SDG16: 'Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions'

Allen Hershkowitz, PhD • September 15, 2021

United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal Number 16, (SDG16) labeled “Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions”, was crafted to promote strong humanitarian, government, and for-profit institutions essential for human survival, personal health, and planetary well-being. SDG16 recognizes that strong institutions of all types—government agencies, for-profit business, NGOs—are all needed to advance the SDG’s aspiration for peace, justice, and equity. Indeed, it’s well-known that regions without strong institutions are more inclined towards poverty, social and political unrest, and unhealthy, unsustainable communities.


Institutionalizing sustainability planning means consulting the Sustainable Development Goals as an aspirational framework. Doing so is now a pervasive and growing trend in virtually all large institutions throughout the world, regardless of their mission. Moreover, this trend is increasing rapidly as the leadership at virtually every major business sector, from finance to mining, from real estate to aviation, has publicly committed to sustainability planning and, especially, to some level of climate action.


Hundreds of institutions throughout the globe are increasingly seeking to redefine and re-imagine how to manage their entire value chain from a sustainability perspective. Investors, employees, community leaders, customers, the media, government regulators, local governments, athletes, fans, and other stakeholders expect all the institutions and businesses they deal with to be a responsible environmental steward, and they increasingly expect to have access to information about their environmental profile and commitments.


Sustainability planning by any institution, whether government agency, a fashion business, finance, or sport must ultimately be driven by a recognition that nature is the ultimate source of all economic value. Nature provides the ecological services on which all life depends. Accordingly, building strong institutions to promote SDG16, “Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions” is driven by our collective obligation to address unprecedented and urgent ecological and social challenges including climate change, poverty alleviation, livable wages, gender bias, racial equality, etc.


SDG16 focuses on the need to create and support institutions that authentically respond to these sustainability challenges, including public demands for more livable and sustainable communities. Accordingly, sustainability engenders new management priorities for the 21st century institution. It goes without saying that the strategic relevance of sustainability planning for any institution is invariably unique to its mission. However, scientific rigor, ethical transparency, equity, and effective policy development rely upon validated assessment methodologies.


As recent fires, flooding, drought, and storm events throughout the world have made eminently clear, the effects of climate change and the growing global demand for climate action have imposed an unavoidable obligation on all institutions to develop sustainability plans that advance the UN SDGs. At minimum, all institutions engaged in sustainability planning should look to SDGs 1, 2, and 3 (end poverty and hunger, promote good health) and eliminate all avoidable greenhouse gas emissions. 


Pursuing sustainability is indeed ‘The right thing to do’ and that may be enough to motivate more committed organizations. Eventually, however, all institutions need to get to the place where sustainability is recognized as crucial to its long-term mission, whether as an NGO, a government agency, or a for-profit business. As the Harvard Business Review reported two years ago:

“Corporate boards of directors must tackle questions about sustainability in a new and urgent manner. If they don’t, they will hear from investors about their lack of action. In just the latest indication of the investor community’s increasing scrutiny on sustainability, Yahoo announced in 2018 that it would start publishing sustainability ratings for publicly traded companies. In order to fulfill their obligations, every listed company board must now become ‘sustainability fluent.’”[1]


Recognition of the need for SDG16, of the need to institutionalize sustainability planning does not obviate the fact that attempting to do so in complex institutions, whether a for-profit business or an international agency, is not without meaningful challenges. These barriers to sustainability are 1. economic, 2. technical, and 3. cultural. An organization is a shadow of its leadership, and the ruthlessness of the market does not go away because we have good intentions. Accordingly, in order to overcome the three barriers to sustainability, an institution must benefit from authentic support from its leadership, including adequate investment of financial resources and personnel.


Without authentic support by its leadership, the shift in culture and operations needed to implement sustainability will be stymied.  Indeed, as Tables 1 and 2 below indicate, the single most important attribute of a successful sustainability plan is support from senior leadership, while a lack of leadership support and resources is the number one reason that sustainability plans fail.


Table 1

Why Sustainability Initiatives Succeed

Senior leadership support
Employee engagement and interest
Clear goals and metrics
Effective internal communication
Introduction of environmentally friendly policies
[2]


Table 2

Why Sustainability Initiatives Fail

Lack of investment of resources
Competing priorities
Culture change challenges
Organizational obstacles
Lack of a compelling Case for change


 As the chemistry of the atmosphere continues to change, as climate impacts evolve, as government policies change, and as ecological and social challenges expand, the need for institutions to promote the UN SDGs could not be more urgent. Promoting sustainability planning and collaboration by all institutions—government agencies, for-profit, and NGO alike—can help all institutions, indeed all people, plan for the inevitable worsening climate impacts we should expect.


[1] “What Boards Need to Know About Sustainability Ratings,” Silder Wall Spitzer and John Mandyck, Harvard Business Review, May 30, 2019


[2] Table One and Table Two are excerpted from “Sustainability Business Cases,” December 2019 version, slides 38 & 39, published by Sustainability Advantage exclusively for “Master Slide Decks” subscribers.


