ESG exists because there's a market for that form of equity. That market is willing to buy equity that might even underperform the rest of the market, because it explicitly does perform in the metric these buyers care about.
There are already options if you strictly are focused on emissions, so I don't think this article is meaningful. The Economist is right-leaning and would certainly love to distract ESG equity buyers from their pesky concerns about social and corporate governance. My guess is that the target readership for The Economist is executives, and they would certainly love to make ESG scrutiny of their ballooning compensation go away.
There are already options if you strictly are focused on emissions, so I don't think this article is meaningful. The Economist is right-leaning and would certainly love to distract ESG equity buyers from their pesky concerns about social and corporate governance. My guess is that the target readership for The Economist is executives, and they would certainly love to make ESG scrutiny of their ballooning compensation go away.