ESG

Subscribe to ESG via RSS

There is no doubt that, as I have previously noted on this site, the conversation about ESG has changed over time, particularly as ESG has faced a political backlash. These changes not only concern ESG itself but each of its three constituent pillars – and while ESG discussions frequently focus on the “E” pillar, and in particular on climate change, the changes in the ESG conversation also concern the “S” pillar as well. Of the recent changes surrounding the Social component of ESG, arguably none is more important that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, in which the Court ruled that race-based policies should not be used in university admissions. In a May 23, 2024, Law360 article entitled “The State of Play in DEI and ESG One Year After Harvard Ruling” (here), attorneys from the Crowell & Moring law firm review the ways that the Supreme Court’s decision in the Harvard case have changed the dialog surrounding Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and ESG.Continue Reading ESG, DEI, and the Supreme Court’s College Admissions Decision

There is no doubt that ESG both as a concept and as a social, political, and litigation phenomenon has changed over time. Due to political backlash and changing investor priorities, ESG and ESG-related issues recently have featured less prominently in general economic and business dialog than even just a short time ago. An interesting and thought-provoking May 2, 2024, article (here) from the Rock Center for Corporate Governance asks the question whether the circumstances surrounding ESG are changing because ESG “is a luxury good”? (Hat Tip to Cydney Posner’s May 13, 2024, post on the Cooley law firm PubCo blog, here). The article raises some interesting questions and reflects interesting data and observations.Continue Reading Is ESG a “Luxury Good”?

As ESG-related litigation has developed, one definitive trend has been the emergence of litigation involving allegations of “greenwashing” – that is, claims alleging that companies overstated their ESG credentials in order to win business, attract customers, or score virtue points. To date, the greenwashing claims have emerged primarily in the U.S. and Europe. Now, Australia is getting into the act, as the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has brought and won its first greenwashing civil penalty action. As discussed below, the action involved claims that Vanguard’s Australian affiliate made misleading statements about its ESG-sorting processes for one of its index funds.Continue Reading Australian Regulator Wins First Greenwashing Enforcement Action

I have noted in prior posts on this site the phenomenon of ESG backlash, which has not only taken the form of legislative and other overtly pollical action, but has also taken the form of litigation as well. Though the ESG backlash lawsuits generally have not fared well in the courts, one of these suits recently survived a motion to dismiss.

In a February 21, 2024, ruling, the Northern District of Texas denied the motion to dismiss in a lawsuit filed by an American Airlines pilot alleging that the airline and its employee benefits committee violated their fiduciary duties under ERISA to the company’s 401(k) plan participants in connection with selection and retention of funds whose managers allegedly pursue non-economic ESG objectives rather than maximizing plan participants’ financial benefits. As discussed below, the ruling underscores just how fraught the ESG-related litigation picture has become. A copy of the court’s ruling can be found here.Continue Reading ESG Backlash ERISA Lawsuit Survives Dismissal Motion

It is not news that ESG has become a battleground issue, with prominent ESG efforts now facing an anti-ESG backlash. And while in the recent past institutional investors and advocacy groups tried to push publicly traded companies to establish their ESG credentials, the ESG-related litigation (such as it has been, so far at least) has primarily been filed not against ESG laggards, but rather against companies that have tried to promote their sustainability efforts and other climate-friendly measures.

In the latest example of litigation against a company in connection with its efforts to promote its ESG qualifications, the New York Attorney General, Letitia James has filed a fraud lawsuit in New York state court against the U.S. subsidiary of JBS, a Brazil-based meat and poultry producer, alleging that its sustainability claims and its publicized goal of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 misled consumers.  A copy of the New York Attorney General’s February 28, 2024, press release about the lawsuit can be found here. The NYAG’s February 28, 2024, complaint can be found here.Continue Reading NYAG Sues Meat Company for Its Net Zero Emissions Claims

As I have noted in prior posts, due to a political “backlash” against ESG, many companies have found it expedient to avoid talking about ESG altogether – a developing that has been referred to as “greenhushing.” Indeed, some academics have even suggested that it may be time to say “RIP” to ESG. But if the expression “ESG” is now verboten, how are we going to talk collectively about the various topics encompassed by the term “ESG”?

According to a January 10, 2024, front-page Wall Street Journal article entitled “The Latest Dirty Word in Corporate America: ESG” (here), as “ESG” has become the three letters that corporate officials dare not utter, they have found other ways to talk about “responsible business.” Meanwhile, corporate environmental and social responsibility efforts continue despite the apparent banishment of “ESG” as an expression. Moreover, as also discussed below, due to regulatory changes, the likelihood is that discussion of the concepts underlying what was referred to in past as “ESG” are only going to increase, regardless whether or not the term “ESG” is used.Continue Reading Goodbye ESG, Hello “Responsible Business”

While academics and others may be asking whether it is time to “say RIP to ESG,” the fact is that though some observers may be done with ESG, ESG is not done with us. A recent action by a U.K. regulator shows that companies remain susceptible to investigations and other regulatory actions for their sustainability and other product or business-related claims. In a December 12, 2023 press release (here), the U.K. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) announced that it has started a formal investigation into the London-based consumer products company Unilever to examine the company’s “green” claims about “a number” of its products.

As discussed below, this latest regulatory action underscores the fact that companies seeking to burnish their green credentials could be subject to scrutiny and even possible regulatory action. A December 13, 2023, Wall Street Journal article about the CMA’s investigation can be found here.Continue Reading Unilever Under U.K. Investigation for Possible “Greenwashing” Product Claims

It is no secret that I am skeptical of the usefulness of ESG as an analytic tool and even as an intellectual concept. As I have contended, there are fundamental disagreements about what ESG actually means, and the idea that it can be objectively measured and quantified is illusory, at best. Now, in an October 21, 2023, Financial Times op-ed column (here), NYU Business School Professor Aswath Damodaran argues that ESG is “beyond redemption” and it may be time to administer last rites.Continue Reading Time to Say RIP to ESG?

Persia Navidi

Readers of this blog well know that one of the current hot topics in the world of D&O is ESG – and not just in the United States, but in Europe, and elsewhere as well. In the following guest post, Persia Navidi, Partner in Insurance, Cyber and Climate Risk at Hicksons Lawyers, provides an overview of the state of play with regard to ESG in Australia, and also discusses the related insurance issues. I would like to thank Persia for allowing me to publish her article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Persia’s article.Continue Reading Guest Post: ESG and Financial Lines Insurance in Australia

A unit of Deutsche Bank has agreed to the entry of a cease-and-desist order and to the payment of a $19 million penalty in connection with an SEC enforcement action in which the agency alleged that the unit had made materially misleading statements about its use of ESG factors into its research and investment recommendations. The ESG-related enforcement action was accompanied by a separate anti-money laundering (AML) enforcement action against the unit, Deutsche Bank’s New York-based investment advisor subsidiary, DWS Investment Management Americas (DWS), in which DWS agreed to pay a separate $6 million penalty. The ESG-related action, which apparently involved the SEC’s Climate and ESG Task Force, highlights the ways in which companies seeking to be proactive on ESG-related issues can attract claims. The action also underscores the fact that the SEC is scrutinizing ESG-related disclosures.Continue Reading Deutsche Bank Unit Hit with SEC Penalties Over ESG Claims