of results in relation to stated Key
relevant to each industry, material to the company’s Performance Indicators (KPI) in order to evaluate the
financial performance and under-researched in effectiveness of its sustainability strategy
conventional financial analysis. Within each criterion, we
look for evidence of a company’s awareness of
• Validation or external audit of stated results
sustainability issues and for indications that it has • Transparent communication of its corporate sustainability
implemented strategies to address them. We also evaluate strategies and extent to which stated targets have
the company’s progress in implementing such strategies as been met
well as the quality of its reporting on these issues.
Therefore, the questions within each criterion are This framework for evaluating corporate sustainability
structured to capture and evaluate the following elements: performance enables S&P Global Sustainability Research
to develop a more robust understanding of a company’s
• Awareness of the importance of these factors to its quality of management.5
financial success
• Determination of the potential impact in business
value as well as social and environmental impact

Scoring the Questions

The questionnaire is designed to be objective and uses For many questions, companies will only receive the
predefined scoring approaches in which each potential maximum score for the question if they have provided
answer is assigned a number of points between 0–100. adequate supporting material. And for some questions
points will only be awarded if information covering the
question requirements is publicly available. In the following
pages, we provide examples of specific questions from the
Pharmaceuticals and Banking industries, and show how a
company’s response to these questions has an impact on
the S&P Global CSA Score.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 10

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Example 1
Pharmaceuticals

Question: Access to Healthcare Programs Does the company have programs to improve the accessibility of healthcare
(Products & Drugs) products and drugs and are they available publicly?
Question Points 0–100

Question weight within criterion 15%

Criterion Contribution to Societal Healthcare

Dimension Social

CSA Rationale Underprivileged patients in developed as well as developing countries often face financial
constraints to accessing the medication and treatment crucial to cure their diseases.
Sustainability leaders in the pharmaceutics and biotech industries are taking innovative steps
to engage with these social issues by providing underprivileged patients access to drugs and
products. In turn, these companies benefit from the opportunity to expand their own credibility,
their corporate and product brands, and the market penetration of their products and services.
Our questions focus on the measures that companies take to increase the accessibility of
drugs in both developing and developed countries.

Possible Answers Number of Points Awarded

A. List of potential approaches 0–100

(company can check all that apply) (depending on which approaches have been selected)
B. Not applicable A question that has been marked “Not Applicable” will not be scored and the weight of the
question will be equally redistributed across the other questions within the same criterion, only
if the analyst agrees that the question does not apply to the company’s business model. This
option is only granted in exceptional cases.
C. Not known 0

5To learn more about the methodology used in the Corporate Sustainability Assessment, please refer to the CSA Handbook, which provides
additional detail on the rationale and structure for the general and cross-industry criteria in the CSA. The CSA Handbook can be accessed at the CSA
Resource Center at www.spglobal.com/esg/csa/csa-resources/csa-methodology.

Assuming the company receives 50 points for its response to this question, its score will be calculated as follows:

Number of Question Weight Criterion Weight

Points Received (within the criterion) (within questionnaire) Question Score =

(between 0 and 100) 15/100 = 14/100 = 1.05 of S&P Global

CSA Score
50 0.15 0.14

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 11

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Example 2
Banks

Question: Customer Does the company inform customers regarding privacy protection issues and is this
Privacy Information information available publicly?
Question Points 0–100

Question weight within criterion 50%

Criterion Privacy Protection

Dimension Social

CSA Rationale Networked data and globalized corporate activities require careful handling. Insufficient
database and network protection, unclear management of personal information and vague
database access rules could expose companies to large risks in case of personal data leakage
and misuse, or unauthorized access. For companies to avoid legal costs, reputational risk, and
exclusion from certain activities, a company-wide privacy policy is paramount. Our questions
focus on the coverage of the company's privacy policy and the mechanism in place to ensure
the policy's effective implementation.

Possible Answers Number of Points Awarded

A. List of potential approaches 0–100

(company can check all that apply) (depending on which approaches have been selected)
B. Not applicable A question that has been marked “Not Applicable” will not be scored and the weight of the
question will be equally redistributed across the other questions within the same criterion, only
if the analyst agrees that the question does not apply to the company’s business model. This
option is only granted in exceptional cases.
C. Not known 0

Assuming the company receives 67 points for its response to this question, its score will be calculated as follows:

Number of Question Weight Criterion Weight

Points Received (within the criterion) (within questionnaire) Question Score =

(between 0 and 100) 50/100 = 4/100 = 1.34 of S&P Global

CSA Score
67 0.50 0.04

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 12

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Calculating the S&P Global ESG Score:

S&P Global CSA Score = Σ (Number of Question points received x Question Weight x Criterion Weight)

A company’s S&P Global CSA Score at the highest aggregated Additional insights into our scoring methodology can be
level is the sum of all Question Scores. Each company found in our “S&P Global ESG Scores Methodology”
receives a S&P Global CSA Score ranging from 0–100. document.

