Search

This position paper argues that behavioral economics provides essential tools for bridging the gap between consumers' environmental values and their actual purchasing behaviors. Drawing on empirical research, Prof. Hochman demonstrates how psychological factors often prevent environmentally-conscious intentions from translating into green consumer choices.   The paper presents compelling evidence from two recent studies. The first reveals that simple taste testing can double consumer willingness to purchase aesthetically imperfect "ugly" produce – showing how direct sensory experience can overcome visual bias and potentially reduce significant food waste. The second study identifies a counterintuitive finding: consumers are generally more willing to sacrifice time than money for environmental benefits, despite money being renewable while time is not.   These findings support Prof. Hochman's central position: green consumer choices are driven less by environmental information or values, and more by subjective experience at the decision point. The paper advocates for practical applications of behavioral economics principles, including strategic placement of tasting stations, designing green defaults into purchasing systems, and simplifying environmental impact messaging.   For organizations committed to ESG principles, Prof. Hochman presents a clear stance: offering green alternatives isn't sufficient—these options must be perceived as accessible, worthwhile, and aligned with consumers' immediate needs. By incorporating psychological insights into business strategy, companies can create choice environments that enable consumers to act in accordance with environmental values without feeling they're making burdensome sacrifices. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog

This blog post, written by Prof. Hillel Schmid and Prof. Itay Greenshpan, explores the relationship between philanthropic foundations and environmental organizations in Israel. Drawing on recent research, the authors analyze the sources of funding for environmental NGOs and the structural dependencies that arise as a result. The post highlights how the limited number of philanthropic foundations operating in Israel—alongside a decline in government funding and insufficient corporate support—creates challenges for environmental organizations striving to maintain both financial stability and ideological independence. The authors offer several recommendations to strengthen the sector, including the development of new partnerships, diversification of funding sources, and efforts to build trust between donors and NGOs. They emphasize the importance of maintaining a balance between values and pragmatism in order to preserve the critical role of environmental organizations in Israeli society. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog.

This position paper explores the critical interplay between adaptation and mitigation as complementary strategies for effective climate risk management. The paper distinguishes between adaptation (managing preparedness for climate impacts) and mitigation (reducing factors causing climate change), showing how businesses and governments must balance short-term resilience with long-term risk reduction. Examining financing challenges, the analysis highlights how immediate climate impacts require emergency funds and public-private partnerships, while long-term transformation demands innovative financial instruments like green bonds and climate investment funds. The paper identifies key stakeholders — governments providing regulatory frameworks, regulators ensuring financial stability, and institutional bodies directing capital flows — and demonstrates how their coordinated action integrates physical risk management with transition risk management, as evidenced by recent Israeli initiatives like the Green Taxonomy and Banking Directive No. 345. By integrating these approaches, organizations can not only reduce climate risks but also unlock new economic opportunities within a sustainable green economy. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog

This post explores how political dynamics in the United States are shaping the availability and design of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investment products offered to the public—particularly through pension funds. As partisan divisions around ESG deepen, state-level political leadership is playing an increasingly active role in defining which investment options are promoted or restricted. Drawing on recent empirical studies, the post highlights a stark divide between Republican-led and Democratic-led states. While the latter tend to support broader access to ESG-aligned financial products, the former often impose limitations or even bans on them—citing concerns about politicization or financial performance. These regulatory decisions, often motivated by political ideology, may ultimately impact not only the range of choices available to savers, but also the long-term effectiveness of ESG strategies themselves. The post also discusses the legal and public implications of such political interference. A notable example is a recent court case involving American Airlines’ pension fund, where the balance between fiduciary duty and ESG preferences came under judicial review. This and similar cases point to a growing legal complexity in aligning ESG considerations with institutional responsibilities in polarized environments. Ultimately, the post raises important questions about who decides which investment products citizens are allowed to access, and whether ESG-related decisions should be driven by political agendas—or by evidence-based financial and sustainability considerations. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog.

