A new paper from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) – Sloan School of Management says that the divergence between ESG scores from ratings providers continues to be a problem in the investment industry creating "an impediment to prudent decision-making that would contribute to an environmentally sustainable and socially just economy." The paper, "Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings," looks at divergence between five ratings agencies; KLD, Sustainalytics, Video-Eiris, Asset4, and RobecoSAM. The research found the correlation among those agencies' ESG ratings was on average 0.61; by comparison, credit ratings from Moody's and Standard & Poor's are correlated at 0.99. The paper states that a lack of consensus around ESG ratings for specific companies can lead to: