80% of surveyed sustainability executives say their companies are adjusting their ESG strategies in response to the new administration. The most common change is reframing communications: 52% of executives report reworking their sustainability messaging, including moving away from the term „ESG.“
Tariffs also pose a challenge, with 66% saying they will hinder progress on achieving sustainability goals. Almost half (45%) say they will delay investments in sustainable operations.
The study also captures how ESG backlash is evolving: 90% believe it will persist—or even intensify—over the next few years. That’s a rise from 63% just two years ago. The top targets of backlash are climate-related commitments, such as net-zero goals, and ESG-related language.
When asked who is driving the backlash, surveyed executives now point to federal policymakers. It marks a shift from two years ago, when activists and advocacy groups topped the list.
Companies are adjusting their strategies by reframing language and moving away from the term „ESG.“
- 52% of executives say their companies are narrowing or reframing communications, including moving away from the term „ESG“
- 48% are increasing legal and risk review
- 43% are enhancing focus on business ROI and shareholder value of ESG-related initiatives
Sources of backlash
Activists take a backseat. Federal policymakers are now the leading source of ESG opposition.
- Federal policymakers are the top agitator: 78% of executives say US federal policymakers and regulators will be the most significant drivers of ESG backlash
- That’s up from 43% who said the same about this group’s impact over the last two years
- Activists are no longer the main source of pressure: 51% cite activist groups, up from 48%
- But over the last two years, respondents had cited activists as the leading source of backlash
