One of the leading issues of our era is climate shift, which has the potential to influence health and fitness of nearly everyone on planate. Furthermore, economy and financial system face significant overall risk due to climate shift. At this stage, everyone knows this fact, that it is high time to move further and take some advanced steps for sustainable development. 

Background

Climate change represents one of the most significant global challenges of 21^st century, influencing ecological stability, societal well-being and economic system. The transition toward a low carbon economy has introduced not only environmental implications bit also financial implication s too. In this context, climate-related financial risks (CRFR) have emerged as a central concern for investors, regulators, and financial institutions. ESG was first time came into the picture in year 2006, in  “United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI) report”.

ESG is an umbrella term which covers Environmental factors, Social factors and governance factors in it. 

• The environmental factor covers the fact that the business should respect the environment and try to make an effort to protect and restore the environment.
• The Social factor of ESG covers the society around us, and the people who are associated with the organization in any form.
• Finally, the governance factor covers the fact that the business should run itself with all ethical standards and maintain and maintain integrity, transparency and accountability integrity transparency to society.

Gap in Literature

While we have enough literature to support establishing the relation between the ESG impact on financial productivity as well as the relation between risk and return is well defined by literature and financial theories, but the direct effect of ESG on CRFR has not yet been tested. Despite the global emphasis on ESG and its potential to guide capital towards greener practices, very limited scholarly attention has been paid to whether, ESG-driven strategies are related to the reduction in CRFR. The absence of focused bibliometric studies examining the link between ESG and CRFR further emphasizes this research gap.

Research Question

To address the identified gap, this study guided by the following research questions.

• RQ1: What is the current landscape of research at the intersection of ESG initiatives and CRFR?
• RQ2: Which countries and authors are contributing most to this area of literature?
• RQ3: What are key areas, publication types and trends etc. in ESG-CRFR studies?

Novelty and Contribution

We have enough literature to support establishing the relation between the ESG impact on financial productivity as well as the relation between risk and return is well defined by literature and financial theories, but the effect of ESG on CRFR has not yet been tested. This study contributes to the ESG and CRFR literature by integrating bibliometric analysis with VOS Viewer along with Power bi, a visualization tools rarely used in prior bibliometric research. Unlike previous studied that generally explores ESG influence on corporate performance. This study uniquely maps the bibliometric structure; research trends and evolution of scholarly work and publication related to the ESG and CRFR. Theoretically. The study enriches the potential of ESG strategies to reduce CRFR financial risk mitigation potential, practically it provides stakeholder and regulator a data driven visual of the evolving research trends, identify knowledge gap and future research direction.

Structure of the Paper

The rest of the paper is structured as follow:

• Section 2 presents the literature review highlighting foundational studies.
• Section 3 outline the research methodology and data collection process.
• Section 4 discuss the analysis using Power bi and Vos Viewer.
• Section 5 concludes with key insights, implications and suggestion for future research.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION

The bibliometric analysis entails updating already existing bibliographical sources concerning the topic under study.  It is a method that includes reading, and evaluating documents and bibliographic resources, to choose and gather information. Bibliometric analysis entails updating already-existing bibliographical sources in relation to the topic under study.  It is a method that includes reading, evaluating documents and bibliographic resources, to choose and gather information.

The Bibliometric analysis executed in this learning is crucial in providing a advanced outlook to understand the literature development from conceptual uncertainty to theory evaluation and to clarify the important constructs and their connections (De Bakker et al., 2005). Furthermore, the development of the literature considers the number of alliances among scholars who create the research community to create and share information (Koseoglu, 2016)

Sample Criteria

Table1: Sample Criteria

Using the criteria and following a systematic keyword filtration process, we assess the gap in the existing literature, as illustrated in Table 2 below.

