Research

Understanding Electric Vehicle Adoption: The Role of Information Frictions and Heterogeneous Beliefs (2025)

http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5391851

In 2023, the transportation sector in Europe contributed 25% of CO2 emissions, with almost no reduction since 2010. Despite government policies promoting decarbonization, public adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) remains limited. This study, involving 5,500 German participants from a pre-registered survey and experiment, identifies information frictions and mixed beliefs about EV sustainability as key barriers. Two treatments-highlighting EVs' environmental benefits and public policies-both increased participants' likelihood of choosing an EV, but only the environmental treatment raised willingness to pay more. The findings underscore the need for clear, accurate information to complement policy efforts, reducing disinformation and amplifying the impact of initiatives to meet climate goals. 

Unveiling the Consequences of ESG Rating Disagreement: An Empirical Analysis of the Impact on the Cost of Equity Capital with Chiara Mio, Marco Fasana, Antonio Costantinia, and Francesco Scarpa (2024)

Accounting in Europe: https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2024.2350955

Recent academic research exhibits considerable disagreement among ESG ratings from different agency providers. The consequences of this disagreement on the market are still under-explored; thus, we investigate whether this disagreement impacts the cost of equity capital. Using a sample of 23,201 firm-month observations from January 2019 to March 2021, we find that ESG disagreement positively moderates the negative relationship between the average ESG score and cost of equity. By disentangling the aggregate ESG score, we find that the moderating effect of this disagreement does not hold for any pillar. Furthermore, the association between ESG rating disagreement and cost of equity is more pronounced in the presence of high analyst information uncertainty. Overall, our findings highlight that ESG rating disagreement jeopardizes investors' confidence in ESG ratings and weakens the role of these ratings in reducing the cost of equity, pointing to the need to improve convergence across agency providers. 

Unpacking the ESG Ratings: Does One Size Fit All? with Monica Billio, Carmelo Latino and Loriana Pelizzon (2024)

Forthcoming in Economic Letters: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4742445 

In this study, we unpack the ESG ratings of four prominent agencies in Europe and find that (i) each single E, S, G pillar explains the overall ESG score differently,(ii) there is a low co-movement between the three E, S, G pillars and (iii) there are specific ESG Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that are driving these ratings more than others. We argue that such discrepancies might mislead firms about their actual ESG status, potentially leading to cherry-picking areas for improvement, thus raising questions about the accuracy and effectiveness of ESG evaluations in both explaining sustainability and driving capital toward sustainable companies.