Actionable ESG for PE

The ESG landscape is largely being developed in relation to the activities and interests of the largest companies, the largest institutional investors, and the largest PE firms and subsequently applied across entire markets. This creates a dynamic wherein what is being expected and requested of you and your portfolio companies is not necessarily fully-aligned with your own operations and interests. We are dedicated to helping bridge this gap.

Taylor Gray, Ph.D.

Taylor Gray, Ph.D.

With over 15 years of experience in ESG research and practice, I currently lead the Research & Analytics division at Motive, a top ESG advisory for private market investors and companies. As an Oxford-educated expert, I've held academic positions, published in notable journals, and participated in prestigious conferences. My passion for sustainability and ESG has driven me to assist companies ranging from start-ups to Fortune Global 500 firms in harnessing the power of ESG programs and data for positive change.

A breathtaking mountainous scene with a radiant sun, reflective waters, and the Motive logo

The EU-ESRS for Portfolio Companies


Last week marked a significant move in European sustainability reporting with the rejection of an attempt to dilute the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). With its affirmation, companies are now set on a course to publish their sustainability reports, in line with ESRS, in 2024. While mainly an exercise in standardized disclosure, the ESRS brings about notable shifts. One of the most consequential is the synchronization of sustainability and financial reports, aiming to elevate the importance of sustainable operations. As firms grapple with these changes, understanding the finer nuances, from materiality considerations to enhanced transparency requirements, becomes essential. Dive in to get a grasp of what's on the horizon with the ESRS and its implications.

Just last week, the European Commission voted down an attempt to weaken the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), which had only just been released in their final version in August, 2023. This paves the way for the ESRS to come into effect, with the first cohort of in-scope companies mandated to publish conforming sustainability reports in 2024.

For context, The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) had already been affirmed, requiring companies under scope to report on sustainability impacts, opportunities, and risks in compliance with EU reporting standards. The ESRS have now been developed, and are being affirmed, to spell out exactly what those ‘EU reporting standards’ are. ESRS 1 and ESRS 2 are the general disclosure standards, and now effectively in operation, and more industry-specific standards are anticipated to be developed over the coming years.

[Side Note: The CSRD applies to EU listed or large firms for financial years starting on or after January 1st, 2024 (to report in 2025), and for non-EU firms exceeding specified EU-based revenue thresholds for financial years starting on or after January 1st, 2028 (to report in 2029).]

As companies have time to review and understand the ESRS requirements, most will find that they are an exercise in compliance rather than a dramatic advance in operational sustainability. To be clear, the ESRS are not setting any sustainability objectives or mandating any particular ESG-oriented performance, rather they are standardizing how corporate sustainability information should be disclosed.

For most companies, complying with the ESRS should not be overly onerous nor costly. If a company already publishes an annual ESG or Sustainability report, or if they convey ESG data to PE-ownership for inclusion in an annual roll-up report, then they likely already have access to nearly all, if not all, the information that would be requested under the ESRS framework. The new ESRS simply presents a requirement as to how and where the information should be presented. Again, more so an exercise in compliance rather than sustainability.

With that said, however, a few points do merit further comment:

  1. Schedule: The ESRS will require that the sustainability report be published at the same time as financial statements. This comes as an attempt to move sustainability information onto a level playing field with financial information and may be the most consequential element of the ESRS. Many companies will be required to adjust their data monitoring and collection protocols to meet this new schedule.
  2. Materiality: The ESRS require a materiality assessment which considers both financial and impact materiality–or what is commonly referred to as double materiality. Although the premise of double materiality is present, the spirit of financial materiality reigns supreme. The consideration of a company’s impact on society or the environment has been greatly diluted from when the original draft entered the comment and review period. In the final approved draft, the ESRS was explicit in aligning with the IFRS view of financial materiality (here:, while including a substantially reduced conceptualization of impact materiality. For most companies, this will not change how they collect and report data, but it may require how companies discuss the issue of materiality within their disclosures to be revisited.
  3. Transparency of Action Plans and Targets: The ESRS will require that any forward-looking action plans or targets be accompanied by more granular disclosures relating to timelines, strategies, and performance. The ESRS does not mandate any particular performance targets or objectives, but rather mandates more transparency in how these are evaluated and disclosed  should a company choose to have such. It remains to be seen, but we anticipate this element of the ESRS could have an outsized effect in incentivizing companies to avoid targets and action plans and instead shift their sustainability disclosures to be more so evaluations of past performance rather than commitments to future goals.
  4. Assurance: Third-party assurance of the sustainability disclosures will be required. Up until now, all ESG and Sustainability reports providing any level of assurance–and there aren’t very many that do–have done so voluntarily. Most companies will find that limited assurance–the degree which is required within the ESRS framework–is not difficult to establish as long data collection protocols are developed knowing that such assurance will be sought. This need not be a substantial cost.

The ESRS do represent a novel compliance factor, and we recommend that all companies take a moment to review how these will apply to them. Large or listed EU firms are working with a much tighter timeline, but all other companies have time to determine if and how the ESRS will impact them. 

The ESRS have been developed with care to harmonize with leading voluntary ESG disclosure frameworks as well as other prominent related regulatory frameworks. For most companies that the ESRS will apply to, the ESRS are not likely to present any meaningful deviations from a reporting trajectory they were already on…although the ESRS is likely to present a meaningful deviation from the reporting schedule they were on. Requiring sustainability disclosures to be reported at the same time as financial statements may very well be the most consequential element of the ESRS.

More Articles

A rooftop garden overlooking a modern cityscape with potted plants and the Motive logo.

California’s New Climate Disclosure Legislation: SB 253 & SB 261

California has ushered in a new era of climate disclosure with SB 253 and SB 261, going beyond the SEC’s draft guidelines. These laws mandate that many businesses in the state, both public and private, disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related financial risks. Specifically, they call for detailed Scope 1, 2, and eventually, Scope 3 emissions reporting and are rooted in established protocols like the Greenhouse Gas Protocol and TCFD. For PE firms, this could mean added reporting responsibilities for portfolio companies doing business in California. While larger firms might have direct reporting obligations, even smaller entities could feel the ripple effects, especially those in the supply chains of reporting entities.

Read More »
Illustration of a tranquil sunset over a rocky coastal landscape with the sun casting a golden hue over the waters and the Motive logo at the bottom.

Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures

In September, the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) released guidelines on nature-related risks, gaining traction as ‘the biodiversity standard’. While voluntary, it’s meshing well with major ESG frameworks. The TNFD offers a holistic view of firms’ nature dependencies and impacts. However, it’s a double-edged sword: delving deep may reveal sensitive competitive data. As the TNFD gains momentum, PE firms and portfolio companies should anticipate shifts in ESG conversations and strategies.

Read More »
Illustration of a snowy landscape with tall pine trees, a large moon in the sky, and the logo of "MOTIVE - The ESG Company" at the bottom left corner.

Words Matter: Defining ESG

ESG often stirs opinions, yet remains undefined for many. Let’s clear the air: ESG is performance data drawn from corporate operations amidst market, environmental, and social dynamics. It aids in risk management, acts as a compliance tool, and is grounded in materiality, not agenda. At Motive, we emphasize understanding ESG’s essence rather than drowning in popular commentary. Our aim? Start discussions on ESG from first principles.

Read More »