"At the United Nations, the 2030 Agenda remains our common language for collective action," declares Nils PEDERSEN

As geopolitical rivalries intensify and the world enters a more fragmented era, how can companies remain aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals? In this interview, Nils Pedersen, Executive Director of the United Nations Global Compact – Network France, shares his insights following his keynote at the ESSEC Institute for Geopolitics & Business conference “Geopolitics of the Backlash: How Business Navigates Disruptions and Power Plays — Five Years into the 2030 Agenda”. He argues that resilience and sustainability are not competing imperatives but deeply interconnected. Pedersen highlights how transparency, values-based competitiveness, and collective action are essential for businesses to withstand systemic shocks and to keep advancing a sustainable global economy in an age of uncertainty.

Five years into the 2030 Agenda, how do you assess the impact of mounting geopolitical rivalries on the ability of companies to align with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?

Nils PEDERSEN: Geopolitical instability, economic shocks, the lingering effects of COVID-19, and ongoing conflicts are all significantly hampering progress toward the SDGs. Companies, too, are directly experiencing the repercussions of these overlapping crises on their sustainability journeys. Yet, despite these headwinds, reports show that the 2030 Agenda has still driven meaningful advances in areas such as health, equality, infrastructure, and biodiversity. These achievements remind us that efforts must not falter, but rather intensify. The Agenda and its goals continue to provide a robust framework—a common language—for governments, businesses, and civil society to mobilize collective action.

The ESSEC Institute warns of a potential monetary competitiveness shock caused by US financial instability and dollar devaluation. How should companies engaged in the Global Compact anticipate and mitigate such systemic risks?

N.P.: With the roll-out of our enhanced Communication on Progress (CoP), transparency and reporting have become central to Global Compact participation. More than a compliance exercise, this mechanism provides companies with a powerful tool to refine their strategies, anticipate systemic risks, and strengthen resilience in times of uncertainty. At UN Global Compact Network France, we also support businesses in building more sustainable supply chains. This not only improves their environmental and social performance but also reinforces the long-term robustness and competitiveness of their business models.

The Turnberry negotiations revealed a pattern of US economic pressure on Europe—tariffs, LNG contracts, forced investments. How can responsible businesses reconcile resilience with long-term sustainability in such a context?

N.P.: Resilience and sustainability should not be viewed as contradictory. On the contrary, true resilience is grounded in sustainability. Commitments to climate goals, labor standards, and transparency cannot be traded off for short-term gains. For example, by diversifying their energy sources and scaling up renewable capacity, European companies can reduce dependence on imported liquefied natural gas while enhancing sustainability. In an era of proliferating trade barriers, this is also an opportunity to ensure that value creation is shared more equitably in the regions where companies operate.

China’s strategy of heavy subsidies and deep market penetration has increased Europe’s dependence in critical sectors such as energy transition, AI, and semiconductors. How can companies balance competitiveness and responsibility under such asymmetric conditions?

N.P.: In facing asymmetric competition, Europe risks undermining labor and environmental standards if it competes only on cost. Instead, companies must innovate and build value through a form of competitiveness rooted in values—higher quality, stronger ESG practices, and careful management of structural dependencies. This approach should be reinforced by supporting and aligning with EU initiatives such as the European Chips Act and the Net-Zero Industry Act, which aim to reduce dependencies, strengthen industrial resilience, and foster sustainable growth.

With geopolitical tensions threatening ESG frameworks—from US pushback on Diversity & Inclusion to pressures on CSRD and CBAM—how can the Global Compact safeguard responsible business practices without putting firms at a disadvantage?

N.P.: We have not observed any decline in company participation; in fact, Networks in Europe and North America continue to grow. This resilience reflects the fact that the Global Compact is built on universal principles, not short-term calculations. Our model rests on the conviction that durable prosperity requires transparency, shared rules, and a strong ethical foundation—above all, one that is human-centered. Data from our Communication on Progress confirms this: the longer companies remain engaged in the Global Compact, the stronger their implementation of ESG practices becomes.

What role should corporate coalitions like Global Compact Network France play in building resilience to shocks in global value chains, from rare earth supply risks to potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait?

N.P.: As the largest corporate sustainability initiative in France—and one of the largest globally—we are uniquely positioned to drive collective action at local, national, and regional levels. Our integration within the UN system allows us to work closely with institutional actors, serving as a bridge between companies, governments, international organizations, civil society, and local stakeholders. This role enables us to align corporate risk mitigation with broader security priorities, fostering coordinated strategies that not only advance sustainability but also address the wider geopolitical challenges of our time.

Do you believe that corporate governance structures should evolve—perhaps by creating roles such as a “Chief Geopolitics Officer”—to embed geopolitical foresight into business responsibility and SDG alignment?

N.P.: Corporate governance is always evolving as companies adapt to new realities. Sustainability departments that were once standalone are now integrated into strategic units such as finance or corporate strategy. This shift shows that CSR has become a central issue, without losing sight of specific areas like the environment or human rights. At the same time, crises such as the war in Ukraine have underscored the importance of ensuring business continuity during geopolitical shocks. These tensions inevitably influence companies’ social and environmental policies, making it essential to anticipate and address them proactively.

Looking ahead, what practical steps can companies take to remain true to the spirit of the Global Compact—human rights, labor, environment, anti-corruption—while navigating an increasingly brutal and fragmented global economy?

N.P.: Companies that embed the principles of the Global Compact and the SDGs at the core of their strategies are better equipped to withstand today’s turbulent environment and demonstrate credibility with their stakeholders. They also play a critical role in shaping a sustainable global economy—mobilizing investment, accelerating public–private partnerships, and contributing to the 2030 Agenda. Moreover, businesses can help build fair and effective regulatory frameworks, creating a more favorable environment for sustainable growth. In the end, global competition is not just about markets—it is also about upholding universally shared values.

ABOUT THE ESSEC INSTITUTE FOR GEOPOLITICS & BUSINESS

Created in 2024 by ESSEC, the Institute for Geopolitics & Business examines how geopolitical shocks reshape companies’ economic models.

Operating across ESSEC Business School’s campuses in France, Morocco, and Singapore, it brings a tri-continental perspective to what drives corporate competitiveness in the post-globalization era: vigilance, resilience, independence.

It feeds into ESSEC’s degree programs, executive education, and research to foster a new generation of geopolitics-proof business leaders capable of steering and growing companies amid an increasingly brutalized world.

Rooted in ESSEC’s academic excellence, the Institute draws on 4 flagship centers:

• the IRENE Center for Negotiation & Mediation,
• the Center for Geopolitics, Defense & Leadership,
• the Center for European Law & Economics, and
• the Chair Business & Industry in Africa.

Contact: Thomas FRIANG, Executive Director of the ESSEC Institute for Geopolitics & Business - friang@essec.edu