Geopolitics and sustainability

Let's talk geopolitics and the communications landscape around sustainability. Not everyone is talking about it openly.

ESG — the framework investors use to assess companies on environmental, social, and governance factors — has become politically charged, particularly in the US. Some asset managers are quietly distancing themselves from the term. And that nervousness is spilling over into how companies talk about sustainability more broadly.

The instinct for many communications teams is to go quiet. To wait and see. To say as little as possible until the dust settles.

That instinct is understandable. But it is also a mistake.

The political noise around ESG is largely a debate about ideology and investment philosophy. But the business case for managing sustainability risks and opportunities — and communicating them clearly — has not gone away.

Investors still need to understand how companies are managing climate risk, supply chain exposure, and long-term resilience. Regulators are still moving forward. UKSRS is expected to come into effect in 2027.

The companies that will navigate this best are not the ones that shout the loudest about their sustainability credentials. Nor are they the ones that go silent. They are the ones that get precise.

They stop talking about sustainability as a values statement. They start talking about it as a business reality — how risk is managed, how strategy is stress-tested, how long-term value is measured and protected. Sustainability as it is connected to long-term business interests.

That is a story that holds up in any political climate.