In June, r3.0, a global common good not-for-profit platform (“Redesign for Resilience and Regeneration”) held an asynchronous dialogue with people they see as “positive mavericks” in the ESG space. The event, you could say, was an on-point expression of what would seem to be a novel mission: to “crowdsources open recommendations for necessary transformations across diverse fields and sectors, in response to the ecological and social collapses humanity is experiencing, in order to achieve a thriving, regenerative, and distributive economy and society.”
Our Executive Director, Alison Taylor, was happy to join in, alongside 10 or so more “mavericks.” The goal of the gathering, according to the report, was to “survey the broad spectrum of ESG critique to develop a preliminary taxonomy or typology of critiques, as a means of mapping synergies, intersections, and complementarity between lines of critique, as well as divergences. The ultimate goal was to test for potential alliances where those who advocate for various lines of critique can understand and align on areas of common ground, to enable a more unified front of collective action to better leverage positive change in transcending ESG.”
“If we don’t understand [ESG’s] flaws,” Alison wrote on LinkedIn, sharing the report, “there is no way we can respond to the current Republican onslaught or the pervasive misunderstandings I see every day.”
Read the report here. We welcome your feedback.
Lead image: macrovector / Freepik