Media and Stakeholder Analysis (MSA)

The S&P Global Media and Stakeholder Analysis (‘MSA’) Media and stakeholder stories on corporate controversies are
forms an integral part of the S&P Global Corporate monitored on an ongoing basis, compiled, and pre-screened
Sustainability Assessment (‘CSA’) and enables S&P Global by S&P Global’s partner RepRisk1 and also identified by S&P
to monitor companies’ sustainability performance on an Global Sustainable1 (‘S1’) sustainability research analysts,
ongoing basis by assessing current controversies with through different sources including newspapers,
potentially negative reputational or financial impacts. The governmental and non-governmental reports. The stories may
main objective of the MSA process is to gain insight into a vary considerably, pertaining to issues such as crime,
company’s ability to mitigate financially material and corruption, fraud, illegal commercial practices, human rights
reputational risks, as well as impacts on stakeholders and abuses, labor disputes and workplace safety, catastrophic
the environment, whilst protecting their shareholder value. accidents, or environmental violations, for example.

Measuring MSA Impact

Measuring MSA impact is a step-wise process that begins The MSA case is then assessed to determine its impact on a
with identifying an MSA case. An MSA “case” is created by company’s CSA Score. The MSA case is scored based
expert research analysts if, according to the MSA on the impact of the case (which can be minor, medium,
methodology, a company is considered responsible for a major or severe) and the response of the company to the
material negative event or wrongdoing, revealing that the incident. Both the impact rating and the company response
company’s actions are inconsistent with its stated policies are used to assign an “MSA multiplier” — a coefficient used
and commitments, accepted best practices or regulations. to adjust relevant affected CSA criteria in proportion to the
Once an MSA case has been opened, the respective negative impact of MSA cases.
companies are contacted and given the opportunity to
respond with relevant information and plans to address Figure 5 provides an overview of how a specific MSA case is
the issue, minimize negative impacts, and prevent identified, evaluated and integrated into the CSA. Figure 6
reoccurrence. provides a formula for how the MSA multiplier is used in
calculating final criteria scores (if any).

*RepRisk, an ESG data science company, leverages the combination of AI and machine learning with human intelligence to systematically
analyze public information in 23 languages and identify material ESG risks. With daily data updates across 100+ ESG risk factors, RepRisk
provides consistent, timely, and actionable data for risk management and ESG integration across a company’s operations, business
relationships, and investments.
www.reprisk.com

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 13

 Measuring Sustainability Performance

Figure 5
Overview of the MSA process: from identification to resolution

6
1 2 3 4 5
Applying the MSA Multiplier
Identification Impact Initiate company Evaluation of Selection of CSA
to calculate impact on
of MSA case evaluation contact company’s response Criteria
CSA criteria score

• When a controversial The case’s impact is When an MSA case is The analyst evaluates The analyst matches A two-step approach is
incident is flagged, judged as minor, identified, the affected the company’s MSA case details to the used to calculate the
the decision to open medium, major or severe company is requested response based on one relevant CSA criteria: impact of MSA cases
an MSA case is based according to different to respond via the of the following options: on CSA criteria:
on (1) company parameters within the CSA online platform, The Affected Criteria 1. Translate the
responsibility and (2) Governance/Economic, including evidence of
• No communication
that are identified will assigned Impact
and no measures
incident materiality. Environmental & Social communications to be any of the CSA Rating and
taken
Details of each Pillars as well as within stakeholders Criteria. Major cases Company
element can be found the Reputational Impact and corrective • Some communication usually involve several Response Rating
in MSA Methodology pillar. Further details are measures taken. and no or partial criteria, while minor to the
Guidebook. provided in the https:// measures taken cases typically impact corresponding
Description

portal.csa.spglobal.com • Adequate just one or two. In most ‘MSA Multiplier’

/survey/documents/ communication and cases, the more criteria using the pre-
MSA_Methodology_Guid appropriate measures affected, the greater the defined MSA
ebook.pdf MSA taken impact on the Multiplier Matrix.
Methodology Guidebook. company’s ESG Score. 2. Apply the MSA
• Adequate Multiplier in a
communication and fixed formula to
appropriate measures calculate the
taken and publicly numerical impact
disclosed on the Affected
• Criteria score.

