This study examines external energy audits and reported supply‐chain carbon monitoring using 12,154 energy‐monitoring establishments in 37 countries from the 2019‐coded World Bank Enterprise Survey cross‐section. Audit is associated with an 8.1‐percentage‐point higher monitoring probability after establishment, governance, country, and industry controls. The questionnaire limits monitoring to the chain up to establishment output; it does not measure complete Scope 3 accounting or emissions reduction. Positive associations persist under alternative estimators and wild‐cluster inference. Customer requirements, environmental managers, and strategy strengthen the association under false‐discovery and family‐wise corrections. Practice‐index associations remain positive after excluding energy‐management content that may overlap with audit. The decomposition is consistent with the proposed monitoring pathway, while cross‐sectional timing and instrument strength warrant an associational interpretation. These findings clarify how external assessment relates to value‐chain information collection and reported environmental practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: