Governance factors have long dominated ESG country analysis, and rightly so. Healthy institutions, systematic process, government accountability, as well as empowered citizens provide a protective platform for nurturing and sustaining social and environmental goals. But a series of ‘outbreaks’— social (systemic racism in the US, chronic geographic inequalities in France, human rights abuses in China), viral (Covid pandemic) and environmental (devastating droughts, fires and flooding) powerfully demonstrate the increasing significance of E and S for countries and the global economy. As a result, the CSR Framework has added new and shifted the weights of other underlying performance indicators across all three ESG pillars.
Most significant for rankings were changes measuring country exposure to climate risk, biodiversity loss and human rights. Scores of several Western European countries rose while those high on carbon emissions, low in respect for human rights or sluggish on energy transition slid. That list includes the US, Australia, and Gulf states Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
Turkey and Hong Kong also sank in the rankings largely due to cracks in governing institutions and crackdowns on the personal freedoms of its populations.
Though greater weight has been added to the E and S pillars, the rise of authoritarian regimes, the frequency of geopolitical bullying and taut tensions between the world’s superpowers demonstrate why governance factors still dominate the overall scores.