Journal Press India^®

Author Details ( * ) denotes Corresponding author

This paper explores the evolving landscape of corporate climate commitments with a focus on the Net Zero transition, as demonstrated through the strategic initiatives of General Motors and the investment philosophy of Generation Investment Management. Drawing on insights from both organizations, the paper examines how corporations are responding to the climate crisis by integrating sustainability into core business strategies. The paper highlights the complexity of Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, the systemic challenges of supply chain decarbonization, and the role of investors in shaping climate accountability. Through a theoretical lens, the paper synthesizes themes of strategic adaptation, stakeholder engagement, innovation-driven growth, and fiduciary duty. It further discusses the cultural and operational transformation required within legacy organizations to realize climate goals. This analysis underscores the need for a holistic, systems-level approach to sustainability, where ambition, agility, and collaborative governance drive meaningful change in pursuit of a 1.5°C-aligned future.

Keywords

Net Zero; Corporate climate commitments; Sustainability strategy; Generation investment management; Scope 1-2-3 emissions; ESG investing; Supply chain decarbonization; Fiduciary duty; Organizational transformation; Climate-led investing

1. Albort-Morant, G., Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., & Fernández-Robles, C. (2022). Assessing green product innovation effects on firm performance: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(2), 859–873. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2912
2. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice. Addison-Wesley.
3. Bapuji, H., de Bakker, F. G., Brown, J. A., Higgins, C., Rehbein, K. A., & Spicer, A. (2020). Business and society research in times of the corona crisis. Business & Society, 59(6), 1067–1078. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650320921172
4. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
5. Bechtsis, D., Tsolakis, N., & Vlachos, D. (2021). Digital transformation for a sustainable supply chain: Challenges and opportunities. Sustainability, 13(6), 3222. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063222
6. Benn, S., Edwards, M., & Angus-Leppan, T. (2021). Exploring corporate legitimacy in times of climate crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 170(3), 469–489. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04609-2
7. BlackRock. (2021). Sustainability as BlackRock’s standard for investing. Retrieved from https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/about-us/investment-stewardship
8. Bocken, N. M. P., Strupeit, L., Whalen, K., & Nußholz, J. L. K. (2021). A review and evaluation of circular business model frameworks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 305, 127138. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127138
9. Busch, T., Johnson, M. P., & Pioch, T. (2021). Corporate carbon performance indicators revisited. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(3), 1451–1471. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2690
10. CDP. (2023). CDP global supply chain report 2023. Retrieved from https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/global-supply-chain-report-2023
11. Chandler, D., Hoffman, A. J., & O’Neill, S. (2022). Climate resilience: How business can prepare for the next disruption. California Management Review, 64(2), 5–21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256211060557
12. Chatzoglou, P. D., & Chatzoudes, D. (2022). The role of green innovation capabilities in achieving environmental and economic performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 366, 132838. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132838
13. Clark, G. L., Feiner, A., & Viehs, M. (2021). From the stockholder to the stakeholder: How sustainability can drive financial outperformance. University of Oxford. Retrieved from https://arabesque.com/research/From_the_stockholder_to_the_stakeholder_web.pdf
14. D’Amato, D., Droste, N., Allen, B., Kettunen, M., Lähtinen, K., Korhonen, J., ... & Toppinen, A. (2021). Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative analysis of sustainability avenues. Journal of Cleaner Production, 293, 126124. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126124
15. De Villiers, C., Rouse, P. & Kerr, J. (2021). Stakeholder engagement and sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(1), 64–92. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2019-3923
16. Deegan, C. (2022). Legitimacy theory. In Z. Hoque, L. Parker, M. Covaleski, & K. Haynes (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Accounting Research Methods (pp. 131–150). Routledge.
17. Deringer, F. B. (2021). A legal framework for impact: Sustainability and fiduciary duties. Retrieved from https://www.freshfields.com/en-gb/our-thinking/campaigns/sustainability/sustainable-finance
18. Dhaliwal, D. S., Radhakrishnan, S., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2021). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The roles of stakeholder orientation and financial transparency. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 40(1), 106752. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2020.106752
19. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value: A stakeholder marketing perspective. Journal of Marketing, 86(3), 1–20. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429221082728
20. Eccles, R. G., & Klimenko, S. (2019). The investor revolution. Harvard Business Review, 97(3), 106–116. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2019/05/the-investor-revolution
21. Eccles, R. G., Lee, L. E., & Stroehle, J. C. (2022). The social origins of ESG: An analysis of innovating firms’ CSR strategies. Organization Science, 33(1), 64–82. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1472
22. European Commission. (2021). EU climate benchmarks and benchmarks’ ESG disclosures. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/banking-and-finance/sustainable-finance/eu-climate-benchmarks-and-benchmarks-esg-disclosures_en
23. Fankhauser, S., Smith, S. M., Allen, M., Hale, T., Hepburn, C., Mitchell-Larson, E., ... & Caldecott, B. (2022). The meaning of net zero and how to get it right. Nature Climate Change, 12, 15–21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01245-w
24. Florencio, P., Roberts, C., & Dias, L. (2022). Climate disclosure, market value, and stakeholder trust. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(1), 56–68. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2183
25. Folke, C., Biggs, R., Norström, A., Reyers, B., & Rockström, J. (2021). Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecology and Society, 26(3), 41. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12061-260341
26. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing.
27. Ghosh, A., Sharma, R., & Singh, A. (2022). Corporate climate resilience: Frameworks and applications. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(6), 2553–2566. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3045
28. Giese, G., Nagy, Z., & Lee, L. E. (2022). Deconstructing ESG ratings performance: Risk and return for E, S, and G by provider. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 48(4), 84–103. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3905/jpm.2022.1.396
29. GM DEI & ESG Report. (2023). General motors diversity, equity & inclusion and ESG summary report 2023. Retrieved from https://www.gm.com
30. GM Sustainability Report. (2022). General motors sustainability report 2022. Retrieved from https://www.gmsustainability.com
31. Grewal, J. & Serafeim, G. (2021). Research on corporate sustainability: Review and directions for future research. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3675408
32. Grewal, J., Hauptmann, C. & Serafeim, G. (2021). Material sustainability information and stock price informativeness. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(3), 513–544. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04451-6
33. Haider, M. Z., Ahmed, S. & Haque, M. E. (2022). Reimagining stakeholder theory in a post-pandemic world. Sustainability, 14(12), 6989. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su14126989
34. IEA. (2022). Global EV outlook 2022. Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2022
35. IFRS Foundation. (2022). International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). Retrieved from https://www.ifrs.org/groups/international-sustainability-standards-board/
36. IPCC. (2021). Sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/ar6/
37. Khan, S. A. R., Yu, Z., Sharif, A., Golpîra, H., & Amin, S. (2022). Green innovation system and green economy: Can green innovation system improve environmental and economic sustainability? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 176, 121445. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445
38. Kirchherr, J., & Piscicelli, L. (2021). Towards an understanding of the circular economy in corporate sustainability. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 175, 105973. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105973
39. Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., & Seppälä, J. (2020). Circular economy: The concept and its limitations. Ecological Economics, 143, 37–46. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041
40. KPMG. (2021). Net zero readiness index 2021. Retrieved from https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/insights/2021/10/net-zero-readiness-index.html
41. Krueger, P., Sautner, Z., & Starks, L. T. (2020). The importance of climate risks for institutional investors. The Review of Financial Studies, 33(3), 1067–1111. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz137
42. Liesen, A., Hoepner, A. G. F., Patten, D. M., & Figge, F. (2021). Does stakeholder pressure influence corporate GHG emissions reporting? Empirical evidence from Europe. Organization & Environment, 34(3), 379–403. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619897530
43. Malik, M., Yousaf, S. & Butt, A. R. (2022). The role of ESG performance in shaping investor preferences: Evidence from global markets. Sustainability, 14(10), 5832. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105832
44. Mazzucato, M., & Rodrik, D. (2021). Mission-oriented innovation policy: A roadmap. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose. Retrieved from https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ bartlett/public-purpose/publications/2021/oct/mission-oriented-innovation-policy-roadmap
45. Montiel, I., Husted, B. W. & Christmann, P. (2021). Using natural resource-based theory and organizational learning theory to understand the dynamics of environmental performance. Strategic Organization, 19(1), 142–162. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127019 885065