Table 2:  Analytical overview of Keywords as per June 2025

(Source: Developed by authors on the basis of Scopus Database)

Sample Design and rational

Based on the above table we selected 195 document results  ALL ("Climate related financial Risk" AND "ESG" ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA , "ECON" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA , "BUSI" ) )

In order to conduct a focused and meaningful bibliometric analysis, a total of 195 documents were selected using the combined search query "ESG" AND "Climate related financial Risk" within the subject domains of Business Management & Accounting, Economics, and Econometrics & Finance. This selection is based on several key considerations:

Firstly, the chosen query directly aligns with the core objective of the study, which seeks to explore the intersection between Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) practices and climate-related financial risks. While the keyword "ESG" alone retrieved 24,344 documents and "Climate related financial Risk" yielded 432 documents, the combination of both terms resulted in a refined list of 195 documents. This ensures relevance, thematic precision, and removes unrelated or overly broad literature.

Secondly, the relatively lower number of results (195) signifies the emerging nature and limited integration of these two critical topics in the current literature, which underscores the novelty and importance of this investigation. Notably, only 2 of these documents included both keywords explicitly in their titles, abstracts, or keyword sections, further highlighting a literature gap that this study aims to address.

The bibliometric analysis was conducted using a combination of Power BI and VOS viewer to provide comprehensive insights into the selected dataset. Power BI was utilized to generate key performance visuals such as Annual Scientific Production, Top Authors by Publications, and Top Keywords, offering a clear view of research trends, prolific contributors, and dominant themes. The Trend of Keywords Over Time further revealed the evolution of thematic focus across years, while the Collaboration Map by Country highlighted the global distribution and international partnerships in the research domain. Complementing these, VOSviewer was employed to construct sophisticated network diagrams including Keyword Co-occurrence, Co-authorship, and Co-citation Networks. These maps enabled the identification of thematic clusters, collaboration patterns among authors, and the intellectual structure of the field through frequently co-cited authors. Together, these visualizations offer a holistic understanding of the bibliographic landscape and research dynamics.

Key Visualizations Used in Bibliometric Analysis

4.1. Annual Trend of Publication & Citation

The chart titled “Annual Publication and Citation” is based on research data collected from the Scopus database (all years), which is available from 2018 onwards. It highlights the trends in publications and citations over the years 2018–2025. The number of publications was very low in the initial years, with only 2 titles in 2018, none in 2019, and 1 in 2020. From 2021 onward, there is a significant rise, reaching a peak of 72 publications in 2024 before slightly declining to 46 in 2025. Citations, on the other hand, show a contrasting pattern, starting at 103 in 2018 but dropping to zero in 2020. A remarkable surge is observed in 2021 with 845 citations, followed by 480 in 2022, 506 in 2023, and then a sharp decline to 352 in 2024 and 22 in 2025 (till June). This indicates that while publication volume increased after 2020, newer research outputs have not yet gathered substantial citations, resulting in a time lag. The spike in citations between 2021 and 2023 may reflect the influence of impactful studies published in earlier years.

Research output by source title

The chart “Number of Publication by Source Title”, prepared using the criterion of a minimum of 2 publications per source, shows that research output is concentrated in a few leading journals while also spanning a variety of sources. Strategy and the ... tops the list with 9 publications, followed by Science Research Letters and International Review of Finance with 8 each. Other significant journals, including Corporate Social Responsibility and Journal of Cleaner Production, have 6 publications, while many sources contribute 2–3. This distribution highlights the dominance of certain journals in the field while also reflecting the multidisciplinary nature of research across areas such as sustainability, economics, risk management, and corporate finance. This chart is helpful as it provides a clear overview of the distribution of research publications across different journals, allowing the identification of key sources that dominate the field. By highlighting the journals with the highest number of publications, it helps researchers and institutions understand where significant contributions are being made and which platforms are most relevant for disseminating their work.

 Co-authorship Analysis by Authors

The VOSviewer visualization illustrates the co-authorship network of researchers from 2022 to 2025, highlighting both established and emerging contributors in the field. Larger nodes, such as those representing d’orazio p., zioto m., bandyopadhyay a., kashyap a., and carè r., indicate authors with significant research output or influence. The color gradient from blue to yellow reflects the timeline of activity, with blue and green nodes representing authors active mainly during 2022–2023, while yellow nodes denote more recent contributions in 2024–2025. The clustering of nodes suggests strong collaborative groups or research teams, while the spread of authors indicates the global and multidisciplinary nature of the research domain. This network not only identifies key authors but also provides insights into evolving research trends and emerging collaborations.

