This report examines current legal frameworks for institutional investors in 11 countries, including the EU, UK, US, Canada, Japan, and Australia and how they link financial returns with sustainability. It finds that in many cases, investors are legally required to consider sustainability if it aligns with financial goals. The report also recommends policy changes to clarify fiduciary duties and make it easier for investors to prioritize sustainability by fostering clearer guidelines and collaboration 

This seminal report from Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, addresses the question of whether institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies are legally permitted to integrate environmental, social and governance issues into their investment decision-making and ownership practices. The study describes the legal framework for institutions in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, the UK and the US.

Recognizing that climate-related risks are complicated, this brief disaggregates climate risks into three categories (planetary, economic, and financial) to then map those risks to which stakeholders are best positioned to address them. The article explains the importance of this disaggregation to facilitate intended outcomes and avoid unintended consequence. 

This article advocates for and examines the role of managers in weighing corporate political responsibility with traditional shareholder primacy when lobbying. Builds a strong case and suggests that companies consider whether the public is informed or has the necessary expertise.

Researchers describe the “double legitimacy” problem. American workers need to invest portions of their income into mutual funds to have economic security, thus becoming Worker Investors. Corporations are unconstrained and can dip into these funds to support their political spending. This paper outlines the Big 4’s political power in resolving the double legitimacy problem, and how their refusal is supporting policies that go against the Worker Investor.

This report explores the financial impacts of growing political instability in the U.S., emphasizing how shifts in policy and governance affect corporate decision-making, risk assessment, and long-term value. It outlines the importance of aligning business strategies with evolving political landscapes to protect financial interests. 

This paper reflects on Friedman’s famous claim that American business should solely be driven to increase profits. Oxford Professor Karthik Ramanna homes in on the qualifying clause of Friedman’s argument—that markets need non-market institutions to safeguard the conditions for competition—and that if corporations have influence in shaping the market, then it is not free. The report argues that corporate influence on the political landscape has tilted in their favor, often at the expense of the public sphere.

As a company’s engagement in social and political issues becomes increasingly fraught, this article lays out decision-making principles companies can use to determine whether and when to engage in social and political issues.

Urges corporate leaders to stay the course on climate action, integrating sustainability into core governance and fiduciary duties. Strine offers a critique of anti-ESG backlash as inconsistent with capitalism and argues that long-term climate leadership protects workers, investors, and the economy.

Comments from business leaders, academics, civil society organizations and others commenting how the Erb Principles for Corporate Political Responsibility can help with managing risk, sustaining market economies, strengthening civic institutions and enabling long-term value for business and society. 

An introduction to Third Side Strategies, including the rationale for focusing on CPR Governance to enable long-term value for business and society. Outlines the main motivations -- including Risk Management, Long-term Value Creation, and Supporting Business Purpose and Fiduciary Duty. Includes the main services offered and how to get involved