Who decides the criteria for rating a company’s ESG score, and on what basis? Part 3: Is ESG a tool of the global corporates to govern the world?

 (𝐄𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐒𝐧𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐛𝐲 𝐑𝐚𝐣𝐢𝐯 𝐌𝐚𝐥𝐡𝐨𝐭𝐫𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐕𝐢𝐣𝐚𝐲𝐚 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧)

Indian social theory addressed this problem of too much concentration of power across multiple domains. It required a separation among the different varnas (forms of social capital). This ensured that businesses (Vaishya varna) focus on profits by optimizing their use of resources, while intellectuals and spiritualists (Brahmin varna) were leaders on moral issues, and governments (Kshatriya varna) focus on delivering the social goods to the public. The new idea of ‘stakeholder capitalism’ challenges these boundaries and allows private corporations to determine the social interests of humanity at large. Just as the Indian Constitution forbids the government to suppress free speech, so must big business be prevented from intervening in public discourse. This could be accomplished by expanding the list of ‘protected categories’ – race, sex, religion, and national origin – to also include political ideology.

The Environment, Social and Governance [ESG] movement sweeping the business world rates companies according to their conduct on all three. The level of investment available to a firm can depend on its ESG rating. But a reasonable question is, who decides the criteria for rating a company’s ESG score, and on what basis? Presently, ESG avoids ‘sin industries’ like alcohol, gambling, tobacco, and weapons. But what about the meat industry and the pharma industry’s use of animals for testing? The premise of ESG is laudable, but one needs to make sure there is diversity of views represented on what constitutes good social policy. Critical Race Theory emphasizes that Blacks and other Intersectional identities must have their views represented over and above any rational or logical arguments, so by the same token, why could we not bring in diverse value systems to formulate the standards of ESG?

*

The purpose of this new Breaking India movement is to install an elite leadership in India’s institutions across all segments of society including the government, industry, academics, and NGOs. [...] which is why we call Harvard the vishwa guru that is creating its own sangha comprising a vast network of shakhas (branches) in India. The following diagram shows the problems we see with the import of Critical Race Theory to India.

• Going clockwise starting at the top, the main points of the diagram are as follows: The social structure of caste is said to be equal to the biological characteristics of race.
• Caste is treated as an indispensable part of Hinduism while caste systems in other cultures are ignored.
• The claim is that since it is an indispensable part of Hinduism, dismantling caste is possible only if Hinduism itself is dismantled.
• Meritocracy is claimed to be a product of caste structures and therefore a part of it.
• Since all objectivity is tainted with the bias of structural privilege, it is said that objective arguments must be replaced with personal experiences. Only the groups identified as victims are said to have valid personal experiences.
• Islam is assumed to be a victim group irrespective of numerous historical records to the contrary. Therefore, it is eligible for the status of ‘protected class’.
• Global nexuses involving governments; multinational companies through their ESG programs; and international groups like the UN and human rights organizations are roped in to pressure India into accepting these frameworks.
• Harvard is playing a central role in creating and distributing this narrative through its vast and influential networks both in India and overseas.

*

Tarun Khanna [the Jorge Paulo Lemann Professor at the Harvard Business School and Director of Harvard University’s Lakshmi Mittal & Family South Asia Institute] said in an interview that the Indian Public Sector Undertakings should ‘be engaged in CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) more productively’. This is not a simple statement considering the way CSR and ESG are sometimes used for furthering specific socio-political agendas especially when combined with identity politics. Other Mittal researchers in the broad category of US-India ties have chosen issues including Indian diaspora politics, corruption, and governance in India.20

The following samples of supported projects illustrate Mittal Institute’s interests in making social justice and political interventions. These include individual research projects as well as panel discussions. Some of the scholars supported are well-known names with strong political ideologies. The following titles of projects are a sample of the vast work done by Mittal Institute: Voices of the Rohingya Dreams of Independence: Vernacular Nationalism Among the Mizos of Northeast India Religious Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict and State Terror in Modern India: Cases From Kashmir, Punjab, Gujarat, and Nagaland Naxalite-Maoist Conflicts in Eastern India Relationship Between Neoliberalism and the Rise of Religious Fundamentalist Movements Deliberative Inequality: A Text-As-Data Study of Tamil Nadu’s Village Assemblies Democracy in Distress in South Asia. Role of Social Media as Propaganda in Sri Lanka’s Post-War Religious Violence Decoding the Supreme Court Verdict that Decriminalized Homosexuality in India Crisis and Credibility: The Politics of Ideas in India and Developing Democracies Constructing a Majority: A Micro-Level Study of Voting Patterns in Indian Elections States-in-Waiting: Nationalism, Internationalism, Decolonization US-India Relations, Diaspora Politics, Anticorruption, and Global Governance

(to be continued)

Tarun Khanna, the Jorge Paulo Lemann Professor at the Harvard Business School and Director of Harvard University’s Lakshmi Mittal & Family South Asia Institute

Arcelor Mittal Headquarters, Luxembourg