Co-authorship Analysis by Countries

The visualization highlights that research output is dominated by countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, China, and India, which form the core of global collaborations in the field. European nations lead the network, while Asian countries, particularly China and India, are also emerging as significant contributors. Smaller but notable contributions are seen from countries like Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and Tunisia, reflecting a growing global interest. The clustering of countries indicates strong inter-country collaborations, whereas isolated nodes like Pakistan suggest limited collaborative research activity with other nations.

Co-occurance Analysis by all Key words

The visualization generated through VOSviewer presents a co-occurrence network of 58 keywords, extracted based on a minimum occurrence threshold of 3, from a total of 809 keywords. The map identifies six distinct clusters, each represented by a unique color. These clusters group terms based on their thematic proximity and frequency of joint appearances in the literature. The co-occurrence analysis provides a clear visualization of the interdisciplinary nature of research on climate change and finance. It reflects growing academic interest in topics like green finance, ESG frameworks, financial risk assessment, and sustainable development. The structure and density of the network also highlight key emerging themes and research gaps.

Bibliographic coupling

The bibliographic coupling analysis, based on 54 sources and 120 documents, revealed several interconnected journal clusters. Prominent among these are Business Strategy and the Environment and Journal of Cleaner Production, which serve as key sources in sustainability and environmental finance. The red cluster emphasizes corporate strategy and financial analysis, while the green cluster focuses on environmental economics and sustainable production. A third cluster, in blue, includes journals on financial regulation and governance. The connections between these clusters reflect a growing interdisciplinary focus, where environmental sustainability, corporate governance, and financial performance are increasingly studied together—particularly under the lens of ESG and climate finance.

Global Footprint of Scholarly Research

The analysis of the geographical distribution of publications and citations highlights notable disparities in research output and academic impact across countries. Italy leads with 25 publications and 578 citations, showcasing both high productivity and exceptional influence. The exceptionally high citation count for Italy may be attributed to collaborative research networks, publication in high-impact journals, and research topics of global relevance. China (24 publications, 117 citations) and the United States (23 publications, 83 citations) follow closely, while Germany (13 publications, 41 citations) and India (11 publications, 17 citations) emerge as significant contributors.

Interestingly, countries like Australia (6 publications, 171 citations) and Netherlands (7 publications, 135 citations) exhibit remarkable citation-to-publication ratios, reflecting the high quality and international relevance of their research outputs. Even with limited publications, South Africa (1 publication, 45 citations) and New Zealand (2 publications, 43 citations) demonstrate substantial academic impact.

India ranks among the top contributors, but its comparatively lower citation count highlights the need to focus on publishing in high-impact journals, engaging in international collaborations, and addressing globally relevant topics to enhance research visibility. European countries dominate both publication volume and influence, suggesting a concentration of scholarly excellence. Overall, the data underscores that research quality and global collaboration drive citation impact more effectively than sheer publication volume.

The map shows that research publications are concentrated in Europe (Italy, Germany, Spain, and the UK), followed by China, the United States, and India. Australia and New Zealand also make notable contributions despite their geographical distance.

Citations are predominantly clustered in European countries such as Italy, Netherlands, and the UK, with Australia and the United States showing strong influence. This suggests that European and Australian research outputs are highly impactful and widely referenced.

Climate-related Financial Risks (CRFR) is an emerging field that requires deeper and more extensive exploration. To understand the research landscape, a bibliometric analysis was conducted using data collected from the Scopus database, covering publications from 2018 onwards, as no significant literature existed before that period. The findings confirm that this field is still in its nascent stage and offers vast potential for exploration across multiple dimensions of sustainability and finance.

