The Rise of Authoritarian Capitalism: What Does It Mean for Businesses That Seek Peace?

This framework sets new B Corp certification requirements for responsible lobbying and public policy engagement, including public disclosure of lobbying activities and country-by-country tax reporting. It also mandates that companies engage in at least two collective actions that support social and environmental goals, enhancing transparency and accountability in government affairs as part of fulfilling a beneficial purpose. 

The updated B Lab certification standards include a new impact topic on “Government Affairs & Collective Action”, requiring companies to disclose and govern their political engagement, advocacy, lobbying practices and collective initiatives for systems change. The changes raise expectations for transparency and accountability in how firms use their influence and voice.

This article explains why major banks are abandoning the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, arguing that economics—not politics—drives the retreat. Despite political backlash, fossil fuels remain highly profitable and low-carbon transitions costly. The authors warn that banks’ short-term incentives and siloed risk management ignore long-term climate risks, exposing investors and markets to systemic instability and stranded assets. 

BSR argues that the traditional “business case” conversation is broken and emphasizes the need for judgment to recognize sustainability’s strategic relevance. Rather than focusing narrowly on ROI, companies should integrate sustainability into core priorities—like innovation, operations, and digital transformation—positioning it as a driver of long-term value for both business and society.

The piece highlights how companies are moving beyond ad hoc responses to social issues by creating internal rules and processes that guide decision-making. These frameworks, alongside executive action and monitoring, are becoming a core part of corporate governance that boards are expected to oversee.

This report identifies 10 top geopolitical risks that could significantly affect companies and markets: (1) global trade protectionism, (2) Middle East regional war, (3) U.S.-China strategic competition, (4) global technology decoupling, (5) major cyber attacks, (6) major terror attacks, (7) Russia-NATO conflict, (8) emerging markets political crisis, (9) North Korea conflict, and (10) European fragmentation. For each risk, the report highlights three assets most sensitive to that scenario—such as sector-specific equities, currencies, credit spreads, or commodities—offering concrete signals businesses can monitor to assess potential impact. This framework helps firms proactively track and integrate geopolitical risk into strategic planning and risk management.

Bloomberg’s new Geopolitical Risk Scores offer a data-driven way for companies to assess how country-level political instability—such as regulatory disruption and civil unrest—could affect operations, supply chains, and compliance. Built with Seerist threat intelligence and covering 7 million companies across 245 countries, the scores quantify 29 types of political, security, and cyber risk. Companies can track, compare, and integrate these risks into strategic planning, disclosure, and portfolio management.

This book by Severin Wirz, an attorney specializing in U.S. and international anti-corruption law, traces the origins, enforcement, and global impact of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). It explores how anti-bribery law reshaped corporate conduct, compliance systems, and international business norms, illustrating how legal accountability mechanisms influence global markets and corporate political behavior. 

This annual survey of over 300 global businesses across 50+ countries assesses how the private sector is acting on the net-zero transition, identifying where policy, investment, and system conditions are speeding or slowing progress. It flags how geopolitical volatility and regulatory uncertainty are influencing corporate decisions and how business sees its role in system-wide transformation.

This report reviews over a decade of efforts to protect human rights and human rights defenders, emphasizing the long-standing, widely recognized field in which a variety of actors—including businesses, civil society, investors, and UN bodies—play distinct roles. It highlights progress, ongoing challenges, and the need for businesses to remember the rationale and stay committed to responsible engagement in supporting human rights defenders.

This case examines the challenges multinationals face in pursuing B Corp certification, using Danone as an example. It highlights aligning global operations, governance, and stakeholder engagement with rigorous social and environmental standards, and raises the broader question: What is responsible influence on public policy for companies that have committed to sustainability? 

This teaching case by Rajat Panwar of Oregon State University, explores the tensions faced by companies such as Singapore’s Olam, in whether to continue to advocate for farm subsidies that benefit the industry but undermine biodiversity and raise questions about their sustainability commitments. The case challenges students to consider how, even when companies are clear about their interests in nature, taking a public stance is politically sensitive. 

Philosopher David Silver argues that corporations are not merely profit-seeking entities but moral agents responsible for defending liberal democracy when authoritarian leaders pressure them to comply. Drawing on his book Corporations and Persons: A Theory of the Firm in Democratic Society, Silver contends that businesses must resist coercion, act collectively, and uphold ethical duties that sustain free markets and democratic institutions. 

The article explains that capitalism and open markets can strengthen democracy by fostering pluralism, competition, and opportunities for independent groups to operate outside government control. It argues the bigger risk is when governments capture businesses through regulation, which reduces that independence and weakens democracy.

This CEO-focused briefing summarizes the Business Breakthrough Barometer’s global findings, highlighting executive insights on transition readiness, policy uncertainty, geopolitical friction, and system transformation. It distills what CEOs see as the barriers and accelerators to achieving net-zero, circularity, and nature-positive systems—and clarifies where business seeks clearer policy, capital signals, and collaborative pathways. 

This Covington client alert reports that shareholder proposals for greater corporate political spending transparency received unusually strong support in 2025, averaging 42% compared to 26% in 2024. The alert highlights rising investor expectations shaped by the CPA-Zicklin Index and warns companies to balance transparency with legitimate confidentiality, emphasizing the governance risks of insufficient disclosure and unexamined political expenditures. 

This CPA report explains how opaque political spending—including through third-party groups—can expose companies to legal, reputational, operational, and financial risks. It underscores the importance of consistent governance and transparency across all political giving, noting that these risks apply regardless of issue or party .

This Aspen Business & Society Summit report explores how business leaders can safeguard democracy as political risk rises. It argues that corporate silence or partisanship threatens both markets and legitimacy, urging principled, collective action and authentic corporate voice grounded in values, courage, and preparedness—core dimensions of Corporate Political Responsibility that sustain healthy civic and economic systems.