Pacesetter Research: Prioritizing the "G" in ESG, Enables the Integration of the "E" and the "S"
With rising pressure from stakeholders on "E" and "S" initiatives, the "E" and "S" have typically dominated ESG conversations however prioritizing the G may facilitate the integration of all three components
August 14, 2023 at 07:46 PM
6 minute read
With so much attention from multiple stakeholders (i.e investors, employees, customers, local communities, regulators, NGOs, and suppliers) on ESG (environmental, social, and governance), it can be argued that ESG has become a business phenomenon unable to be cast aside for the time being. In the 2022 edition of the EY US CEO Survey, which included a mix of public and private business leaders, it was reported that 82% of US chief executives see ESG as a value driver to their business over the next few years. In response to this need from business leaders to understand ESG and all its intricacies as it relates to their organization, professional service providers have increasingly developed service offerings to help clients best navigate through ESG challenges and maximize growth opportunities. For example, among law firms, the 2022 Wolters Kluwer Future Ready Lawyer Survey found that 50% had created an ESG practice in the past three years. As climate disclosure regulations have increased and with rising accountability placed on businesses to run in a socially responsible manner the "E" and the "S" have gained much attention, and the "G" has often been deprioritized. According to a Morningstar Sustainalytics survey of more than 500 CSR and sustainability professionals found that 46% of respondents rated corporate governance as the least important aspect of their ESG efforts. However, as data on ESG becomes more readily available, there may be some early indications that the "G" may now need to take center stage in order to deliver the best value to organizations.
Most understand ESG to be a framework (that is often used by investors) to assess an organization's operational performance as it relates to social and environmental impact. However, before the term ESG made its appearance in a 2004 UN report and became better known in the late 2010s, there were other predecessors with similar purposes. For instance, in the 1980s EHS (environmental, health, and safety) focused on using regulation to manage or reduce pollution produced in the pursuit of economic growth but also to improve labor and safety standards. Then in the 1990s, corporate sustainability evolved as a new framework in which businesses aimed at creating sustainable, long-term shareholder, employee, consumer, and societal value by pursuing responsible environmental, social, and economic (or governance) strategies. By the early 2000s CSR (corporate social responsibility), became the top priority for business leaders.
Historians have argued that the concept of CSR emerged from the growing criticisms of the factory systems in the U.S. (poor working conditions and the employment of women and children) along with the rise of philanthropy where successful and wealthy business leaders were donating to religious, educational, and scientific causes. While this may have been the catalyst for CSR, the introduction of a "social contract" by the Committee for Economic Development essentially illuminated the importance of CSR. The contract brought forward the idea that companies function and exist because of public consent and, therefore, there is an obligation to contribute to the needs of society. This led some organizations to incorporate social interests in their business practices and behave in an ethically responsible manner with their stakeholders. Today, CSR is a framework for business self-regulation, with the aim of social accountability and making a positive impact on society by being environmentally friendly; promoting equality, diversity, and inclusion in the workplace; treating employees with respect; giving back to the community; and ensuring business decisions are ethical. From this evolution it is evident that governance has consistently played an active and fundamental role, making its inclusion in ESG rational.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![ALM Market Analysis Report Series: Nashville's Rapid Growth Brings Increased Competition for Law Firms ALM Market Analysis Report Series: Nashville's Rapid Growth Brings Increased Competition for Law Firms](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/292/2024/03/FEATURED-Bar-Talk-Merger-Hotspot.jpeg-image620x372.jpg)
ALM Market Analysis Report Series: Nashville's Rapid Growth Brings Increased Competition for Law Firms
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Rules Georgia Railroad Can Seize Land as Landowners Vow to Fight
- 2On the Move and After Hours: Einhorn Barbarito; Gibbons; Greenbaum Rowe; Pro Bono Partnership
- 3On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners
- 4Is the Collateral Order Doctrine About to Have a 'Brat Summer'?
- 5Trump Administration Faces Lawsuit Over USAID Stop-Work Orders
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250