In recent years, major figures in the tech industry have positioned themselves as champions of progressive values, including those reflected in ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) principles. However, this article explores a surprising shift: the increasing fusion between business leaders and political power structures, even under administrations whose policies may contradict those same progressive ideals. The authors examine how tech billionaires such as Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg have navigated the political landscape. They show how corporate leaders, once external actors advocating for change, are now becoming key players within government institutions. This movement raises complex questions about the authenticity of corporate ESG commitments, as well as about the risks to democratic processes when private economic interests and public governance become intertwined. Through recent examples and a critical lens, the article highlights the gradual erosion of boundaries between corporate power and state authority. It warns that what once seemed like a theoretical concern—capital increasingly controlling government—has now materialized into an observable and urgent phenomenon that challenges the ideals of democratic oversight, public accountability, and responsible governance. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog.

This paper advocates for implementing "green demolition" through selective deconstruction in Israel's urban renewal projects, highlighting environmental, social, and economic benefits. While Israel has embraced green building standards for new construction, the demolition phase remains largely overlooked in regulatory frameworks. Despite thousands of apartments being demolished annually, generating approximately 1.5 tons of waste per 10 square meters, pre-demolition deconstruction receives minimal incentives. Selective deconstruction—the controlled dismantling of buildings to enable reuse and recycling—could divert an estimated 700,000 tons of waste from landfills annually. The Just A Second Association proposes a three-pronged approach: engaging developers, working with regulators to create incentives, and raising public awareness. Key challenges include the need for regulatory changes, economic incentives, cost-benefit analysis, infrastructure development, and increased awareness. International examples from Germany, the Netherlands, the United States, and the European Union demonstrate successful implementation through various policy mechanisms. The paper concludes that integrating selective deconstruction into Israel's construction industry requires mandatory legislation, economic incentives, and public-private partnerships. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog

This position paper explores how the convergence of two major revolutions—the Impact Revolution and the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Revolution—is transforming the landscape of business competition. Using the collaboration between BMW and Toyota as a case study, the paper shows how global challenges are prompting companies to adopt coopetition—a strategic approach that integrates competition and cooperation. The Impact Revolution redefines the purpose of business to include not only financial profit but also social and environmental value, aligned with the UN's Agenda 2030. Meanwhile, AI enables smarter, faster, and more inclusive collaboration—by democratizing knowledge, optimizing global partnerships, and accelerating progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals. Together, these revolutions foster a new business paradigm, where competitive advantage lies in the ability to build high-impact strategic alliances. Despite challenges such as trust and value-sharing, coopetition—supported by AI—is emerging as a powerful tool for sustainable and systemic change. To read the full article, visit our Hebrew main blog

This position paper examines corporate responsibility and leadership in the post-ESG era,  the evolving debate surrounding ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) considerations and their impact on business practices, with reference to Robert G. Eccles' framework as discussed in the Harvard Business Review . We argue that companies should adopt a practical, balanced approach to ESG, recognizing the tension between single materiality (financial risks) and double materiality (corporate actions and social impact). A "one-size-fits-all" approach is inadequate; companies must prioritize clear, measurable goals and transparent reporting. By integrating both financial and social considerations, companies can enhance long-term competitive advantage. However, it is essential to assess ESG costs and benefits to align with broader strategic objectives. If the benefits outweigh the costs, companies gain a sustainable edge; if not, the competitive advantage is lost. Applying Robert G. Eccles' framework in Israel could help local companies navigate ESG challenges and capitalize on sustainability. These strategies should be tailored to each company’s competitive context, balancing social responsibility with financial performance. In the long term, businesses that effectively integrate ESG are likely see enhanced shareholder value, reinforcing the importance of sustainability in corporate strategy. To read the full post, visit our Hebrew main blog

This blog examines the ESG-based sustainable investment movement through a sociological and historical lens, based on an academic article published in the journal Regulation & Governance . Based on a four-year global study including 100 in-depth interviews with investment managers, analysts, activists, and corporate executives, we characterize ESG as a cross-sectoral movement that has gained prominence since 2015, especially following the Paris Agreement. We argue that ESG investing as a mechanism for global governance represents a myth—a set of unrealistic beliefs that profit-oriented investment can significantly change corporate behavior. This myth rests on three flawed assumptions: that environmental and social risks create financial risk; that ESG risks can be accurately quantified; and that corporations will meaningfully respond to shareholder ESG policies. Despite these limitations, the ESG movement has achieved substantial institutional traction, normalizing sustainability reporting and creating normative pressure within financial circles. The paper concludes that state intervention is essential for the ESG myth to become reality. Without regulatory mechanisms such as carbon taxation, green investment incentives, and expanded fiduciary duties for investment firms, the transformative potential of ESG investing will remain largely unrealized. *Rami Kaplan, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel **David L. Levy, University of Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Kaplan, R., & Levy, D. L. (2025). The rise of investor-driven climate governance: From myth to institution? Regulation & Governance . https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70000

