ESG視点からの炭素コスト情報の収集と集約：金発科技（Kingfa）のケーススタディ

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:炭素コストの管理会計的枠組みと物理・財務データ統合の研究ギャップを埋める事例研究として参考になる。

🏢実務担当者:ESG・エネルギー・財務システムに分散した炭素データをコスト対象別に集約する実務設計のヒントを得られる。

🏛政策担当者:企業レベルの炭素コスト会計枠組みを制度設計に反映する際の実証的示唆を提供する。

Purpose: To examine how carbon cost information is collected and consolidated from an Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) perspective, using Kingfa Science & Technology as a case study. Specifically, the study aims to address the fragmentation of carbon-related physical and financial data across corporate systems and to construct a practical framework for carbon cost classification, attribution, and consolidation, thereby supporting the "dual-carbon" goals and responding to external pressures such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Methodology: This study adopts a single-case study approach based on publicly available secondary data, including Kingfa's annual reports (2022–2025), sustainability reports (2022–2025), and the China Carbon Market Development Report (2025). Data analysis employs trend comparison to track the co-movement of green business expansion and carbon intensity changes, and monetary conversion estimation using market reference prices to bridge physical energy consumption data with financial cost information. The analysis covers Scope 1 (direct emissions) and Scope 2 (energy indirect emissions), with Scope 3 addressed qualitatively by materiality, since public reporting provides it only as an unverified group-level aggregate that cannot be attributed to a cost object. Findings: The study reveals that Kingfa's carbon cost information is highly fragmented across ESG, energy, production, R&D, and financial systems, with no effective mapping between physical emission data and financial cost data. Three major gaps are identified: (1) inconsistent classification and accounting boundaries of carbon costs; (2) lack of mapping between physical and monetary data; and (3) unclear cost objects and cost drivers. To address these gaps, the study proposes a carbon cost collection and consolidation mechanism comprising: (a) a three-tier classification framework dividing carbon costs into carbon emission costs, carbon abatement costs, and carbon risk costs; (b) a tripartite "cost object–cost driver–responsibility center" consolidation structure that clarifies cost attribution, allocation basis, and accountable entities. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The proposed mechanism enhances the traceability and managerial relevance of carbon cost information, filling the research gap on front-end information collection and consolidation from an ESG perspective. For practice, it provides Kingfa and similar manufacturing enterprises with a structured approach to integrating fragmented carbon data into managerial decision-making. For policy, the study offers empirical insights for regulators and standard-setters to consider enterprise-level carbon cost accounting frameworks that align with both domestic "dual-carbon" targets and international mechanisms such as CBAM.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.47604/ijfa.3985first seen 2026-09-30 05:02:42
• semanticscholar https://iprjb.org/journals/IJFA/article/download/3985/5364first seen 2026-10-01 05:14:29 · last seen 2026-10-02 05:11:21