Beyond compliance: How GCs can lead the charge on ESG strategy

From your experience, what role should General Counsels (GCs) play in shaping ESG strategy? How does this differ from the more compliance-focused roles they typically take on?

GCs usually have a really broad and well-rounded view of the business. Unlike a lot of our colleagues, our legal work touches multiple areas—we’re involved with suppliers, customers, and we often support departments like Finance, HR, and IT. So, we get to understand their unique challenges and opportunities. Plus, GCs are typically part of the senior executive team, involved in high-level strategy discussions where ESG should be a key focus. Given all that, we’re in a prime position to identify ESG-related opportunities and risks, and to help the business adopt strategies that both align with its goals and minimise risk.

So, how’s this different from the compliance role GCs are often expected to fill?

The difference is that instead of just focusing on what might go wrong—which is the traditional compliance mindset—GCs should also be looking for opportunities. It’s about being proactive and helping the business see where ESG can drive growth or innovation, not just managing potential pitfalls.

What kind of ESG-related opportunities should GCs be communicating to the C-suite? And how can they frame these opportunities effectively?

On the most basic level, cutting carbon emissions can reduce costs—think lower energy consumption or using IT better to cut down on travel. And with energy prices going up and solar panel costs dropping, the return on investment for generating your own renewable energy is becoming more attractive.

But there’s more. Customers are increasingly using sustainability as a factor when choosing products or services, and employees—especially younger generations—care deeply about this. In fact, Deloitte’s recent Gen Z and Millennial survey found that 72% of respondents consider a company’s environmental policies important when evaluating employers. Two out of ten had already changed jobs to align their work with their values. So, the right ESG actions can not only cut costs, but also attract and retain talent and customers. Framing ESG in terms of these direct business benefits is key to getting buy-in from the C-suite.

That’s really compelling. On the other hand, what are the biggest ESG-related risks companies face today? How can GCs help businesses address them?

The biggest risks are often just the flip side of those opportunities. If your competitors are more sustainable, you risk falling behind. If you’re not perceived as responsible, you could lose key talent or struggle with recruitment. So, by helping the company identify and act on ESG opportunities, GCs are already addressing those risks.

Another key area is ensuring that a company’s ESG claims are genuine and can be backed up with evidence. Greenwashing accusations are becoming more common and more damaging. GCs need to be familiar with guidelines like the Advertising Standards Authority’s CAP Code and the Competition and Markets Authority’s Green Claims Code to help companies stay on the right side of the line.

How can GCs integrate ESG considerations into a company’s risk management framework without making things overly complex?

ESG risks should be treated like any other business risk. They should be part of the company’s overall risk assessment and management processes. And really, every department needs to be thinking about ESG, even if they don’t always call it that.

Take gender pay gap reporting, for example. It’s highlighted businesses with poor gender diversity, which is typically handled by HR or recruitment teams. But the issue isn’t just reputational—McKinsey’s research has shown a strong link between executive diversity and financial performance. So, lack of diversity is a business risk, not just an ESG issue. It’s all interconnected, and that’s how ESG should be integrated into risk management.

How can GCs ensure that companies aren’t just ESG-washing, but are putting in place meaningful initiatives that can withstand scrutiny from regulators and stakeholders?

This is an area where GCs really come into their own. We’re used to verifying statements for accuracy and looking for supporting evidence. Ideally, any ESG initiatives should be backed up by quantitative data—measurable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, lower waste output, greater diversity at senior levels, things like that.

Sometimes it’s also worth getting independent verification too, like bringing in a carbon accounting firm to measure the company’s carbon footprint or seeking certifications like B Corp accreditation. That adds credibility and ensures that the initiatives are meaningful and not just for show.

How do you think GCs can stay ahead of compliance requirements while also preparing for future shifts in ESG expectations?

Honestly, it’s not much different from staying on top of any other area GCs deal with—you have to stay informed. That means reading a lot and keeping up with the latest guidelines, regulations, and industry standards. There’s no magic formula—just keeping your finger on the pulse!

Lastly, what advice would you give to GCs who are trying to balance short-term commercial pressures with longer-term ESG goals?

My advice is to stop thinking of it as a trade-off between ESG and commercial issues. Every business faces decisions where short-term benefits might not align with long-term goals, but the key is to see how ESG fits into both. If your ESG initiatives have clear links to business benefits—whether that’s reducing costs, mitigating risks, or boosting your brand—they should naturally be part of the overall decision-making process. It shouldn’t be an “ESG vs commercial” debate. The two can and “should align”.