Greenwashing and Corporate Accountability in India: Need for Stronger ESG Regulation.
- 17 hours ago
- 2 min read
This article is written by Divanshi Agrawal, pursuing LL.B. from Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida.
The importance of environmental, social and governance (ESG) in corporate governance has changed the laws in India, alongside the formation of the ESG repost has continuously enabled the addition of greenwashing, where corporations purposely misrepresent their sustainability credentials.
The purpose of this article is to analyse the Indian ESG regulatory law, especially the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s (SEBI) Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) regime which puts forward its point that even after developing reforms, there are major gaps that still exist in enforcement and verification. Focusing on the Indian environmental history and other comparisons with the global jurisprudence, this article argues that greenwashing is not only a mere disclosure failure but is also a structural weakness in the corporate reporting procedures .
The article, in its conclusion, mentions that India must move beyond only requiring the companies to disclose their ECS information and, in place of that, create a stronger system that must be followed strictly. This can be achieved by introducing a single detailed law on ESG, making an independent verification of the ESG disclosures mandatory and also clearly defining the legal consequences for the companies that would dare to provide wrong or misleading information.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this research article, submitted by students and/or other contributors in their personal capacity, are solely those of the author(s) and do not, in any manner whatsoever, reflect or represent the views, opinions, advice, or official position of PACTEDGE LEGAL LLP (“PACTEDGE”). PACTEDGE makes no representations or warranties, whether express or implied, as to the completeness, accuracy, reliability, or currency of any facts, data, analysis, or legal propositions contained herein and shall not, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, be liable for any loss, injury, damage, or consequence arising directly or indirectly from any reliance placed upon this publication. The entire contents of this research article, including without limitation its text, structure, compilation, selection and arrangement of material, are and shall remain the exclusive intellectual property of PACTEDGE LEGAL LLP, protected under applicable copyright and other intellectual property laws. No part of this publication may be copied, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, adapted, published, communicated to the public, distributed, or otherwise made available in any form or by any means, whether electronic, digital, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, nor shared or reposted on any platform or medium, without the prior written consent of PACTEDGE LEGAL LLP; any unauthorised use shall constitute infringement and may attract civil and/or criminal consequences, without prejudice to any other rights or remedies available to PACTEDGE LEGAL LLP in law or equity.
Comments