Is ESG Dead? Or Just in the Middle of a Reinvention?

Daniella Foster • January 18, 2024

Daniella Foster, Executive Board Member, SVP and Global Head of Public Affairs, Science & Sustainability for Bayer’s Consumer Health Division and Board Chair at the UN Global Compact Network USA, calls for a pivot away from the "ESG" battles and to focus instead on sustainable business and the sustainability of your business.


Woke capitalism. Virtue Signaling. Just a buzzword without real substance. This is some of the language I’m sure you’ve also seen around the term “ESG,” as a part of the ongoing conversation on whether ESG is dead.


Instead, I’m a fan of Fortune’s take: ESG is dead. Long live E, S, and G. It’s time to pivot. Now!


For those, like me, who have been in this industry for a while, we know that every so often we go through a reinvention. Corporate philanthropy, corporate citizenship, corporate social responsibility, sustainability . . .  the list could go on. What’s evident by these changes is that we're adapting to the business climate, with the latest incarnation moving sustainability from a nice-to-have to a business mandate.


And now we’re in the middle of another reinvention, and I think that’s a very good thing. One of the reasons “ESG” has been highly politicized is many people equate ESG with reporting and “check-the-box” management. It’s a reporting and investor acronym. It has a role, but it’s not everything. The intent – a focus on the environment, human rights, and governance – still makes good business sense and should be high on the corporate agenda. Ninety-two percent of CEOs say they are continuing their ESG programs, but most are modifying their approach. The next evolution will be focused on sustainable business AND the sustainability of your business; empowering companies to create a sustainable business model that anticipates people’s needs, helps solve world issues AND makes a profit. When this reinvention is successful, here are some of the ways I think a sustainable company will operate 10 years from now:



Aligning Lobbying Efforts with Sustainability Commitments


I participated in a COP28 session on corporate accountability and a representative from the government of Norway asked a great question: how do you know that your company is doing the right thing? One of his criteria was looking at a company’s lobbying efforts and seeing if they are congruent with their climate and human rights position. A November 2023 study by InfluenceMap showed 58% of ~300 Forbes 2,000 companies reviewed were found to be at risk of “net zero greenwash” due to their policy engagement. These are companies that have announced net zero commitments, but are not adequately supporting policy to deliver the Paris Agreement. For instance, the report calls out several gas and energy companies for making net zero commitments, but with contrarian lobbying actions such as advocating for oil and gas expansion, opposing proposed power plant rules, fossil fuel phase-outs, and climate policies.


To enable stakeholder trust and ultimately a better, more world-positive business, companies will need to align what they stand for and act upon in the public sphere.



Investment in the Future of your Business


Instead of focusing on “checking the box,” the future is about investing in the sustainability of your business, which will be fueled by being a sustainable one. Let me unpack this thought. At COP28, much of the focus was on the path to phasing out fossil fuels, but there was also a compelling conversation about the critical need to build climate resilient communities. These both can serve as business opportunities that help the world at the same time. 


Companies should think of sustainability as a business accelerator, using existing strengths and core competencies as a guide. For instance, food and agriculture contributes 25% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, and on the flipside, also is negatively impacted by extreme weather like droughts, floods, and heat leading to food insecurity. My company, Bayer, is a leader in agriculture, these challenges are at the core of our research and development strategy — driving us to create value for both our shareholders and the planet. We’re developing ways to mitigate the adverse impacts, such as reducing the impact of our crop protection products by 30% by 2030 (as of last year, we have gotten to 14%).  In addition, we’re developing new technologies that work with the changes in climate to help farmers improve their yields and minimize their environmental impacts. One example is direct-seeded rice, which moves away from the traditional growing method of flooding a paddy. This approach improves water use per kilogram of crop by 25% and reduces on-field greenhouse gasses per kilogram of crop produced in our key markets by 30%. Innovations like these also improve people’s livelihoods – one of the main audiences is smallholder farmers and innovations like these improve their productivity and the quality of their yields, in turn helping them earn more money.


Other companies are doing this today as well, but I think more companies need to do the hard work to embed sustainability into their business model to create new opportunities to propel future growth.



Using Sustainability to Drive Vision


One reason companies fail is they don’t evolve with people’s needs. And what could be a bigger need than helping people and the planet adapt to climate change and build resilience, given the impact it is and will continue to have on our livelihoods. Climate change is impacting everything from our health to our food, to our homes, and to our rights.


Think about your audience. What do you they need today and how will that evolve in the future (when climate change is likely causing even more damage)? Is your vision aligned with this? These questions sound simple, but are good ones to go back to, to ensure you are on track to be a sustainable business.


A good place to start is seeing what concerns are at the top of the list for governments and policy makers. During COP28, 200+ countries signed a historic agreement to transition away from fossil fuels; 120+ countries signed the health and climate declaration, 100+ countries endorsed tripling reliance on renewable energy sources . . . Companies that succeed in the future will marry these needs with their business core competencies to ensure the sustainability of their business moving forward.



Don’t Wait!