Company A pleads guilty The analyst determines The analyst contacts Company A has The analyst determines Based on the major
to violating national the case has the company. communicated the case the following CSA negative impact of the
anti-competitive law. It major impact: to its stakeholders, but criteria are affected: case and the evaluation
is fined US $1 billion and • The breach of Company A states it did not indicate whether • Risk and Crisis of the company’s
agrees to settle with the regulations and has issued a press processes or control Management: response, a low MSA
US Department of company policies is release announcing the mechanisms were Company A multiplier is assigned.
Justice. New significant fine but provides no re-evaluated and deliberately engaged The MSA Multiplier is
information reveals it further information on improved. The analyst in non-compliant applied in a fixed
obstructed justice using • The fined amount is corrective measures selects “Some behavior indicating formula to impact the
forged documents significant relative to undertaken to prevent communication, no or original CSA criterion
inadequate risk
resulting in a higher company earnings future incidents. partial measures score which
control mechanisms
fine than other and other fines given taken.” significantly reduces the
companies involved. in that industry • Business Ethics: final CSA criteria scores
Company A violated
• (e.g. Risk and Crisis
Example

Guilty plea and

best practice in Management Criteria
associated fine are
business ethics and and Business Ethics).
broadly covered in
the company’s own
international media,
code of conduct
contributing to
negative • Corporate
reputational impact. Governance:
Company A’s
executives were
aware of the
wrongdoing and
failed to take prompt
action.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 14

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Please see MSA Methodology Guidebook for a more detailed description of the MSA multiplier calculations with examples.

The hypothetical MSA example has been provided for illustrative purposes only and does not reflect an actual MSA case or outcome.
MSA scores have been arbitrarily applied and are used for illustrative purposes.

Source: S&P Global ESG Research

A simplified model for adjusting CSA criteria for MSA risk is below.

Based on the example outlined in Figure 5, Company A relevant CSA criteria of “Business Ethics” and “Risk and
receives a low MSA Multiplier. This Multiplier is then used Crisis Management.” Please see Figure 6.
to calculate the final scores of the

Figure 6
Applying the MSA Multiplier* to CSA criterion scores

CSA criterion score without

MSA Multiplier Calculation Final Criterion Score
MSA adjustment

Unadjusted Score Codes Final Score for

MSA Multiplier Calculation
of Business Conduct Business Conduct

Unadjusted Score Final Score for

MSA Multiplier Calculation
Risk and Crisis Management Risk and Crisis Management

If a company has no MSA cases identified during the course approach and the decision process used to determine
of the campaign year, the criterion score will remain an MSA impact, please refer to the
unchanged. For more details on our updated scoring MSA Methodology Guidebook.

* For detailed information on the MSA multiplier, please refer to the MSA Methodology Guidebook

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 15

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Updating the Questionnaire — Raising the Bar

The CSA is reviewed on an annual basis and adjustments are This analysis provides us with an indication of which
made to the methodology in order to enhance reporting and questions may be outdated, which corporate sustainability
stay relevant with issues already captured and to address practices have been widely adopted by companies, or which
emerging, forward looking sustainability issues that are ones may need to be refined in order to more adequately
expected to have an impact on companies in the coming distinguish the leaders from the laggards.
years. This approach allows the CSA to address under-
reported topics of interest to investors and other Once the methodology priorities for an assessment year have
stakeholders and challenge companies on new sustainability been decided, and adequate background research has been
topics that may be part of upcoming regulatory changes or performed on the topics, S&P Global Sustainability Research
future reporting guidelines or requirements. A detailed review & Methodology team is responsible for ensuring that the
of the previous year’s results is performed at the end of each proposals are translated into the CSA and systematically and
assessment cycle in order to identify areas for improvement, objectively applied to the respective industries and
apply scoring updates, provide methodology clarifications or companies. This also extends to how company answers are
to reconsider questions that can be removed from the appraised and how final scores for each question are
questionnaire. calculated.

