Skip to content

menu

Greenberg Traurig, LLP logo
HomeContact UsEuropeAsiaLatin AmericaEnvironmentalEnergy
Search
Close

E2 Law Blog

Insights and Commentary on Global Environmental and Energy Issues

Home » The Management Systems Underlying ESG Reports

The Management Systems Underlying ESG Reports

the concept of enterprise management and investing in the ESG system with the aim of increasing the portfolio profitability
By Christopher Bell & David Mandelbaum on November 3, 2021
Posted in Compliance, Environmental Social & Governance (ESG), Featured, Regulatory, Risk management

Companies interested in “ESG” disclosure and accounting may be having the same reaction we are to much of the recent popular business press. Thinking carefully about Environment, Social, and Governance policies and practice, we think, still makes sense.

Companies have customer-, investor-, and other stakeholder-relations purposes for paying attention to ESG. The Wall Street Journal reported Oct. 25 (subscription required) that those with good ESG policies may be able to obtain more favorable terms on business insurance, for example. And there is an endless stream of articles on ESG from all sides, including company initiatives, ESG financing and bonds, and ESG ETFs. But everyone recognizes that ESG disclosure and accounting – like “sustainability” reporting and accounting before it – carries risks similar to financial disclosure and accounting. If what you say is not true, you can be criticized or sued. Hence the involvement of lawyers.

Many are looking to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s promised rulemaking on climate risk disclosure and accounting as a guide to ESG practice. The SEC may have useful things to say, but one should be clear that climate risk is only a component of ESG. It may be important, quantifiable, and highly scrutinized, but it is distinct from compliance with environmental regulations, success of diversity, equity, and inclusion policies, stakeholder and community engagement, avoidance of corruption, slave labor, and so forth. The SEC has not said that it intends to propose regulations on disclosure or accounting of any of those other ESG matters. Equally important, pronouncements on disclosure typically do not extend to how you achieve the performance underlying and necessary to support the disclosure.

Think of what a company does with respect to ESG as having two parts: what happens before any disclosures and what happens after. It is important not to confuse the two: talking about ESG is not the same as doing ESG. Recently, the emphasis has been on the former, not the latter. Companies want to derive benefits from their ESG disclosures but avoid having those disclosures harm their reputation and brand or become liabilities in related environmental, labor and employment, fraud and corruption, or other matters. A company doesn’t want its own statements cited against it and seeks to avoid claims for fraud or misrepresentation in the securities or other contexts. A company wants to have done what it needs to have done before making disclosures to avoid criticism, to defend against lawsuits, and to defend its overall brand.

Up front, the company may want to examine the systems it has in place behind its planned ESG disclosure and accounting that allow it to know that what it says is true. For example, it may want to consider whether its environmental, anti-corruption, human resources, or compliance management systems provide suitably reliable and complete information to back up its ESG reporting. Building ESG disclosure on a concrete and demonstrable foundation of sustained and superior performance is easier and less risky than the other way around: wanting to make ESG claims and then figuring out if there is anything to back them up.

These management systems are often more effective when the company integrates them with its overall business. If the newly-minted “ESG systems” are pasted over the top of what the operating management must do anyway, such systems may not help and may not be well-received by internal or external stakeholders. The systems ought to be seen as useful for the day-to-day tasks of running the business and generating superior ESG performance on a routine basis, not just fodder for creating an annual or quarterly report. Many companies already have in place many of the systems necessary for effective ESG performance, even though they might not recognize them as such (e.g., anti-corruption and environmental management systems, diversity programs, anti-child labor and slavery policies, etc.).

The systems should also generally provide information, but not in a way that will inappropriately increase enforcement risk. Cautions are important, but alarms on a hair trigger often do not help. Finally, the systems cannot be so bureaucratic and resource-intensive that they become manuals on a shelf that no one implements. That’s worse than nothing.

Management systems and the performance and information they generate provide among the best defenses to criticism or litigation. So, having set them up at the outset, one can use them to prevent turbulence in the first instance and to mitigate the downside when things go awry.