PHOTO: Iswanto Arif | Unsplash


About the Author:

Allen Hershkowitz, PhD
Founding Director & Chairman, Sport and Sustainability International
Environmental Science Advisor, New York Yankees


Read perspectives from the ISSP blog

By Ioannis Ioannou, PhD June 19, 2025
London Business School Professor Ioannis Ioannou, PhD examines the vulnerable narrative infrastructure surrounding ESG. By collaboratively engaging those most affected by ESG transitions—indigenous peoples, workers, young people, small businesses, and communities, particularly in the Global South—we can foster the trust, legitimacy, and collective commitment for meaningful progress. Who Gets to Tell the Story of ESG? For more than a decade, ESG rapidly evolved from a specialized investor consideration into an elaborate global infrastructure of standards, metrics, taxonomies, and disclosure frameworks. Investor attention soared, corporate sustainability teams grew exponentially, and ESG vocabulary— climate risk, fiduciary duty, and double materiality—became firmly embedded in corporate boardrooms and regulatory discussions globally. Yet, despite ESG’s impressive institutional and technical advancements, the narrative meant to support it remained remarkably fragile. While ESG developed sophisticated standards, disclosures, and metrics, it never invested in the narrative infrastructure to explain its purpose, build public understanding, or secure legitimacy beyond institutional circles. Without the broader stakeholder engagement and effective storytelling that would connect ESG to people’s lived realities, it became vulnerable. Critics didn’t need to challenge carbon accounting or materiality frameworks; instead, they recast ESG as a job killer, an elite agenda, or an unwelcome intrusion into everyday life. The backlash caught many ESG professionals off guard, though the warning signs were visible. ESG’s rapid adoption by investors and regulatory bodies created an illusion of momentum, but this obscured a deeper structural gap. ESG rarely connected meaningfully with those directly affected by ESG-driven transitions—workers facing disruption, small business owners adapting to shifting expectations, and communities, particularly in vulnerable regions, confronting real and immediate climate risks. For these groups, ESG often seemed abstract, distant, and disconnected from their daily concerns. Narrative infrastructure might sound like an unusual concept, but it's foundational to widespread support. It connects people and institutions, conveys meaning, and determines whether ESG is seen as genuine leadership or merely corporate branding. Robust narrative infrastructure ensures resilience under political pressure; without it, initiatives can rapidly lose whatever public approval they may have had. Constructing narrative infrastructure requires explicitly recognizing storytelling— and who contributes to that storytelling—as integral to ESG strategy, not simply a communications exercise. Effective narratives generate trust precisely because they emerge from transparent dialogue, clear accountability, and inclusive stakeholder engagement. By contrast, greenwashing uses storytelling deceptively, aiming to conceal poor performance, and deflect scrutiny. Strong narrative infrastructure, unlike greenwashing, strengthens credibility and legitimacy by openly connecting ESG commitments to shared realities, tangible actions, and measurable outcomes. It is a fundamental strategic asset for ESG success. Importantly, narrative infrastructure also concerns who gets to tell these stories. Over the last decade, the central narrators of the ESG story have largely been institutional actors: executives, investors, sustainability professionals, academics, and regulators. Their contributions have been invaluable, driven by expertise, rigor, and genuine commitment. Yet these narrators also represent a relatively narrow perspective, shaped by institutional backgrounds and professional incentives. Many important voices have remained largely excluded from shaping ESG narratives: indigenous people whose lives are often fundamentally changed by corporate activities, workers whose livelihoods are directly impacted by ESG transitions, young people deeply invested in future outcomes, small businesses continuously adapting to new ESG-related requirements, and especially communities—particularly in the Global South —directly facing the worst of climate disruptions. While these stakeholders' experiences occasionally appear within ESG reporting, they seldom influenced strategy or shape decisions in a substantial way. This exclusion poses significant, practical risks. Stakeholders naturally resist initiatives perceived as imposed from above or disconnected from their lived realities—not necessarily because they oppose ESG’s goals, but because they feel unheard and invisible within such ESG narratives. The resistance appears as political backlash, active public scepticism, or disengagement, all severely undermining ESG’s legitimacy, effectiveness, and public support. Addressing this critical weakness requires deliberately building ESG’s narrative infrastructure through inclusive, collaborative, and ongoing engagement. Practically, companies should move beyond occasional or reactive consultations toward sustained processes where stakeholders actively shape strategies. This can involve establishing community advisory boards with real decision-making power, participatory scenario planning that integrates diverse local perspectives, and internal cross-functional councils that ensure workers, communities, and youth voices directly influence ESG outcomes. Such sustained, authentic collaboration bridges the gap between institutional intentions and genuine public legitimacy. Within companies, narrative stewardship should not be limited to corporate communications or sustainability departments alone. Effective ESG storytelling depends on regular, structured collaboration