Objective limitations of the current vector of ESG-transition development

Aim. To identify objective reasons for the slowdown of ESG-transition, as well as a list of risks and limitations of the current vector of development of the climate agenda, which are often ignored by developers of “green” standards and taxonomies.

Tasks. To evaluate ESG transition initiatives during the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic; to identify non-obvious barriers and constraints to ESG transition; and to uncover the reasons that have shaped the current vector of the climate agenda.

Methods. The study is based on the analysis of empirical data. Their processing showed that ideas of the international climate agenda are often broadcast regarding the ESG topic, but there are very few critical articles and reviews about it.

Results. The current vector of development of the climate agenda is primarily conditioned by the goals of its initiators - international economic organizations. These include the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The propagated notions of global environmental crises that future generations will inevitably face unless measures are taken to facilitate the transition to sustainable development are only a political tool for competing in the hydrocarbon market. Given the lack of strong technological solutions, investments in green assets can be seen as high-risk given their speculative nature.

Conclusions. Despite the priorities of the global economic agenda, there are doubts about its integrity, as it fails to take into account a number of constraints and circumstances, including failure to take into account the scale of the raw material strain required to transform the global energy system; the lack of technologies to efficiently process large volumes of retired so-called renewable energy sources; the lack of energy technologies for which demand is not yet evident; and the “rebound” effect, i.e. the question of what happens next. As a result, market participants often use so-called greenwashing (or “green camouflage”) to formally meet the requirements, or rather, to portray the “greenness” of their technology/products.

1. Zhivotovskaya I.G. “Green economy” as a global model of sustainable economic development in the 21st century. In: Zhivotovskaya I.G., Chernomorova T.V., eds. “Green economy” as a global development strategy in the post-crisis world: A collection of reviews. Series: Socioeconomic aspects of globalization. Moscow: Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences of RAS; 2016:7-57. (In Russ.).

2. Il’ina N. What will happen to ESG? Kommersant.ru. Jun. 15, 2022. URL: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5410238 (accessed on 23.04.2023). (In Russ.).

3. Vilisov M.V. Myths and reality of the green economy. Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye problemy Rossii = Economic and Social Problems of Russia. 2022;(1):14-25. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.31249/espr/2022.01.01

4. Golovshchinskii K.I., ed. ESG: Three letters that change the world. A report to the 23rd Yasin (April) Int. sci. conf. on problems of economic and social development. Moscow, 2022. Moscow: HSE Publ.; 2022. 140 p. URL: https://publications.hse.ru/pubs/share/direct/619210984.pdf (accessed on 13.10.2022). (In Russ.).

5. ESG and Russia’s climate agenda today: New opportunities. Plenary session of the II ESG conference. MGIMO University. Oct. 14, 2022. URL: https://youtu.be/EGqvJT-3T-M (accessed on 17.10.2022). (In Russ.).

6. Anikeeva A., Khudalov M. Will they give a green light to Russian “green” finance? In: Sustainable development and infrastructure: An overview of trends in Russia and the world. Moscow: National Center for Public-Private Partnerships; 2021:58-60. URL: https://pppcenter.ru/upload/iblock/063/063f1ff65aa7dce18a2cfa2d6b0627c4.pdf (accessed on 22.10.2022). (In Russ.).

7. ESG transparency: Reinventing. Expert RA. Nov. 16, 2022. URL: https://raexpert.ru/events/agency_events/go_2022/?utm_campaign=novostnaya_rassylka_s_sayta&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Sendsay#descr (accessed on 25.10.2022). (In Russ.).

8. Sovacool B.K., Hook A., Martiskainen M., Brock A., Turnheim B. The decarbonisation divide: Contextualizing landscapes of low-carbon exploitation and toxicity in Africa. Global Environmental Change. 2020;60:102028. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.102028

9. Cobalt Market Report 2021. Guildford: Cobolt Institute; 2022. 46 p. URL: https://www.cobaltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/FINAL_Cobalt-Market-Report-2021_CobaltInstitute-3.pdf (accessed on 13.10.2022).

10. Moores S. The global battery arms race: Lithium-ion battery gigafactories and their supply chain. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. February 2021. URL: https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/THE-GLOBAL-BATTERY-ARMS-RACE-LITHIUM-ION-BATTERY-GIGAFACTORIES-AND-THEIR-SUPPLY-CHAIN.pdf (accessed on 13.10.2022).

11. Månberger A., Stenqvist B. Global metal flows in the renewable energy transition: Exploring the effects of substitutes, technological mix and development. Energy Policy. 2018;119:226-241. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.056

12. Köllner C. The dark side of our raw-materials supply chain. ATZelektronik Worldwide. 2018;13(2):8-13. DOI: 10.1007/s38314-018-0021-1

13. Cucchiella F., D’Adamo I., Koh S.C.L., Rosa P. Recycling of WEEEs: An economic assessment of present and future e-waste streams. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;51:263-272. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.010

14. End-of-Life management: Solar photovoltaic panels. Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency; 2016. 100 p. URL: https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2016/IRENA_IEAPVPS_End-of-Life_Solar_PV_Panels_2016.pdf?rev=49a75178e38c46288a18753346fb0b09 (accessed on 13.10.2022).

15. The opportunities of solar panel recycling. GreenMatch. 2021. URL: https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2017/10/the-opportunities-of-solar-panel-recycling (accessed on 18.07.2023).

16. World energy outlook 2022. Paris: International Energy Agency; 2022. 524 p. URL: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/830fe099-5530-48f2-a7c1-11f35d510983/WorldEnergyOutlook2022.pdf (accessed on 18.07.2023).

17. Jackson T. Prosperity without growth: Economics for a finite planet. London: Earthscan; 2009. 264 p. DOI: 10.4324/9781849774338

18. Herring H. Energy efficiency – a critical view. Energy. 2006;31(1):10-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2004.04.055

19. Saunders H.D. Historical evidence for energy consumption rebound in 30 US sectors and a toolkit for rebound analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2013;80(7):1317-1330. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.007

20. Victor P.A. Managing without growth: Slower by design not disaster. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar; 2008. 272 p. DOI: 10.4337/9781848442993

21. Ferguson P. The green economy agenda: business as usual or transformational discourse? Environmental Politics. 2015;24(1):17-37. DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2014.919748

22. Tishkov A. Ecological alarmism as a method of competitive struggle. Vedomosti. Sep. 30, 2021. URL: https://www.vedomosti.ru/opinion/articles/2021/09/29/889008-ekologicheskiialarmizm (accessed on 12.05.2023). (In Russ.).

23. Itsakov E.D. Solar power plants as part of an effective “smart” and sustainable development project. In: Developer’s unified digital environment: Best practices and standards of Smart infrastructure. Forum. The first day. August 10-11, 2021. Mosstroiinform. Aug. 10, 2021. URL: https://youtu.be/yb43URSnfPo?t=27253 (accessed on 30.07.2022). (In Russ.).