Note that by “management system” we do not mean a subjective scoring system for the purpose of making that annual report. We mean the operational and business processes and procedures used consistently to produce superior ESG performance. That includes, but certainly is not limited to, measuring that performance, recognizing that in some contexts subjective scoring may be helpful. But scoring systems have issues should public scrutiny be attracted or litigation arise. As everyone knows from restaurant reviews and employee evaluations, subjective “point” scales are ordinal, not cardinal. For example, 5 may be better than 4 and 4 better than 3, but typically, the distance between 5 and 4 is much smaller than the difference between 4 and 3 in the reviewer’s mind. 5 is a great score, 4 is a good one, but 3 is a bad one and infrequent. 2 and 1 may never appear at all. So arithmetic averages of scores are of questionable use. Comparison of scores on incommensurate topics can also be difficult. Exactly how many environmental compliance points are equal to a diversity and inclusion point? And, undue attention to scoring may ultimately reduce the credibility of the underlying effort to achieve sustainable and meaningful ESG performance if companies are perceived to be “working to the test” rather than doing the right thing.

In sum, ESG merits some disciplined thinking and doing. It’s not only about the promised SEC climate risk regulation. It’s not only about point systems. It’s a question of doing ESG before talking ESG (that is, “walking the talk”). It’s a question of what needs to be done to achieve the customer-, investor-, and other-focused purposes without undue increase in risk and how systems must be deployed to achieve the promised and intended ESG performance reliably and consistently, which can also be beneficial in the event that criticism or litigation arises in the aftermath of ESG disclosures.

Tags: Environmental Social & Governance
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Christopher Bell Christopher Bell

Chris Bell represents clients in civil and criminal enforcement and investigations, litigation, compliance counseling, emergency incident response, and legislative and regulatory advocacy (including appellate challenges to rulemakings) under all of the major environmental, health, safety and natural resource laws. His enforcement experience includes…

Chris Bell represents clients in civil and criminal enforcement and investigations, litigation, compliance counseling, emergency incident response, and legislative and regulatory advocacy (including appellate challenges to rulemakings) under all of the major environmental, health, safety and natural resource laws. His enforcement experience includes internal investigations, responding to grand jury investigations and agency information requests, and negotiating consent, probation, and debarment agreements. He is currently the EPA Independent Monitor overseeing the nation’s largest investor-owned energy company’s compliance with complex debarment and probation agreements arising from the resolution of a criminal enforcement case brought under the Clean Water Act.

Chris assists buyers, sellers, investors and financial institutions on the environmental aspects of transactions, including conducting due diligence, negotiating the environmental provisions of transactional documents, and identifying and executing insurance-based risk management opportunities. His transactional experience has included upstream, midstream and downstream energy projects, alternative energy projects, and transactions in the manufacturing, logistics, consumer products and chemicals sectors.

He helps clients evaluate and implement compliance and ethics programs (e.g., under the Sentencing Guidelines), and environmental, health and safety management systems (including based on ISO 14001). Chris advises clients on sustainable development, climate change, product and chemical stewardship and regulation, and value chain management. He recently served on an independent committee advising the senior management of a Fortune 50 company on its global sustainability strategy and reporting.

Read more about Christopher Bell
Show more Show less
Photo of David Mandelbaum David Mandelbaum

David G. Mandelbaum represents clients facing problems under environmental laws. He regularly represents clients in lawsuits and also has helped clients achieve satisfactory outcomes through regulatory negotiation or private transactions. A Fellow of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, David teaches Superfund, and…

David G. Mandelbaum represents clients facing problems under environmental laws. He regularly represents clients in lawsuits and also has helped clients achieve satisfactory outcomes through regulatory negotiation or private transactions. A Fellow of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, David teaches Superfund, and Oil and Gas Law in rotation at the Temple University Beasley School of Law as well as an environmental litigation course at Suffolk (Boston) Law School.

