ESG sounds like a "Great Thing", right?
Environmental, Social and Governance? Who is against "doing right by the environment"?
Well, that depends.
A felony undertaken for allegedly "good" reasons is still a felony. You still go to prison, or at least you're supposed to.
Now think this through folks: All of these measures have cost. To the extent they're mandated by law every company must comply. But to the extent they're not mandated by law the firm(s) that do it are disadvantaged; their costs are higher and thus their profits lower.
This means they will fail in a competitive marketplace -- every time.
The only way that's not true is if every other competitor can be forced to do it too.
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
Note that there's no exception in said law for investment conglomerates that own and vote huge percentages of corporate stock and act in concert to force compliance across competitors and, even worse, horizontally across entirely different businesses. That is, Blackrock and similar (e.g. Vanguard.)
The issue is simple when you get down to it: These "initiatives" all increase cost -- and not a little either. Placing "glo-bull warming" in front of the line, for example, when it comes to selecting energy technologies to produce or consume in your operations means you intentionally overpay compared against the other alternatives. Nobody in their right mind intentionally sets $100 bills on fire.
If these "initiatives" were cost savers then nobody would have to "urge" or "coerce" anything; firms would do it on their own because, once again, you're nuts to set $100 bills on fire. Thus it is proved that these "initiatives" are in fact money losers and competitiveness destroyers and as such colluding to do so is a felony and in addition creates real harm to real consumers.
Now if you have to comply with an actual law then, well, you do. If the law says you must do "X" and that happens to raise your cost, then it does. There's nothing you can do about this as a businessperson. That is the proper form of government by the way, to set level playing field standards that represent the will of the people, because all such standards come with a cost and the proper place to have that debate is in the Legislature. May I note that California tried to do exactly that with corporate board membership and it was struck by the courts as unconstitutional.
But no!!!! Not anymore. Checks and balances? Laws, courts and Constitutions? No need for that tripe! Now we have all these firms blathering on Twatter with their obligatory kowtow to the upcoming WEF summit. Which is a bunch of people preening on about raising your costs through collusive action which is a 10 year in the slam-slam felony for each and every person engaged in same. Nobody in their right mind would go along with any of that unless there was coercion involved, and the only place that coercion can legally be imposed is by legislative action.
Again: When this is done by a band of people or corporations it is a ten year in the hoosegow felony for every single person involved.
Make Prison Great Again -- NOW -- or we the people must contemplate Making 1776 Great Again.
If they won't follow the law -- and nobody will indict them -- why should you not have them for dinner?