3 ms·
Isn't a large part of the problem that you can make gains in one category by harming another? So to make mining more climate friendly, use kids in the Congo who
by MattGaiser 4y ago
Isn't a large part of the problem that you can make gains in one category by harming another? So to make mining more climate friendly, use kids in the Congo who do not require any gasoline? Or do it all with biodiesel so that emissions are lowered by CO2 reuptake by the plants, but the rainforest is bulldozed?
Yes, they conflict, so you want to reward companies that effectively manage those conflicts, not casually trade one issue for another.
- jballer 4y agoThat’s the obvious criticism. Not to mention ability to generate a profit beyond those concerns. Proponents would argue that this a feature, not a bug.
- FabHK 4y agoYes, and addressed in the article: > ESG suffers from three fundamental problems. First, because it lumps together a dizzying array of objectives, it provides no coherent guide for investors and firms to make the trade-offs that are inevitable in any society. Elon Musk of Tesla is a corporate-governance nightmare, but by popularising electric cars he is helping tackle climate change. Closing down a coalmining firm is good for the climate but awful for its suppliers and workers. Is it really possible to build vast numbers of wind farms quickly without damaging local ecology? By suggesting that these conflicts do not exist or can be easily resolved, ESG fosters delusion.