The analysis of publication and citation trends, conducted using Power BI, reveals a notable growth in interest after 2021. While there were only 6 publications in 2021, the number rose sharply to 22 in 2022, peaking further in 2024 with 72 publications, indicating that researchers are increasingly recognizing the importance of CRFR. However, citation trends show a natural time lag, with impactful studies from earlier years driving citation surges between 2021 and 2023.

The study also highlights that existing literature is largely dominated by general articles, with a critical gap in research exploring the intersection of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) initiatives and climate-related financial risks. This gap presents significant opportunities for future studies to examine how ESG practices can mitigate or quantify risks associated with climate change and financial systems.

Geographical and source analysis underscores the dominance of European nations—particularly Italy, the UK, and Germany—alongside growing contributions from China and India. High-impact journals such as Business Strategy and the Environment and Journal of Cleaner Production emerge as key platforms for research dissemination. Countries like Italy and Australia stand out due to their exceptionally high citation counts, which can be attributed to international collaborations, publication in leading journals, and globally relevant research topics.

The keyword co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling analyses further reveal that the field is inherently interdisciplinary, intersecting themes like green finance, sustainable development, ESG frameworks, and financial risk assessment. However, the presence of emerging clusters suggests that significant thematic areas remain underexplored, offering avenues for innovative research.

In conclusion, this study emphasizes that while CRFR research is gaining momentum, there is an urgent need to focus on the integration of ESG initiatives and climate-financial risk assessment. Strengthening global collaboration, publishing in high-impact outlets, and addressing critical gaps will be essential for advancing this field and contributing to sustainable financial strategies in the face of climate change.