Analysts within S&P Global Sustainability Research & Starting Q1 2024, S&P Global has introduced a new principal-
Methodology team are assigned to specific industries and based approach to methodology and modeling governance.
draw upon knowledge gained through their participation in The review will be conducted by Covered Methodology and
industry conferences, roundtable discussions with industry Model Governance Committee (CMMGC). The committee will
organizations, as well as direct contact with companies conduct review of new CSA methodologies and changes to
throughout the course of the year in order to determine which existing methodology.
industry-specific criteria within the CSA warrant review. As a
general rule, analysts rely on their sustainability and financial A Peer Review sub-Committee is set up to provide feedback
expertise to determine and recommendations related to updated CSA methodology
to CMMGC.
the materiality of sustainability topics, both current and
upcoming — identifying which sustainability opportunities There is also an independent quality assessment process
and challenges are most likely to have an impact on a focusing on Analytical Risk and Quality and it will provide its
company’s financial performance. This materiality review also report to the Sustainability Research & Methodology team
aids analysts in determining the overall weight questions and and to CMMGC.
criteria will have within each industry-specific questionnaire.
In addition to their industry coverage, analysts are assigned New CSA methodology or any updates to the existing
general and cross-industry criteria, such as Supply Chain methodology will be considered once it is approved by
Management, Occupational Health and Safety and Corporate CMMGC after thorough review.
Governance.
Once the CSA methodology is approved by CMMGC and a new
In addition to performing a fundamental review of the assessment cycle has been launched, S&P Global CSA Data
sustainability topics in the CSA, S&P Global Sustainability and Sustainability Research & Methodology team manages
Research & Methodology team also performs statistical the assessment process, interactions with companies, and
analysis of companies’ scores to identify questions that merit the overall quality control process. They are also responsible
further review. Examples include questions at the extremes for ensuring that the assessment process remains objective
(i.e. where all or most companies received the highest or the and independent of S&P Global’s other business units.
lowest score) or questions that have a very low statistical
distribution of scores. An overview of the methodology review process is provided in
Figure 7.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 16

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Figure 7
Updating the CSA*

Covered Model and Methodology Governance Committee Oversight

Decision-making body governing ‘potentially’ regulated models and methodologies associated with ESG scores including CSA

Sustainability Research Statistical analysis of Finalization of proposed Update CSA

& Methodology questionnaire to identify changes for criteria that
questions for review: have been prioritized by S&P Global Sustainability
Responsibilities: • Questions with low the Methodology Research & Methodology
• Top-down responsibility statistical distribution Committee implements methodology
for overall structure of the of scores • Relative weights are changes while ensuring:
adjusted, giving more weight
questionnaire and • Questions in which most
to most materially relevant
• Consistency of
implementation of the CSA companies received questionnaire structure
methodology topics for the industry across industries
scores of either 0 or 100
• Oversight of CSA • Major changes are subject to • Minimal redundancy within
methodology development Suggestions of modifications, external consultation round the questionnaire
deletions or additions to with companies and industry
• Industry-specific expertise
experts • Objective, consistent scoring
industry specific, general
• ESG experts assigned to or cross-industry criteria • Clear internal guidelines for
general or crossindustry consistent appraisal of data
criteria Contribution to Integration of feedback based • Independence and integrity
CSA methodology on discussions with of the review process
development companies, roundtables,
sustainability experts, etc.

Source: S&P Global Sustainability Research

External Verification
Information provided in the questionnaire is verified for In addition, to support the quality and objectivity of the
accuracy by crosschecking companies’ answers with the CSA, we voluntarily obtain independent third party
supporting documentation they have provided, checking assurance.
publicly available information, and by verifying a
company’s track record on crisis management with media
and stakeholder reports.

7
For additional information on the various DJSI index families that are constructed using information from the CSA, please visit the DJSI website at:
www.spglobal.com/esg/csa/indices/

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 17

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Leveraging Sustainability Insights

In addition to determining the components of the full range of The Sustainability Yearbook provides extensive qualitative
the DJSI and DJSI Diversified index families, the CSA analysis highlighting current and future challenges
information is also used to construct innovative products shaping the competitive landscape for each of the 62
such as the S&P ESG series of indices, which include iconic industries.
benchmarks such as the S&P 500 ESG as well as products
like the S&P Long-Term Value Creation Index 7. The S&P In addition, The Sustainability Yearbook contains
Global ESG Scores are available to investors globally through statistical information indicating the total number of
S&P Global Market Intelligence platforms. companies assessed for each industry, as well as the
average and top scores at the dimension level.
Furthermore, the results of the CSA are used to determine
the companies that are eligible for inclusion in The
Sustainability Yearbook* — a reference guide to the world’s
sustainability leaders.

