When Robert Eccles wrote a piece called Grift capitalism: The GOP’s brilliant strategy for ripping off ordinary Americans, it led to a challenge from a conservative friend of 20 years: if you can find a conservative that thinks sustainability is good for capital markets, will you stop ‘writing nasty stuff’ about Republicans? That led him to the position he speaks from today: a liberal ex-hippy who has found common ground with the so-called ‘eco right’.
Eccles, a well-known author and lecturer who has been writing about non-financial metrics since the early 1970s, had already become frustrated with the polarized discourse, such as around climate change. ‘The left got the memo first. They got it first and they got it at scale, mobilizing tons of money and articulating a finance-centric theory of change, which hasn’t worked,’ he says, adding that, in his view, ‘we’re now at the stage where the left is as much of a problem in dealing with climate change as climate denialism’.
He has since been on the hunt for consensus in an arena where that feels impossible. Through what he calls ‘the GOP outreach campaign,’ Eccles has sought commonality on issues like shareholder proposals and climate policy. He began meeting with organizations such as the Alliance for Market Solutions, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, C3 Solutions, R Street Institute, ClearPath and the American Conservation Coalition (ACC) – groups he describes as ‘conservatives that are as concerned about climate change as I assume you are, and certainly I am, but they just pick it up in a very different way.’
That ‘different way’ means you don’t hear about climate transition plans, says Eccles. ‘You don’t hear about net zero or Scope 1, 2 and 3. You don’t hear about 1.5C and you don’t hear about the Paris Agreement. Instead, you hear a lot more about technology. You hear a lot more about pragmatic issues like permitting – a challenge preventing more renewable energy getting into the grid but something the left rarely talks about. The eco right is focused more on carbon capture, storage and utilization. It’s also a little bit more optimistic. There’s less of the Oh shit, we’re all gonna die if AI doesn’t get us first.’
A new funding round
Whatever your views, Eccles says the eco right should be taken seriously as an increasingly important faction – particularly given the current administration. But even when the political pendulum swings again, working across the climate divide will be as important as it is today. With this in mind, Eccles says there needs to be a rebalance in terms of support and financing of a climate-focused right. ‘Part of the problem is that the vast majority of climate philanthropy goes to the left,’ he observes. Coupled with that is what he sees as a bias in much of the business media: ‘They are operating off of the narrative and theory of change of the left – and I don’t even think they realize it.’ What this does, is amplify the extreme and prevent people working together.
‘The eco right are far more open to engage – and I know that because I talked to them. On the left, there are a lot more organizations with a lot more money, as I’ve said, and some are open to engagement, but a big chunk of them is not. It’s their way or the highway.’
Eccles would like to see more of that money go to climate-minded conservatives and says that what he’s hoping for is to find that common ground where opposing sides can work together. ‘Is it carbon taxes? Is it permitting? Is it carbon capture? Sure, there’ll be differences and that’s okay. We need to give social legitimacy and credibility to conservatives that are focused on climate change, but who are approaching it with different ideas and in different ways, rather than just saying Because they’re a Republican, we hate them by definition; because they’re Republican, we know they’re climate change deniers.’
The ACC, for example, is a 75,000-strong community of young conservatives spread across the US who are all focused on climate and the environment. ‘They’re not protesting fossil-fuel companies, they’re not throwing paint at iconic pictures in museums or running around elite universities saying Divest fossil fuels! They are looking to speak to a different part of the population and in different language and there’s some very interesting activity going on with conservatives focused on climate change,’ says Eccles. ‘For this to have the impact that it could, the eco right can’t just be canceled and ignored.’
A four out of 10
Eccles describes himself as a ‘liberal, ex-hippy’. Or a four out of 10 on a scale where ‘Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a one and Jim Jordan – who likes to say he’s the most conservative member of Congress – is a 10’. While perhaps this vocal support for any conservative group is something of a surprise, it actually seems like the logical landing place.
Eccles has watched as his work has become caught up in America’s war of words, hijacked by people he calls the Sustainability Taliban. ‘You had the left attacking ESG because it wasn’t saving the world,’ he says. ‘Then the right started attacking ESG too. How the right decided to confound ESG with woke, I don’t know, but it became a flash in the culture wars, like abortion, gun control and DEI.’
The result, as IROs are aware, is a tension where people are defining ESG in different ways depending on what suits their political and ideological agenda. ‘You see the left and the right claiming that fiduciary duty is on their side: We’re doing ESG because it’s important for value creation or No, ESG is this woke exercise that is part of a pernicious, progressive liberal agenda.’
It was the left that first came up with the idea that the shareholder proposal process could be used to further their agenda and, of course, the right soon followed. A ‘number of the proposals on the left are values based, but trying to frame it in value language,’ notes Eccles, pointing to the shift to renewables and conversations around stranded assets as examples. ‘Then, the right is saying This is terrible. You’ve got people trying to use the shareholder proposal process and the proxy statement to push a political agenda. So what does the right do? They take a page out of the left’s playbook and they start filing anti-ESG shareholder proposals – the same problem they’ve been complaining about. Needless to say, this amuses me no end!’
We need a new language for ESG
So where do IR professionals and public companies fit into all this? As well as amassing 37,000 LinkedIn followers and a stream of ‘Bob, screw you’ engagement, Eccles has worked across numerous reporting standards and been at the forefront of the non-financial metrics movement since its inception.
Today, he is convinced we need to shed the hijacked terminology and find a new way to talk about these themes. ‘The language of ESG is dead. We need a new language to talk about climate change,’ he states. ‘What’s needed is a new narrative: one that’s not for the climate experts on the left, not for the crazies on the right who don’t believe in it. We need a narrative that finds common ground and speaks to the person on the street.’
Returning to the eco right, he says that so far, these groups do not engage with companies in the way the left has. ‘They are not going to companies and asking about the climate transition plan, net-zero targets or Scope 3 reporting,’ Eccles continues. ‘They don’t have those conversations, because they’re not looking to companies to solve the problem. They’re not mobilizing companies and investors because that isn’t their theory of change. Their focus is much more at a policy level.‘
But that doesn’t mean there isn’t common ground to be found here too. Eccles says that companies need to be much more open about what they need from government – particularly in the US where there is often a knee-jerk reaction against legislation. ‘If there are things that need to be done that would enable you to be clear on what you can achieve as a company, like a carbon tax or a plastics treaty, then speak up,’ he urges companies.
He also says IR teams and public companies must do more to develop a new language that moves away from ESG, away from vague positivity and meaningless alignment with the UN Sustainability Development Goals. ‘Companies need to be much more proactive in shaping the narrative,’ Eccles explains. ‘Change the language. Talk about material issues. Don’t use ESG, because people are going to define it however they want to. Instead, talk about value creation. ‘Be clear about where you can and cannot make the world a better place.’
This article originally appeared on IR-Impact.com.
Garnet Roach
Garnet Roach joined IR Impact in October 2012, working on both the editorial and research sides of the publication. Prior to entering the world of investor relations, her freelance career covered a broad range of subjects, from technology to politics...
