Why the Pushback Has Intensified
Corporate sustainability is facing the fight of its life. Budgets are being stripped back, teams are being disbanded, and ambitious commitments are being watered down. Why the pushback? Two reasons, both beginning with ‘T’.
First, the Trump factor. Frankly put, the MAGA base hates everything sustainability has come to stand for; climate change (a “hoax”), multilateralism (think: tariffs, border walls, pulling out of the Paris Agreement), diversity and inclusion (“woke”), regenerative practices (“drill baby drill”).
The second ‘t’ is timing. Business executives have a lot on their plate right now, from geopolitical instability to lethargic growth. With so many fires to fight, there’s a sense that sustainability can wait. “We remain committed,” the refrain runs; sotto voce, “… once the rest is sorted.”
How the Movement Reached This Point
Both problems are, to an extent, of the sustainability movement’s own making. Regarding the Trumpian “ESG backlash”, sustainability advocates didn’t just stumble into the culture wars; they marched in, planted a flag, and demanded everyone take sides. From LBGTQ+ to the deforestation of the Amazon, C-Suites were expected to declare their hand. Some businesses did so willingly; most did not. With Trump, the cultural pendulum swung back, and Legacy Inc breathed a sigh of relief. Consequently, many reassured themselves that the business of business had returned to business.
The timing issue is more complicated. All the science suggests the issues are urgent. The planet is heating up, untamed by yet another lacklustre UN climate summit. Species are being lost at unprecedented rates, as forests burn and Big Ag builds bigger. And, overlooked and underpaid, people (read: “the 99%”) are getting angry. Still, the message isn’t landing in boardrooms. Loud as the alarms ring, the world of M&As and MBAs keeps turning as usual.
Why? Because, as yet, neither melting glaciers nor enfeebled ecosystems are judged “business critical”. This is not to say they won’t imperil economic activity (they will). Nor that such issues are absent from corporate risk registers (they aren’t). It’s simply to accept the inconvenient truth that, for now, business-as-usual can hobble onwards. In short, the pluricrisis is close, but not close enough.
How Companies Are Responding
So how is the sustainability field responding? As often happens when under attack, it’s gone into defensive mode. In practice, that means keeping quiet and waiting for the winds to change. Corporate executives insist that they are pressing on, but just no longer shouting about it — a practice dubbed “greenhushing”. Perhaps it’s true, perhaps not. What is indisputable, however, is the pressure now on sustainability teams to prove their value. If an eco-innovation cuts costs or a circular product line boosts sales, it stays. Everything else is getting pulled. The result is a leaner, meaner approach to sustainability.
Why the Correction Was Inevitable
In a way, this course correction is no bad thing. Sustainable business has had a good run. Over the last decade and more, it’s gone from the margins of business to a central concern. In the process, however, it’s arguably lost its way, promising to be all things, to all companies. No movement can hold that weight of expectation. It succeeded early on largely because ‘win-win’ solutions were easy to find.
But now the low-hanging fruits (e.g. energy efficiencies, waste reduction, product reformulation etc.) are mostly gone. And while upsides still exist, they require investment and effort to deliver. Those qualities are in short supply in today’s no-nonsense business world.
Wall Street and its ilk are celebrating sustainability’s return to managerial pragmatism. So they might. This upstart idea threatened the status quo. It asked hard questions of profit maximisation. It demanded consideration for the planet. It argued that people were more than ‘human resources’. In essence, it asked for a different way of doing business.
A Choice That Will Define the Future
All this leaves sustainability with a choice. Does it soften its demands and play by the rules, only stepping up if it can prove ROI? Or does it continue to act as the awkward sibling, reminding business that crises loom and a new paradigm is needed? The answer still lies in the balance. All current signs point to the first; any future hope rests on the second.