across multiple functions—including strategy, human resources, procurement, product development, and finance—to ensure ESG commitments align authentically with core business decisions and reflect real-world stakeholder experiences. Companies can institutionalize this collaboration by creating dedicated cross-functional ESG committees tasked with integrating diverse internal perspectives, monitoring stakeholder feedback, and ensuring ESG initiatives clearly connect to tangible social outcomes. At an institutional level, building ESG narrative infrastructure involves establishing platforms that broaden participation in ESG discourse. It requires supporting initiatives that improve public understanding of ESG standards and practices, funding research that evaluates public perceptions of ESG alongside traditional financial metrics and ensuring ESG disclosures transparently reflect diverse stakeholder concerns. ESG narrative legitimacy grows stronger when diverse perspectives genuinely shape how ESG commitments are determined and communicated, implemented, and monitored—not merely as token inclusions, but as integral, strategic components of ESG itself. Regulators have an essential role in shaping ESG narrative infrastructure. Current ESG disclosure standards typically prioritize technical accuracy and financial materiality, mostly targeting investor needs. Broadening these frameworks to explicitly incorporate public legitimacy could significantly enhance ESG’s impact. For example, regulators could introduce clear criteria assessing whether companies effectively communicate their ESG strategies to diverse stakeholders and evaluate how these communications influence brand value and reputational risk—approaches already emerging in Europe’s Green Claims Directive and the CSRD/ESRS focus on double materiality. Additionally, policy evaluations could systematically measure whether ESG initiatives are genuinely perceived as fair, inclusive, and beneficial by the communities they affect. Public support and trust require deliberate and continuous effort; they cannot be assumed or taken for granted. Fortunately, inspiring examples of effective ESG narrative infrastructure already exist. Companies like Patagonia have openly integrated supplier and worker voices into their ESG narratives, transparently highlighting labour practices and sourcing standards, significantly enhancing their credibility. Unilever’s inclusive “living wage” campaigns have similarly leveraged stories from frontline workers to connect ESG metrics with tangible social outcomes, strengthening stakeholder trust. Industry-specific initiatives, such as the Bangladesh Accord in apparel, demonstrate how authentically incorporating diverse stakeholder experiences—including employees, unions, and community representatives—into ESG reporting can reinforce accountability and legitimacy. These examples highlight how inclusive storytelling, grounded in genuine stakeholder participation, can transform ESG commitments from abstract promises into credible actions with real-world impact. ESG professionals now face an exciting strategic opportunity: intentionally building a narrative infrastructure that's genuinely inclusive, collaborative, and resilient. Yes, involving diverse stakeholders means navigating complexity, dialogue, and occasionally tough compromises. It also means embracing participatory processes that might feel messier or less predictable. But it's exactly this diversity of voices and collective authorship that generates persuasive, robust narratives—ones that not only resonate widely but can confidently withstand shifts in politics, culture, and public sentiment. Beyond strengthening ESG's narrative infrastructure, it's important for ESG professionals to step back and consider sustainability more broadly. By explicitly linking ESG narratives to overarching sustainability objectives—such as respecting planetary boundaries and enabling a just transition—professionals can better illustrate how financial markets, corporate strategies, and policy frameworks actively support broader ecological and social well-being. Making these broader connections explicit can deepen trust, enhance engagement, and ensure the interconnected ESG-sustainability story resonates meaningfully with all those whose futures depend on it. We stand at a turning point, facing a critical opportunity to strengthen ESG’s narrative foundations. While ESG’s narrative fragility has been clearly exposed, this moment also offers an inspiring chance to intentionally build a more inclusive, credible, and resilient narrative infrastructure. The future of sustainability depends not only on rigorous metrics or detailed disclosures, but ultimately on whether those whose lives are impacted recognize themselves clearly in its story. By authentically amplifying diverse voices, explicitly connecting ESG initiatives to broader sustainability goals, and developing narratives rooted in real-world experiences, we can foster the trust, legitimacy, and collective commitment necessary for meaningful and lasting progress.
By Antoinette de Crombrugghe May 15, 2025
I belong to a generation raised in the shadow of the climate crisis. But it wasn’t something we were taught in school. It wasn’t part of our curriculum, our standardized tests, our childhood vocabulary. We came across it slowly, in fragments, through social media, activism, panic headlines, and documentaries. We educated ourselves. We connected the dots. And still, many of us are figuring out how to carry this knowledge and how to live with it without being crushed by it.
PHOTO: Ana Bachurova | Pléneau Island, 65°06.6’S / 064°04.0’W
By Ana Bachurova March 20, 2025
After recent travels in Antarctica, UNEP-FI Energy Efficiency Lead Ana Bachurova, M.Sc., MBA shares learnings and insights into our current environmental realities and how practitioners in sustainable development can advance positive impacts.
More blog posts