More than 30 per cent of respondents to The Logic’s May subscriber survey said they are “very concerned” that the anti-ESG movement could impact environmental, social and governance policies in Canada.

Another 27 per cent said they were “a little concerned,” four per cent were “not very concerned” and 12 per cent were “not at all concerned.”

“Every business relies on environment, social and governance stability to function,” said one subscriber. “There must be a more responsible sector that recognizes, honours and protects our privilege to function within our environmental and human context.”

As The Logic previously reported, anti-ESG sentiments have been growing in the U.S., and some groups have asked Canada’s big banks to commit to ongoing fossil-fuel financing and shelve or suspend net-zero emissions targets.

Some subscribers’ comments indicated strong feelings on the debate. “Anti-ESG efforts provide an important balance to what seems like a single-sided debate among social justice warriors seeking to control others’ actions,” one respondent said. 

“Currently, it’s more a U.S. Republican vs. Democrat spat, which it definitely shouldn’t be. There is a risk of that spilling into Canada, but we aren’t nearly so polarized (yet),” wrote another.

Earlier this year, the Business Development Bank of Canada’s venture capital arm started collecting ESG information on all the VC firms it funds in an effort to prepare them for more rigorous reporting standards in the future. 

The impression is that reporting has room to improve—on average, respondents to The Logic’s survey rated Canada’s progress on ESG reporting at a 4.1 out of 10. 

Almost 58 per cent of respondents said it’s fair to require all companies to set environmental, social and governance goals and targets, regardless of size or sector. 

De-prioritizing ESG commitments, over 63 per cent of respondents said, poses a risk for the economy or a company.

“A green transition will require enormous investment and effort if we are to maintain a livable planet, and mitigate risks (see: Alberta wildfires). Canada has the expertise, the resources and the sophisticated institutions needed to succeed. Falling under the sway of short-term-focused stakeholders will detract from long-term goals. Losing the lead on ESG will make it harder to catch back up,” another subscriber said.

Just over 40 per cent of respondents said governance goals were most important to their investment strategies, while nearly 37 per cent chose environmental and 23 per cent chose social.

“You can’t have one over the other. Impact on people and planet are mutually reinforcing, or mutually degrading. Governance is how all impact, including financial impact, is managed,” a subscriber said.

---

Methodology

The Logic emailed subscribers a private link to an online survey on May 23 and the survey closed May 25. Respondents’ identities were kept anonymous. Subscribers were first asked, “How would you rate Canada’s progress on ESG reporting, on a scale of 1 to 10?” They were then asked, “Do you think it’s fair to require all companies (any sector, any size) to set ESG goals and targets?” and could answer: “Yes” or “No.” Next, they were asked, “Which best describes how you feel about companies de-prioritizing ESG commitments?” and could choose: “It poses risks for the economy and/or company,” “It would benefit the economy and/or company” or “It would not affect the economy and/or company.” They were also asked, “Which of the following factors are most important to your investment strategy?” and could select: “Environmental,” “Social” or “Governance.” Finally, respondents were asked, “How concerned are you that the anti-ESG movement could impact environmental, social and governance policies in Canada?” and could select: “Very concerned,” “A little concerned,” “Not very concerned,” “Not at all concerned” or “Please elaborate on your answer.”