Annual Milestone
Figure 8
Timeline of CSA Process

Source: S&P Global Sustainability Research

8
www.spglobal.com/esg/csa/yearbook

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 18

Measuring Sustainability Performance

Conclusions: The Benefits of Measuring ESG Performance

Investors’ demand for long-term oriented strategies that The results of the Corporate Sustainability Assessment are a
integrate economic, environmental and social criteria within suitable reference for determining the integrated value of a
their portfolios is expected to grow. As investors seek to firm. This includes its’s intangible assets, with a more
invest in companies with a superior business model and holistic assessment leading to better informed investment
attractive long-term potential, their stock selection decisions.
decisions will increasingly be influenced by sustainability
considerations. By using industry-specific criteria to identify sustainability
leaders that are likely to outperform in the long run, the
CSA’s best-in-class approach creates vibrant competition
among companies within the same industry. In doing so, it
supports acceleration in the momentum toward greater
sustainability across all industries.

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 19

Contact us
S&P Global Switzerland SA
Zurich Branch, Neumuehlequai 6 8001,
Zurich, Switzerland
[email protected]

DISCLAIMER

This content (including any information, data, analyses, opinions, ratings, scores, and other statements) (“Content”) has been prepared solely for information
purposes and is owned by or licensed to S&P Global and/or its affiliates (collectively, “S&P Global”).

This Content may not be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means without the prior written permission of S&P Global.

You acquire absolutely no rights or licenses in or to this Content and any related text, graphics, photographs, trademarks, logos, sounds, music, audio, video,
artwork, computer code, information, data and material therein, other than the limited right to utilize this Content for your own personal, internal, non-commercial
purposes or as further provided herein.

Any unauthorized use, facilitation or encouragement of a third party’s unauthorized use (including without limitation copy, distribution, transmission, modification,
use as part of generative artificial intelligence or for training any artificial intelligence models) of this Content or any related information is not permitted without S&P
Global’s prior consent and shall be deemed an infringement, violation, breach or contravention of the rights of S&P Global or any applicable third-party (including any
copyright, trademark, patent, rights of privacy or publicity or any other proprietary rights).

This Content and related materials are developed solely for informational purposes based upon information generally available to the public and from sources
believed to be reliable. S&P Global gives no representations or warranties regarding the use of this Content and/or its fitness for a particular purpose and references
to a particular investment or security, a score, rating or any observation concerning an investment or security that is part of this Content is not a recommendation to
buy, sell or hold such investment or security, does not address the suitability of an investment or security and should not be relied on as investment advice.

S&P Global shall have no liability, duty or obligation for or in connection with this Content, any other related information (including for any errors, inaccuracies,
omissions or delays in the data) and/or any actions taken in reliance thereon. In no event shall S&P Global be liable for any special, incidental, or consequential
damages, arising out of the use of this Content and/or any related information.

The S&P and S&P Global logos are trademarks of S&P Global registered in many jurisdictions worldwide. You shall not use any of S&P Global’s trademarks, trade
names or service marks in any manner, and in no event in a manner accessible by or available to any third party. You acknowledge that you have no ownership or
license rights in or to any of these names or marks.

Adherence to S&P's Internal Polices

S&P Global adopts policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of non-public information received in connection with its analytical processes. As a result,
S&P Global employees are required to process non-public information in accordance with the technical and organizational measures referenced in the internal S&P
Global Information Security and Acceptable Use policies and related guidelines.

Conflicts of Interest

S&P Global is committed to providing transparency to the market through high-quality independent opinions. Safeguarding the quality, independence and integrity of
Content is embedded in its culture and at the core of everything S&P Global does. Accordingly, S&P Global has developed measures to identify, eliminate and/or
minimize potential conflicts of interest for Sustainable1 as an organization and for individual employees. Such measures include, without limitation, establishing a
clear separation between the activities and interactions of its analytical teams and non-analytical teams; email surveillance by compliance teams; and policy role
designations. In addition, S&P Global employees are subject to mandatory annual training and attestations and must adhere to the Sustainable1 Independence and
Objectivity Policy, the Sustainable1 Code of Conduct, the S&P Global Code of Business Ethics and any other related policies.

See additional Disclaimers at https://www.spglobal.com/en/terms-of-use

Copyright© 2024 S&P Global Inc. All rights reserved. www.spglobal.com/esg/csa

To learn more about this product, contact us here. 20