Since United States v. Atlas Minerals, the first multi-generator Superfund contribution case to go to trial in 1993, Mr. Mandelbaum has been engaged in matters involving allocation of costs among responsible parties, especially under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).  He has tried large cases and resolved others as lead counsel.  He has written, spoken, and taught extensively on the subject.  More recently he also has been engaged to assist lead counsel from this firm and others:

  • to develop cost allocation methodologies;
  • to craft expert testimony in support of a favored methodology (given a definition of “fairness,” why one methodology better tracks it than another);
  • to develop efficient case management approaches; and to assist private allocation as part of the neutral team.

Concentrations

  • Air, water and waste regulation
  • Superfund and contamination
  • Climate change
  • Oil and gas development
  • Water rights
Read more about David MandelbaumDavid's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
Related Posts
Environment protection concept Renewable energy Sustainable development goals SDGs-Shutterstock_1746975767
DOJ’s Updated Corporate Crime Policies: Practical Considerations in the Environmental Context
October 3, 2022
SEC
SEC Proposes Comprehensive Package of Climate-Related Disclosure Rules
May 3, 2022
drinking water in glass
Potential Impact of EPA’s PFAS Strategic Roadmap on CERCLA Cleanups
November 2, 2021

Stay Connected

Subscribe to this blog via RSS Follow GT on Twitter Join the Discussion on Facebook View GT's LinkedIn Profile
Subscribe

Feb. 28 | Colorado Mining Association’s 125th National Western Mining Conference & Expo

Listen to our E2 Law Podcast for insights and commentary on global environmental and energy issues.

  Announcements

  • PFAS in Drinking Water: EPA Proposes Historic New Regulation
  • CBAM on Track to Take Effect in October 2023

Tweets by @GT_Law

Tweets by @GT_Law

About Us

GT’s Environmental Practice is one of the largest and geographically broadest environmental groups of any law firm based in the United States. Our client-focused, problem-solving approach reflects the commitment to service that has led major national companies in a variety of industry segments.

Read More....