46. MSCI. (2022). ESG ratings methodology. Retrieved from https://www.msci.com/our-solutions/esg-investing/esg-ratings
47. Nair, A., Palacios-Marqués, D., & Merigó, J. M. (2022). Corporate sustainability strategies and firm performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Research, 142, 225–239. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.056
48. NewClimate Institute. (2022). Corporate climate responsibility monitor 2022. Retrieved from https://newclimate.org/resources/publication/2022/corporate-climate-responsibility-monitor -2022
49. OECD. (2021). Aligning finance and investment with climate objectives: OECD report to G20. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/finance/Aligning-Finance-and-Investment-with-Climate-Objectives.pdf
50. OECD. (2022). Sustainable infrastructure for climate action. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/environment/sustainable-infrastructure-for-climate-action.htm
51. PRI. (2021). A legal framework for impact. Retrieved from https://www.unpri.org/policy/a-legal-framework-for-impact/7774.article
52. PwC. (2021). ESG: The growth opportunity of the century. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/reinventing-the-future/take-on-tomorrow/esg.html
53. Rajão, R., Soares, L. C. R., & Chan, C. (2021). The politics of net zero: Carbon accounting and credibility. Nature Climate Change, 11, 597–601. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01089-4
54. Roberts, C., Bridgewater, E., & Clark, G. (2020). Policy coherence for climate mitigation. Sustainability, 12(17), 6931. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176931
55. Rogers, D. Z., Lusk, J. L., & Jablonski, B. B. R. (2022). Linking executive compensation and climate performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(3), 1054–1068. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2926
56. Sachs, J., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., & Fuller, G. (2022). Sustainable development report 2022. Retrieved from https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/
57. Sarto, F., Veronesi, G., & Kirkpatrick, I. (2021). Managing sustainability through dynamic capabilities: An integrative framework. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(2), 1087–1100. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2669
58. Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). (2022). Science-based net-zero target setting guidelines. Retrieved from https://sciencebasedtargets.org/net-zero
59. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday. New York, USA.
60. Senge, P., Hamilton, H., & Kania, J. (2021). The dawn of system leadership. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 19(1), 27–31. Retrieved from https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_dawn_of_system_leadership
61. ShareAction. (2022). Voting matters 2022. Retrieved from https://shareaction.org/reports/voting-matters-2022
62. Stuchtey, M., Enkvist, P. A., & Zumwinkel, K. (2021). A good disruption: Redefining growth in the twenty-first century. New York, USA: Bloomsbury.
63. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
64. Sullivan, R., Gouldson, A. & Webber, P. (2021). Ecosystem services in corporate environmental strategy. Environmental Science & Policy, 119, 56–64. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.01.005
65. Tashman, P., Marano, V. & Kostova, T. (2021). Walking the walk or talking the talk? Corporate social responsibility decoupling in emerging market multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(4), 591–614. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00361-8
66. Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) (2021). TCFD 2021 Status Report. Retrieved from https://www.fsb.org/2021/10/2021-tcfd-status-report/
67. Tuhkanen, H., & Vulturius, G. (2022). Navigating legitimacy trade-offs in private climate governance. Climate Policy, 22(1), 52–69. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.2003387
68. UN Global Compact. (2021). Business ambition for 1.5°C. Retrieved from https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/events/climate-action-summit-2019/business-ambition
69. United Nations. (2021). The sustainable development goals report 2021. Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2021/
70. Wang, Z., & Sarkis, J. (2021). Corporate sustainability development in China: Review and future research directions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 167, 105421. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105421
71. Whelan, T., & Fink, C. (2021). ESG and long-term value: What’s the connection? Harvard Business Review Digital Articles, 2–6. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2021/01/research-actually-investing-in-esg-does-make-you-money
72. World Bank. (2023). The role of critical minerals in clean energy transitions. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2023/01/19/critical-minerals-clean-energy
73. Yang, M. G., Hong, P., & Modi, S. B. (2022). Impact of environmental practices on firm performance: Moderating role of sustainability capability. International Journal of Production Economics, 246, 108412. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108412
74. Zameer, H., Wang, Y., Yasmeen, H., & Saeed, A. (2021). Linking green innovation strategy and environmental performance in manufacturing firms: Role of dynamic capabilities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 167, 120683. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120683