The board plays a pivotal role in ESG oversight by defining structural governance mechanisms aligned with company-specific ESG priorities.
Should ESG oversight rest with a dedicated committee or be delegated across existing committees (audit, risk, sustainability, compensation)?
by Iris Pardillo -
Number of replies: 3
In reply to Iris Pardillo
Re: Should ESG oversight rest with a dedicated committee or be delegated across existing committees (audit, risk, sustainability, compensation)?
by Leela Julong -
You’ve raised a crucial governance challenge, Iris. A dedicated ESG committee can ensure focused oversight and strategic clarity—especially for complex or evolving ESG agendas. But leveraging existing committees allows ESG to be embedded across business functions. Ultimately, it’s about finding the right balance based on your company’s ESG maturity and priorities. Great conversation starter!
In reply to Iris Pardillo
Re: Should ESG oversight rest with a dedicated committee or be delegated across existing committees (audit, risk, sustainability, compensation)?
by Mary Njeri Gakuo -
Where ESG sits depends on how important it is to your business. A special ESG committee shows you take it seriously and makes it clear who’s in charge, but it can also create extra work and feel separate. Spreading ESG across existing committees keeps it part of everyday work but can make roles less clear. Many boards now pick a mix: one committee leads on ESG and the others handle parts that fit their area.
In reply to Mary Njeri Gakuo
Re: Should ESG oversight rest with a dedicated committee or be delegated across existing committees (audit, risk, sustainability, compensation)?
by Leela Julong -
Thanks for framing this so clearly, Mary. A hybrid model often works best, one lead committee ensures strategic focus and accountability, while others integrate ESG into their core mandates. To avoid fragmentation, it helps to define clear ESG roles across committees and ensure regular cross-committee dialogue.