Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles have become a dominant framework for evaluating corporate sustainability. However, despite the widespread adoption of ESG, issues such as greenwashing, inconsistent accountability, persistent social and environmental injustices, and low trust remain unresolved. To address these gaps, this conceptual paper introduces a value-based ESG framework (V-ESG), which integrates 10 values—stewardship, accountability, leadership, transformation, compassion, justice, community wellbeing, integrity, trust and interconnectedness into ESG reporting. Through a multi-stakeholder engagement, we gathered diverse perspectives from selected participants from various sectors, including finance, energy, academia, policy, and social development to enhance the understanding process of this new reporting approach. An identification of recurring stakeholder perspectives and themes was conducted to prioritize core values, which were then mapped onto the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals to ensure alignment with global sustainability reporting framework. Additionally, a literature review reinforced the selection of values and development of measurement indicators for V-ESG implementation. The conceptual contribution suggests that values-driven sustainability may strengthen long-term institutional trust, corporate responsibility, and community impact. The framework could enhance traditional ESG by embedding ethical leadership, social justice, and governance transparency into sustainability strategies. By promoting a holistic, resilient, and adaptive approach, V-ESG could offer a robust alternative to traditional ESG, ensuring that businesses and investment practices not only comply with regulatory standards but also uphold ethical imperatives for a just and sustainable future. There is also a need to develop capacity of leaders and corporate teams in enhancing awareness and capability on V-ESG as a measurement tool for voluntary certification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chiawo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: