In competitive sports, any losing team that dares dish out trash-talk toward its opponent is likely to be met with a simple one-word response: “scoreboard.” That’s because, at the end of the day, the score is the only thing that matters.
Modern businesses are often inclined to take a similar approach when it comes to ESG (environmental, social, and governance) performance: They tailor their strategies around that seemingly all-important ESG score, hoping that its authority will quell any related concerns from investors, customers, employees, and the like.
CSE Research explores why 'doing business as usual' is no longer a valid option and the shift to 'doing business in a sustainable way' is the only way to secure companies’ trust and financing.
CHICAGO, December 16, 2020 /3BL Media/ - The Center for Sustainability and Excellence (CSE) announces its fourth consecutive 2020 Annual Research into ESG Ratings and Sustainability Reporting Trends in North America, focusing in common ESG practices and frameworks used by companies and organizations with improved financial results (e.g Annual Revenues increase).
Goods Unite Us has spent thousands of hours vetting companies' political expenditures in federal elections. They will tell you about the donations made by the organization and its senior employees along with each company's exclusive Campaign Finance Reform Score. CSRHub measures the environmental, social and governance performance of thousands of companies by aggregating 700 sources to derive consensus ESG ratings.
August 11, 2020 /3BL Media/ - Bloomberg today announced the launch of propriety ESG scores. This initial offering includes Environmental and Social (ES) scores for 252 companies in the Oil & Gas sector, and Board Composition scores for more than 4,300 companies across multiple industries.
As the 2020 ESG (Environment, Social, and Governance) season begins, we appear to be entering the third era of ESG investment integration.
The first generation of ESG investors used data on topics such as product involvement (alcohol, tobacco, gambling) or business practices (anti-union, involvement in Burma) to screen out “bad” companies. These investors often relied on a single data provider and simple guidelines (e.g., <5% of revenue is OK, more than 5% of revenue is bad).