1. Amzallag, A. (2022) ‘Fund portfolio networks: A climate risk perspective’, International Review of Financial Analysis, 84(1), pp. 73–86. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102259.
2. Asni, N. and Agustia, D. (2022) ‘The mediating role of financial productivity in the relationship between green innovation and firm value: evidence from ASEAN countries’, European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(5), pp. 1328–1347. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2020-0459.
3. Battiston, S., Dafermos, Y. and Monasterolo, I. (no date) ‘Climate risks and financial Equilibrium.’, Journal of Financial Equilibrium, 54. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100867.
4. Bell, F. and Vuuren, G. van (2022) ‘The impact of climate risk on corporate credit risk’, Cogent Economics and Finance, 10(1), pp. 1–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2022.2148362.
5. Bhattacharya, S. and Sharma, D. (2019) ‘Do environment, social and governance productivity impact credit ratings: a study from India’, International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 35(3), pp. 466–484. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-09-2018-0130.
6. Bingler, J.A. et al. (2022) ‘Cheap talk and cherry-picking: What Climate Bert has to say on corporate climate risk disclosures’, Finance Research Letters, 47. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.102776.
7. Bodhanwala, S. and Bodhanwala, R. (2018) ‘Does corporate sustainability impact firm profitability? Evidence from India’, Management Decision, 56(8), pp. 1734–1747. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2017-0381.
8. Breitenstein, M., Nguyen, D.K. and Walther, T. (2021) ‘ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND RISK MANAGEMENT IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW’, Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(2), pp. 512–538. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12411.
9. Chelawat, H. and Trivedi, I.V. (2016) ‘The business value of ESG productivity: the Indian context’, Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 5(1–2), pp. 195–210. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-016-0064-4.
10. De, C.S. et al. (no date) ‘ESG Risk Disclosure and the Risk of Green Washing’, ESG Risk Disclouser, 16(146–159).
11. DeMenno, M.B. (2022) ‘Environmental sustainability and financial Equilibrium: can macroprudential stress testing measure and mitigate climate-related systemic financial risk?’, Journal of Banking Regulation [Preprint]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41261-022-00207-2.
12. Friede, G., Busch, T. and Bassen, A. (2015) ‘ESG and financial productivity: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies’, Journal of Sustainable Finance and Investment, 5(4), pp. 210–233. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917.
13. Galletta, S. and Mazzù, S. (no date) ‘ESG controversies and bank risk-taking.’, Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(1), pp. 274–288.
14. Garg, S., Shah, M. and Khanna, M. (no date) Discussion Paper on Climate Risk and Financial, www.rbi.org. Available at: https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/PublicationsView.aspx?id=21071 (Accessed: 15 May 2023).
15. González, M.Á.A., Plaza, E.D.L.P. and Olmeda, N.G. (2020) ‘The impact of corporate social responsibility transparency on the financial productivity, brand value, and sustainability level of IT companies’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), pp. 642–654. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1829.
16. Gosh, S. and Nath, S. (no date) ESG Disclosure and Productivity: Cross-Country Evidence, https://www.rbi.org.in/. Available at: https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/BS_PressReleaseDisplay.aspx?prid=55239.
17. Haywood, L.K. (no date) ‘Putting risk management into the corporate sustainability context’, Social Responsibility Journal, 18(8), pp. 1485–1504.
18. Hoang, T. (no date) ‘The role of integrated reporting in raising awareness of environmental’, Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility, 24(1), pp. 47-69.
19. Iazzolino, G. et al. (no date) ‘The impact of ESG factors on financial efficiency: An empirical analysis for the selection of sustainable firm portfolios.’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(4), pp. 1917-1927.
20. Impact of ESG Discclouser (no date) https://assets.kpmg.com. Available at: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2019/09/impact-of-esg-disclosures.pdf.
21. Landi, G.C. et al. (2022) ‘Embedding sustainability in risk management: The impact of environmental, social, and governance ratings on corporate financial risk’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(4), pp. 1096–1107. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2256.
22. Lee, M.T. and Raschke, R.L. (2023) ‘Stakeholder legitimacy in firm greening and financial productivity: What about greenwashing temptations?☆’, Journal of Business Research, 155, p. 113393. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113393.
23. Lirou, J. (2022) ‘Enterprise ESG Information Disclosure and Financing Restriction. Conference Proceedings’, in. Conference Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Project Management, China.
24. Naumer, H.-J. and Burcin, Y. (no date) ‘It is not only what you say, but how you say it: ESG, Corporate news and the impact of ESG’, Global Finance Journal, 52, p. 100571.
25. Nwaigwe, N.G. et al. (2022) ‘Sustainability disclosure: Impact of its extent and quality on value of listed firms in Nigeria’, Cogent Business and Management, 9(1), pp. 1–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2079393.
26. Oware, K.M. and Mallikarjunappa, T. (no date) CSR expenditure, mandatory CSR reporting and financial productivity of listed firms. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MEDAR-05-2020-0896/full/html (Accessed: 15 January 2023).
27. Rodella, R. and De Giacoma, M.R. (2023) ‘How do financial markets reward companies tackling climate shift concerns? A natural experiment based on the Brexit referendum’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(2), pp. 979–990.
28. Sabbaghi, O. (2022) ‘The impact of news on the volatility of ESG firms’, Global Finance Journal, 51, p. 100570. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2020.100570.
29. Stolbov, M.I. and Shchepeleva Mikhail A. (2022) ‘The impact of ESG factors on financial Equilibrium.’, Voprosy Ekonomiki, 11, pp. 136-148.
30. Volz, U. (2022) ‘Climate-Proofing the Global Financial Safety Net’, Journal of Globalization and Development, 13(1), pp. 1–30. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/jgd-2020-0085/html?lang=en.
31. Wang, J., Hu, X. and Zhong, A. (2022) ‘Stock market reaction to mandatory ESG disclosure’, Finance Research Letters, 53, p. 103402. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103402.
32. Wang, Y. et al. (2023) ‘Institutional ownership heterogeneity and ESG productivity: Evidence from China’, Finance Research Letters, 51, p. 103448. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103448.
33. Yasser, E., Ahmed, A. and Ahmed, S. (2021) ‘ESG Practices and Cost of Debt: Evidence from EU countries’, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 79, p. 102097.
34. Zhou, X.Y. et al. (2022) ‘Bank green lending and credit risk: an empirical analysis of China’s Green Credit Policy’, Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(4), pp. 1623–1640. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2973.