We are aware that the implementation of ESG scores is imminent for individuals. Some individuals may already possess ESG scores without being aware of it. It is logical to consider that if society aims to enact a social credit scoring system to drive transformative change, it would involve corporations, banks, financial institutions, and Wall Street. However, eventually, the application of this system will likely extend to individuals. This shift towards stakeholder capitalism demands serious consideration, as ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) metrics serve as a form of social credit scoring system. These metrics are employed worldwide, primarily in the United States, Canada, and Europe.
The fundamental goal of these metrics is to incentivize companies, and in some cases individuals, to alter their behavior. Those with higher ESG scores are rewarded for their positive performance in specific categories, while those with lower scores face repercussions for underperforming in the same areas. Proponents of ESG metrics argue that this approach is essential for advancing stakeholder capitalism. They believe that businesses should not solely focus on profits and traditional metrics but should also consider the collective’s best interests. Addressing climate change, pollution, oceanic plastic waste, social inequalities, and racism requires the establishment of a social credit scoring system. Supporters argue that businesses are unlikely to undertake these changes voluntarily.
However, skeptics assert that ESG scores are not genuinely used for their stated purposes. They believe that the system primarily serves as a means to control society, generate substantial profits, and promote a left-wing agenda. These critics do not perceive the ESG movement as a genuine effort to improve the world. The primary reason for widespread business adoption of ESG metrics is the intense pressure exerted by large Wall Street firms, banks, financial institutions, and investment management companies like BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. Many companies foresee the inevitable need to align with the ESG movement, whether they personally desire it or not.
The development and implementation of ESG metrics are primarily driven by influential financial institutions and organizations such as the World Economic Forum and the International Business Council. These metrics can be altered at any time, placing substantial power in the hands of immensely wealthy institutions and individuals. Remarkably, there is minimal oversight from government agencies, and average individuals lack the authority to compel these companies to halt their actions. Consequently, individuals will be impacted by this system, whether or not they support it, and the rules governing it can change unpredictably.
Undoubtedly, ESG scores already exert an influence on people’s lives, often without their awareness. Everyday individuals, unbeknownst to them, experience the consequences of ESG scoring systems. The increasing costs of cars, gasoline, and the actions taken by companies like Disney are directly or indirectly linked to ESG metrics. These effects on regular individuals are intentional, as the objective of ESG is to transform society comprehensively, extending beyond the confines of corporations’ walls and affecting people’s daily lives.