Sustainability and ESG: A Strategic Focus for Corporate Governance
Listen to this articleIntroduction In 2024, sustainability and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) initiatives have taken center stage in corporate governance. As businesses face growing pressures from regulatory bodies, stakeholders, and the broader public, navigating the complex landscape of sustainability reporting and ESG considerations has become a priority. This article, authored by T3 Consultants, explores where the sustainability and ESG movement stands today, key legal and regulatory changes, and how companies can adapt to these evolving requirements.
1. Evolving ESG Reporting Standards and Regulatory Frameworks
One of the most significant changes in the sustainability landscape is the introduction of mandatory ESG reporting requirements in several regions, with the European Union (EU) leading the charge. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is expected to impact an estimated 50,000–60,000 multinational companies, requiring them to disclose a broad range of sustainability metrics. This includes emissions data, biodiversity, and worker conditions across the supply chain.
Simultaneously, jurisdictions like Australia and China are implementing their own reporting standards, aligning with the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) S-1 and S-2 sustainability rules. However, in the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has faced setbacks in advancing similar regulations, such as the climate-related financial disclosure rules. These rules, while scaled back to focus only on Scope 1 and 2 emissions, have faced legal challenges that have delayed implementation.
For U.S. companies, the legal uncertainty surrounding federal sustainability rules, contrasted with California’s state-level mandates like SB 253 and SB 261, creates a complex compliance environment. Companies need to stay agile, keeping abreast of both state and international requirements, as these will shape the regulatory landscape in the coming years.
2. The Shift in Anti-ESG Legislation
2024 has also seen a decline in new anti-ESG legislation in the United States. While 2023 witnessed a surge in states passing laws limiting the use of ESG factors in investment decisions, the momentum slowed considerably in 2024. Despite this slowdown, several anti-ESG laws continue to face legal challenges, especially in conservative-leaning states. For example, Oklahoma’s anti-ESG law, which sought to blacklist financial institutions “boycotting” energy companies, was struck down in court, and similar laws in Texas and Missouri are facing opposition on constitutional grounds.
At the federal level, anti-ESG efforts have gained little traction, and several bills that aimed to restrict ESG investing have failed to pass. Moreover, the Department of Labor’s rule allowing fiduciaries to consider ESG factors in retirement plan investments remains a point of contention, with ongoing litigation following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Loper Bright case.
Businesses must therefore remain vigilant, particularly those operating in states with active anti-ESG litigation or in sectors under scrutiny for their ESG-related decisions. Adopting a flexible approach and monitoring the legal developments surrounding anti-ESG laws is critical for staying compliant and avoiding reputational risks.
3. Proxy Voting Trends: E&S Proposals on the Decline
The proxy season of 2024 revealed a significant decline in support for environmental and social (E&S) shareholder proposals. Despite a comparable number of E&S proposals submitted compared to previous years, only three received majority support—significantly fewer than in 2021, where 36 proposals passed. Many institutional investors cited the prescriptive nature of recent proposals and the fact that companies were already addressing many of the issues raised as reasons for lower support.
Interestingly, there has been a marked rise in anti-ESG proposals, with more shareholder proposals opposing ESG initiatives than in previous years. These include calls for reports on the risks posed by carbon reduction goals and concerns about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. However, support for these anti-ESG proposals remains low, averaging just 2%.
Companies should carefully consider how they engage with shareholders on ESG matters, ensuring transparency and maintaining open communication about their sustainability strategies. Ensuring alignment with investor expectations is crucial as the debate over ESG in the proxy voting arena continues to evolve.
4. Corporate Diversity and Inclusion Efforts: Post-Affirmative Action
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to overturn race-based affirmative action in higher education has had ripple effects on corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Conservative groups have used the ruling to challenge various DEI programs, leading to legal battles for some companies. For instance, venture capital firm Fearless Fund was forced to shut down a program supporting women of color entrepreneurs after a lawsuit challenged the legality of such race-based initiatives.
The shifting legal landscape has prompted some companies to rebrand or scale back their DEI efforts, while others have doubled down on their commitment to diversity. Striking the right balance between legal compliance and maintaining a diverse and inclusive corporate culture is now a pressing issue for businesses. Companies should consult legal experts and diversity advisors to navigate these challenges effectively.
5. The Future of Multi-Stakeholder Climate Initiatives
Collaborative climate initiatives, which have long been a cornerstone of global corporate sustainability efforts, are now facing increased scrutiny, particularly from conservative lawmakers in the U.S. The Net Zero Insurance Alliance disbanded earlier this year after pressure from state attorneys general concerned about anti-competitive practices. Similarly, the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) and Climate Action 100+ have faced investigations and membership departures due to fears of legal exposure.
In Europe and other parts of the world, however, regulatory frameworks are evolving to support sustainability collaboration. The European Commission’s revised Horizontal Guidelines and similar rules in the U.K. and Australia provide clarity on how businesses can collaborate on sustainability without breaching competition laws.
As these legal battles play out, companies should weigh the benefits and risks of participating in multi-stakeholder initiatives, especially in regions with ambiguous competition rules. A careful assessment of these risks, balanced against the potential for long-term environmental impact, will be critical in determining the path forward.
Conclusion
The landscape of sustainability and ESG in 2024 is marked by both progress and setbacks. While regulatory frameworks like the EU’s CSRD push companies towards greater transparency and accountability, legal challenges in the U.S. have created significant hurdles for advancing ESG initiatives. At the same time, the rise of anti-ESG laws and proposals has added another layer of complexity for businesses.
For companies seeking to navigate these challenges, staying informed and adaptable is crucial. By monitoring regulatory developments, engaging with stakeholders, and maintaining a flexible ESG strategy, businesses can continue to make meaningful progress toward sustainability goals while minimizing legal risks.
Interested in speaking with our consultants? Click here to get in touch
Some sections of this article were crafted using AI technology
Leave a Reply