While I framed this blog as a hypothesis on how sustainable companies will operate 10 years from now, there’s no need to wait 10 years to evolve. Whether we call it ESG, Sustainable Business, Impact Generation, or something else, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that sustainability can and should play a central role in how companies operate. As someone whose job it has been to embed sustainability into the business strategies of both Bayer and Hilton, believe me, I know the changes I’ve outlined take hard work to achieve. But I also truly believe – and have seen — this is a key way to help business generate impact and value for shareholders, consumers, governments, and the world.

About the Author:

Daniella Foster
Executive Board Member, SVP and Global Head of Public Affairs, Science & Sustainability for Bayer’s Consumer Health Division
Board Chair, UN Global Compact Network USA


Photo: Andrey Popov, ©️Bayer


Read perspectives from the ISSP blog

By Ioannis Ioannou, PhD June 19, 2025
London Business School Professor Ioannis Ioannou, PhD examines the vulnerable narrative infrastructure surrounding ESG. By collaboratively engaging those most affected by ESG transitions—indigenous peoples, workers, young people, small businesses, and communities, particularly in the Global South—we can foster the trust, legitimacy, and collective commitment for meaningful progress. Who Gets to Tell the Story of ESG? For more than a decade, ESG rapidly evolved from a specialized investor consideration into an elaborate global infrastructure of standards, metrics, taxonomies, and disclosure frameworks. Investor attention soared, corporate sustainability teams grew exponentially, and ESG vocabulary— climate risk, fiduciary duty, and double materiality—became firmly embedded in corporate boardrooms and regulatory discussions globally. Yet, despite ESG’s impressive institutional and technical advancements, the narrative meant to support it remained remarkably fragile. While ESG developed sophisticated standards, disclosures, and metrics, it never invested in the narrative infrastructure to explain its purpose, build public understanding, or secure legitimacy beyond institutional circles. Without the broader stakeholder engagement and effective storytelling that would connect ESG to people’s lived realities, it became vulnerable. Critics didn’t need to challenge carbon accounting or materiality frameworks; instead, they recast ESG as a job killer, an elite agenda, or an unwelcome intrusion into everyday life. The backlash caught many ESG professionals off guard, though the warning signs were visible. ESG’s rapid adoption by investors and regulatory bodies created an illusion of momentum, but this obscured a deeper structural gap. ESG rarely connected meaningfully with those directly affected by ESG-driven transitions—workers facing disruption, small business owners adapting to shifting expectations, and communities, particularly in vulnerable regions, confronting real and immediate climate risks. For these groups, ESG often seemed abstract, distant, and disconnected from their daily concerns. Narrative infrastructure might sound like an unusual concept, but it's foundational to widespread support. It connects people and institutions, conveys meaning, and determines whether ESG is seen as genuine leadership or merely corporate branding. Robust narrative infrastructure ensures resilience under political pressure; without it, initiatives can rapidly lose whatever public approval they may have had. Constructing narrative infrastructure requires explicitly recognizing storytelling— and who contributes to that storytelling—as integral to ESG strategy, not simply a communications exercise. Effective narratives generate trust precisely because they emerge from transparent dialogue, clear accountability, and inclusive stakeholder engagement. By contrast, greenwashing uses storytelling deceptively, aiming to conceal poor performance, and deflect scrutiny. Strong narrative infrastructure, unlike greenwashing, strengthens credibility and legitimacy by openly connecting ESG commitments to shared realities, tangible actions, and measurable outcomes. It is a fundamental strategic asset for ESG success. Importantly, narrative infrastructure also concerns who gets to tell these stories. Over the last decade, the central narrators of the ESG story have largely been institutional actors: executives, investors, sustainability professionals, academics, and regulators. Their contributions have been invaluable, driven by expertise, rigor, and genuine commitment. Yet these narrators also represent a relatively narrow perspective, shaped by institutional backgrounds and professional incentives. Many important voices have remained largely excluded from shaping ESG narratives: indigenous people whose lives are often fundamentally changed by corporate activities, workers whose livelihoods are directly impacted by ESG transitions, young people deeply invested in future outcomes, small businesses continuously adapting to new ESG-related requirements, and especially communities—particularly in the Global South —directly facing the worst of climate disruptions. While these stakeholders' experiences occasionally appear within ESG reporting, they seldom influenced strategy or shape decisions in a substantial way. This exclusion poses significant, practical risks. Stakeholders naturally resist initiatives perceived as imposed from above or disconnected from their lived realities—not necessarily because they oppose ESG’s goals, but because they feel unheard and invisible within such ESG narratives. The resistance appears as political backlash, active public scepticism, or disengagement, all severely undermining ESG’s legitimacy, effectiveness, and public support. Addressing this critical weakness requires deliberately building ESG’s narrative infrastructure through inclusive, collaborative, and ongoing engagement. Practically, companies should move beyond occasional or reactive consultations toward sustained processes where stakeholders actively shape strategies. This can involve establishing community advisory boards with real decision-making power, participatory scenario planning that integrates diverse local perspectives, and internal cross-functional councils that ensure