Kristiansson ESG

This paper explores foundational sustainability reporting concepts, including what corporate sustainability reporting is, what form it should take, what difference it makes and what role ought to be played by reporting standards. The starting point is the Brundtland definition of sustainable development (Brundtland, 1987) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; UN, 2015). These have two implications for the corporate sector. First, to the extent that corporations provide the goods and services with which society meets its needs, there is public interest in the ongoing financial viability (and therefore profitability) of the corporate sector. Second, to the extent that the private economic incentives of corporations (and their investors) are realised at the expense of sustainability goals (including at a cost to future generations), there is conflict between the interests of society and those of investors and others with beneficial interests in corporate activity. Taking the perspective of corporate reporting, this paper evaluates the complementary information provided to investors by the financial statements and sustainability-related financial disclosure, both of which are components of financial reporting. These are critical in factoring sustainability into investment decisions, enhancing efficient capital allocation in that regard. Yet such mechanisms cannot alone address the core challenge in sustainability, which is the absence of economic self-interest, even in the long term, in eliminating external costs. In recognition of this conflict, the paper sets out and evaluates complementarity between financial reporting and impact reporting, with both having a distinctive role in aligning corporate and societal interests in a collective transition to a sustainable economy. #CorporateSustainability #ESG #BrundtlandDefinition

The Council on Environmental Quality has issued an interim final rule and corresponding memorandum to heads of federal departments and agencies indicating its intent to rescind prior National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations to comply with an earlier executive order issued by President Donald Trump. This article provides an overview of relevant historical context of NEPA, including a summary of recent judicial and executive actions that questioned the validity of the existing NEPA framework, as well as discusses implications of the interim final rule and memorandum on past, pending and future projects potentially subject to NEPA review. #EnvironmentalReview #ExecutiveOrder #RegulatoryChanges

As companies and others in the regulated community continue to evaluate their strategies in light of the Trump administration’s rollout of its deregulatory agenda, we highlight a notable executive order, Executive Order 14219, issued on February 19, 2025, entitled “Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Deregulatory Initiative," that could have wide-ranging implications for numerous environmental (and other) regulations, as well as current and future enforcement actions and criminal prosecutions. #PolicyChanges #TrumpAdministration #RegulatoryStrategy

Two important environmental reporting deadlines bookend the month of March—chemical inventory reporting under the EPCRA on March 1, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reporting under the Clean Air Act on March 31. #GHGEmissions #CleanAirAct #ReportingDeadlines

On January 20, 2025, the president signed three significant climate and energy-related executive orders—“Declaring a National Energy Emergency,” “Unleashing American Energy,” and “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements”—and rescinded several executive orders from prior administrations, including those focused on reducing emissions and expanding clean energy infrastructure. This article analyzes the key provisions of each order and their potential impact on corporate sustainability practices. #ClimateEmergency #EnergyPolicy #NationalEnergyEmergency

Update: On January 28, 2025, EPA published a final rule delaying the effective date for the TCE risk management rule until March 21, 2025. EPA stated that, due to a temporary stay of the effective date by the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, the rule never went into effect and is subject to President Trump’s 60-day Regulatory Freeze Pending Review. Also, on January 22, 2025, H. J. Res. 27 was introduced to “disapprove” the TCE rule under the Congressional Review Act. No votes have been taken on the resolution yet. #EPARuleUpdate #TCEManagement #RegulatoryFreeze

The environmental, social & governance (ESG) landscape will grow more complex in 2025, with businesses facing increasing pressure related to climate risks, regulatory changes, and shifting societal expectations. Based on The Conference Board? C-Suite Outlook 2025: Seizing the Future, a comprehensive survey of global business leaders, this report highlights the key ESG priorities of CEOs and C-Suite executives, with a primary focus on US CEOs and additional insights from European and global perspectives— providing a strategic road map for the year ahead. #ESG2025 #ClimateRisks #RegulatoryChanges

Organizing workspaces and equipment is just the start — effective EHS housekeeping demonstrates a commitment to safety and reflects the strength of your safety culture. With regular inspections, you can establish a routine to battle complacency and boost safety engagement. #EHS #RoutineInspections #SafetyCulture

An enforcement memo posted by PHMSA provides crucial flexibility for shippers of hazardous materials by highway, rail, air, or vessel in 2025. #PHMSA #HazardousMaterials #ShippingFlexibility https://lnkd.in/eFtGMZTH

The movement for greater corporate responsibility over environmental, social and governance issues, commonly known as ESG, has become increasingly prevalent across boardrooms and shareholder meetings in recent years. However, alongside this momentum, there has been growing opposition to corporate ESG initiatives, and groups critical of these efforts have grown in tandem. The debate over ESG has been a hot-button topic for years—further exacerbated since the COVID-19 pandemic—and has only continued to grow in importance within shareholder meetings. A recent example can be seen in Costco’s latest proxy filing, where the Company defended its DEI program against an anti-ESG proposal that criticized the initiative as financially irresponsible and discriminatory. This comes at a time when an increasing number of companies are rolling back similar programs. The pressure from anti-ESG shareholder proposers continues to grow, making its way into corporate boardrooms. #ESG #CorporateResponsibility #CorporateInitiatives