ESG평가기관에 대한 EU의 규제 입법에 관한 고찰

As interest in sustainable economic growth increases, the importance of ESG evaluations and the ESG rating providers is highlighted, while a critical awareness regarding the appropriateness of their role is being raised. In December 2024, the EU legislated EU-wide mandatory regulation(the Regulation on the transparency and integrity of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) rating activities, ESGR) to regulate ESG rating providers, and it is set to be implemented beginning July 2026. Since IOSCO first called for regulatory authorities’ attention to ESG rating providers in 2021, the ESGR stands as a pioneering precedent that has introduced a comprehensive regulatory framework for these providers. It is expected to have a significant impact not only on the regulation of ESG rating providers themselves globally but also on the entire ESG ecosystem. The ESGR is the final puzzle piece, following existing legislations implemented under the EU's Action Plan for Financing Sustainable Growth (such as the SFDR, EU Taxonomy, the CSRD, the CSDDD), completing the sustainable finance regulatory framework in the EU. The ESGR was enacted with the objective of addressing the issues raised regarding ESG rating providers and ESG ratings. Its core contents are as follows: Firstly, it mandates that ESG rating providers operating within the EU obtain authorization from the ESMA. Non-EU providers must meet requirements under any of three systems including the equivalence regime, the endorsement and the recognition. Secondly, to enhance the independence of ESG rating providers, it requires compliance with organizational requirements concerning governance including the separation of businesses that may cause conflicts of interests with ESG rating activities. Thirdly, it strengthens the transparency of ESG ratings by stipulating obligations for the disclosure to the public, users and rated companies of the information on the methodologies used for the ESG ratings. Fourthly, it secures the reliability of both the ESG rating providers and ESG ratings through regulations preventing actual or potential conflicts of interests for the providers and their rating analysts and other personnel directly involved in the rating process. Fifthly, it ensures the proper enforcement of the regulations through ongoing supervision by ESMA. Despite the recent policy shift of “simplification” or deregulation within the EU, exemplified by the "Omnibus packages", no particular discussions regarding the postponement or softening of the ESGR's implementation have yet been found. The easing of corporate-level disclosure regulations resulting from the Omnibus packages, and the consequent information gap, could increase the demand for ESG ratings. If the implementation of the ESGR enhances the reliability of these ratings, it can be anticipated that ESG ratings would perform more important role in the sustainable financing market. The author suggests key implications from the EU's experience if and when Korea introduces an ESG rating agency regulatory framework as follows: First, the framework should take into account the developmental stage of the entire domestic ESG ecosystem as well as the ESG rating providers. A regulatory framework for ESG rating providers that is isolated from the overall ESG ecosystem will merely increase the burden on the providers and related stakeholders, making it difficult to achieve the original regulatory objectives. Second, given that the global ESG rating market is concentrated around a small number of global providers, while domestic providers and market are very small, the framework should provide for a mechanism in order to appropriately position global providers within the framework and to prevent reverse discrimination between Korean and non-Korean providers. Third, the ESG rating market is still in an immature state, and more importantly, diverse demands exist on how to approach and assess 'sustainability'—a non-financial evaluation—from various perspectives. Therefore, legislative intervention into the specific contents of ESG evaluation methodologies is currently inappropriate." Amid the rapidly changing political and economic environments worldwide, each country's sustainability policies are moving in different directions. The author insists that it is necessary to thoroughly review the legislative trends of major countries, including the ESGR, in order to seek a regulatory framework that simultaneously achieves the dual goals of strengthening short-term corporate competitiveness and maintaining sustainability from a long-term perspective.