workers, communities, and youth voices directly influence ESG outcomes. Such sustained, authentic collaboration bridges the gap between institutional intentions and genuine public legitimacy. Within companies, narrative stewardship should not be limited to corporate communications or sustainability departments alone. Effective ESG storytelling depends on regular, structured collaboration across multiple functions—including strategy, human resources, procurement, product development, and finance—to ensure ESG commitments align authentically with core business decisions and reflect real-world stakeholder experiences. Companies can institutionalize this collaboration by creating dedicated cross-functional ESG committees tasked with integrating diverse internal perspectives, monitoring stakeholder feedback, and ensuring ESG initiatives clearly connect to tangible social outcomes. At an institutional level, building ESG narrative infrastructure involves establishing platforms that broaden participation in ESG discourse. It requires supporting initiatives that improve public understanding of ESG standards and practices, funding research that evaluates public perceptions of ESG alongside traditional financial metrics and ensuring ESG disclosures transparently reflect diverse stakeholder concerns. ESG narrative legitimacy grows stronger when diverse perspectives genuinely shape how ESG commitments are determined and communicated, implemented, and monitored—not merely as token inclusions, but as integral, strategic components of ESG itself. Regulators have an essential role in shaping ESG narrative infrastructure. Current ESG disclosure standards typically prioritize technical accuracy and financial materiality, mostly targeting investor needs. Broadening these frameworks to explicitly incorporate public legitimacy could significantly enhance ESG’s impact. For example, regulators could introduce clear criteria assessing whether companies effectively communicate their ESG strategies to diverse stakeholders and evaluate how these communications influence brand value and reputational risk—approaches already emerging in Europe’s Green Claims Directive and the CSRD/ESRS focus on double materiality. Additionally, policy evaluations could systematically measure whether ESG initiatives are genuinely perceived as fair, inclusive, and beneficial by the communities they affect. Public support and trust require deliberate and continuous effort; they cannot be assumed or taken for granted. Fortunately, inspiring examples of effective ESG narrative infrastructure already exist. Companies like Patagonia have openly integrated supplier and worker voices into their ESG narratives, transparently highlighting labour practices and sourcing standards, significantly enhancing their credibility. Unilever’s inclusive “living wage” campaigns have similarly leveraged stories from frontline workers to connect ESG metrics with tangible social outcomes, strengthening stakeholder trust. Industry-specific initiatives, such as the Bangladesh Accord in apparel, demonstrate how authentically incorporating diverse stakeholder experiences—including employees, unions, and community representatives—into ESG reporting can reinforce accountability and legitimacy. These examples highlight how inclusive storytelling, grounded in genuine stakeholder participation, can transform ESG commitments from abstract promises into credible actions with real-world impact. ESG professionals now face an exciting strategic opportunity: intentionally building a narrative infrastructure that's genuinely inclusive, collaborative, and resilient. Yes, involving diverse stakeholders means navigating complexity, dialogue, and occasionally tough compromises. It also means embracing participatory processes that might feel messier or less predictable. But it's exactly this diversity of voices and collective authorship that generates persuasive, robust narratives—ones that not only resonate widely but can confidently withstand shifts in politics, culture, and public sentiment. Beyond strengthening ESG's narrative infrastructure, it's important for ESG professionals to step back and consider sustainability more broadly. By explicitly linking ESG narratives to overarching sustainability objectives—such as respecting planetary boundaries and enabling a just transition—professionals can better illustrate how financial markets, corporate strategies, and policy frameworks actively support broader ecological and social well-being. Making these broader connections explicit can deepen trust, enhance engagement, and ensure the interconnected ESG-sustainability story resonates meaningfully with all those whose futures depend on it. We stand at a turning point, facing a critical opportunity to strengthen ESG’s narrative foundations. While ESG’s narrative fragility has been clearly exposed, this moment also offers an inspiring chance to intentionally build a more inclusive, credible, and resilient narrative infrastructure. The future of sustainability depends not only on rigorous metrics or detailed disclosures, but ultimately on whether those whose lives are impacted recognize themselves clearly in its story. By authentically amplifying diverse voices, explicitly connecting ESG initiatives to broader sustainability goals, and developing narratives rooted in real-world experiences, we can foster the trust, legitimacy, and collective commitment necessary for meaningful and lasting progress.
By Antoinette de Crombrugghe May 15, 2025
I belong to a generation raised in the shadow of the climate crisis. But it wasn’t something we were taught in school. It wasn’t part of our curriculum, our standardized tests, our childhood vocabulary. We came across it slowly, in fragments, through social media, activism, panic headlines, and documentaries. We educated ourselves. We connected the dots. And still, many of us are figuring out how to carry this knowledge and how to live with it without being crushed by it.
PHOTO: Ana Bachurova | Pléneau Island, 65°06.6’S / 064°04.0’W
By Ana Bachurova March 20, 2025
After recent travels in Antarctica, UNEP-FI Energy Efficiency Lead Ana Bachurova, M.Sc., MBA shares learnings and insights into our current environmental realities and how practitioners in sustainable development can advance positive impacts.
More blog posts