Sustainability and resilience are prominent themes in social, economic, and political discourse, yet their relationship and practical implications often remain misunderstood. Sustainability broadly signifies achieving human prosperity within stable and supportive environmental conditions, whereas resilience emphasizes the capacity to endure, adapt, and maintain a desirable status quo amidst disruptions. Although these terms frequently appear interchangeable, substantial differences arise when assessing their implications for organizational strategies. Organizations frequently hesitate to fully embrace sustainability due to its inherent threat to established business models, operational competencies, and traditional investment practices. Companies often perceive the sustainability transition as disruptive to their proven economic viability and market resilience pathways. Conversely, organizations deeply committed to sustainability may encounter challenges sustaining market competitiveness, indicating that a balance between resilience and sustainability is crucial yet inherently complex. This Blog post, Based on Prof. Dror Etzion's research , introduces a configurational approach, outlining three distinct strategic pathways organizations may adopt to concurrently pursue sustainability and resilience: the Absorbtive, Transformative, and Adaptive pathways. Practical guidelines from this configurational perspective encourage managers and sustainability practitioners to evaluate their organization's initial sustainability position critically, challenge existing assumptions regarding resilience and sustainability alignment, strategically select the appropriate pathway, and cultivate an organizational culture conducive to ongoing learning and iterative improvement. The configurational approach proposed by this research highlights the complexity of aligning resilience and sustainability. It underlines that successful strategic alignment requires tailoring approaches to each organization's unique characteristics and conditions. Organizations can progressively achieve a resilient and sustainably viable state in the long term by appropriately selecting and committing to a strategic pathway. *Dror Etzion is a Grossman School of Business professor at the University of Vermont, United States.

This position paper examines the inherent tensions between ESG reporting requirements and traditional securities law disclosure frameworks, prompted by the SEC's voluntary suspension of its Climate Disclosure Rules in April 2024. The authors distinguish between the two reporting paradigms by contrasting "material information" (central to securities law and directly affecting investment decisions) with "important information" (the focus of ESG reporting, which may be socially significant but not financially material). They argue that securities laws were designed specifically to protect investors through disclosure of information material to investment decisions, not to advance broader social objectives. The paper identifies four fundamental incompatibilities between ESG and securities reporting: traditional securities frameworks already require disclosure of financially material climate risks; ESG-specific requirements impose significant costs with questionable investor benefits; applying uniform ESG requirements across different industries creates structural inconsistencies; and regulatory authorities may exceed their statutory mandates when expanding securities law beyond its traditional scope. Rather than forcing ESG concerns into securities law, the authors propose leveraging dedicated legal frameworks – environmental regulations for environmental concerns, labor laws for social issues, and corporate governance provisions for governance matters. This approach would focus on substantive compliance rather than mere reporting. As the ESG landscape evolves, the position paper advocates for maintaining the distinct purposes of different reporting regimes instead of expanding securities law materiality beyond its foundational principles. To read the full post, visit our Hebrew main blog

This article examines the evolving role of sustainability management in corporate strategy and operations. Based on presentations delivered at the "Sustainability Management - From Theory to Practice" conference organized by the Arison Center for ESG in collaboration with PwC Israel, the authors analyze how sustainability and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) factors have transcended mere regulatory compliance to become fundamental components of business strategy with direct implications for corporate success in competitive markets. The research demonstrates that recent regulatory shifts and heightened investor expectations have compelled organizations to adopt proactive sustainability management approaches that extend beyond basic reporting requirements. Drawing on PwC survey findings, the authors illustrate the transformative impact of these changes across three critical domains: organizational structures, investor preferences, and consumer behavior. The evidence suggests that investors increasingly favor companies implementing proactive climate policies, creating significant market incentives for sustainability integration. This preference trend, combined with increasingly stringent regulatory demands, necessitates the strategic positioning of Chief Sustainability Officers (CSOs) as pivotal strategic actors within corporate leadership structures. Yair Avidan, Chairman of the Advisory Committee and Head of the Fellows Forum, Arison Center for ESG, Reichman University. Eran Raz, Partner and Head of ESG and Climate, PwC Israel.