Blog Authors Show/Hide

  • Jorge Aleman Juarez
  • Tiffany M. Andras
  • Jillian Askren
  • Steven Barringer
  • Kerri Barsh
  • Christopher Bell
  • Marijn Bodelier
  • Kara M. Bombach
  • Nicolas Borda
  • Martin Borning
  • Lynelle Bosworth
  • Laura Bottaro
  • Cyril T. Brennan
  • Thomas R. Brill
  • Caitlyn E. Jones
  • Deirdre A. Carson
  • Greenberg Traurig
  • Rubén Alejandro Ortiz Cervera
  • Jeffrey A. Chester
  • John V. Chibbaro
  • Jacomijn Christ
  • Francesca Ciliberti-Ayres‡
  • Frank Citera
  • Joshua Cohen
  • Michael Cooke
  • Sonali Dohale
  • Hayley Easton
  • Troy A. Eid
  • John Eliason
  • Robert C. Epstein
  • Luigi Fontanesi
  • Robert Freund
  • John Gao
  • Maria C. Garcia˘
  • William Garner
  • Jack Gearan
  • Juan Manuel González Bernal
  • Nancy Guillén Espinosa
  • Jennifer M. Gómez
  • Hamilton Hackney III
  • Caitlyn E. Haller
  • Dr. Martin Hamer
  • Robert Hardy
  • Candace Headen Uduebor
  • Greenberg Traurig
  • Genus Heidary
  • Elizabeth B. Herdes
  • Jan Herfkens
  • Erick Hernández Gallego
  • Rob Herrington
  • Edward S. Hershfield
  • Caleb Holmes
  • Richard Hughes
  • William Hurst
  • David C. Jense
  • Barbara A. Jones
  • Laura E. Jones
  • Sandra K. Jorgensen
  • Rabeha Kamaluddin
  • Todd Kaminsky
  • Barbara T. Kaplan
  • Harris L. Kay
  • Jairo Keeldar ˘
  • Julie Kendig-Schrader
  • Greenberg Traurig, LLP
  • April B. Kim
  • Jillian Kirn
  • Marvin A. Kirsner
  • Aaron S. Klein
  • Zackary D. Knaub
  • Natalie Kopplow
  • Joanna Kuc
  • James O. Lang
  • Gregory K. Lawrence
  • Jack LeBris Erffmeyer
  • Thomas O. Lemon
  • Lauren A. Liss
  • David Mandelbaum
  • Robert Mangas
  • John L. Mascialino
  • Kaitlyn R Maxwell
  • Harriet McConnell
  • Jane McLaughlin
  • Graeme McLellan
  • Peter Mezey
  • Kenneth M. Minesinger
  • Mike Mirdamadi
  • Samuel L. Moultrie
  • Michael G. Murphy
  • Edwin J. Nazario
  • Samir NeJame
  • Howard L. Nelson
  • Christopher J. Neumann
  • Daniell K. Newman
  • Glenn Newman
  • Grant E. Nichols
  • Maribel Nicholson-Choice
  • Hazel Ocampo
  • Pablo Ortiz Mena Montes de Oca
  • Evan Preminger
  • Laura Siegel Rabinowitz
  • Jared Raleigh
  • Bernadette M. Rappold
  • Katie P. Reed˘
  • Pedro Javier Reséndez Bocanegra
  • Craig V. Richardson
  • Braxton Roam
  • Adam Roseman
  • Robert M Rosenthal
  • Steven C. Russo
  • Alessio Gerhart Ruvolo
  • Doreen U. Saia
  • Hector D. Sanchez Fernandez
  • Monisha Sardjoe
  • Andrew W. Scher
  • Sabine Schoute
  • Paul M. Seby
  • Cate Sharp
  • Casey A. Shpall
  • Sylvia Simson
  • Keith E. Smith
  • Greg Sperla
  • Meital Stavinsky
  • Libretta Stennes
  • Meiyanne Sturm ˘
  • Tim Swickard
  • Michael T. Taylor
  • Robert S. Thompson IV
  • Christopher Thorne
  • Matthew K. Tieslau
  • Curtis B. Toll
  • Christopher Torres
  • Rodrigo Vazquez del Mercado-Rivera
  • Marlis Vázquez Egli
  • Margaret J. Weil
  • Philip R. Weingold
  • David B. Weinstein
  • Lilian Welling-Steffens
  • Christopher R. White
  • William Wu
  • Dawn Zhang
  • Erik de Bie
  • Marie-José van der Heijden

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

GT Law Blogs

Recent Posts

  • PFAS in Drinking Water: EPA Proposes Historic New Regulation
  • CBAM on Track to Take Effect in October 2023
  • Greenberg Traurig Expands Litigation Practice with Addition of Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Irina Khasin in Atlanta
  • 4 Greenberg Traurig Attorneys Listed in Lawdragon Green 500: Leaders in Environmental Law
  • IRS Releases Guidance on the Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program for Solar and Wind Facilities

GT Blogs

  • EB-5 Insights
  • Florida From the Ground Up
  • Global Trade Monitor
  • GT Israel Law Blog
  • GT LE Blog
  • Hospitality Law Check-In
  • Immigration Compliance

E2 Law Blog

Greenberg Traurig, LLP logo
Subscribe to this blog via RSS Follow GT on Twitter Join the Discussion on Facebook View GT's LinkedIn Profile
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer

About Greenberg Traurig: Greenberg Traurig, LLP has more than 2650 attorneys in 44 locations in the United States, Europe, Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East. The firm is a 2022 BTI “Highly Recommended Law Firm” for superior client service and is consistently among the top firms on the Am Law Global 100 and NLJ 250. Greenberg Traurig is Mansfield Rule 5.0 Certified Plus by The Diversity Lab and is recognized for powering its U.S. offices with 100% renewable energy as certified by the Center for Resource Solutions Green-e® Energy as a member of the U.S. EPA’s Green Partnership Program. The firm is known for its philanthropic giving, innovation, diversity, and pro bono. Web: www.gtlaw.com.

Copyright © 2023, Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo