登录新浪财经APP 搜索【信披】查看更多考评等级大圣配资
专题：对话ESG全球领导者
新浪财经ESG评级中心提供包括资讯、报告、培训、咨询等在内的14项ESG服务，助力上市公司传播ESG理念，提升ESG可持续发展表现。点击查看【ESG评级中心服务手册】文 | 新浪财经 李欣然
在当今全球商业图景中，可持续发展、人工智能（以下简称AI）与能源转型正在重塑企业生存与竞争的底层逻辑。一方面，ESG从舆论热词演变为驱动营收增长的核心商业考量；另一方面，脱碳进程与AI技术深度融合，正在重新定义产业格局与价值创造方式。与此同时，作为全球最大碳排放国与清洁技术制造中心，中国在这场变革中扮演着矛盾而关键的双重角色——既是挑战的中心，也是解决方案的枢纽。
在此背景下，新浪财经与德勤亚太区可持续发展主管合伙人威尔·西蒙斯 （Will Symons）进行了对话，系统探讨了这场多维变革的内在脉络。从ESG的本质回归到净零转型的实施路径，从AI的治理框架到中国在全球气候治理中的特殊地位，西蒙斯为企业如何在这场深刻变革中把握风险、创造价值提供了具有实操意义的行动路线图。
德勤亚太区可持续发展主管合伙人威尔·西蒙斯 （Will Symons）
褪去包装，回归商业：ESG的本质是营收驱动
西蒙斯指出，尽管过去几年围绕ESG、可持续发展和气候问题的公开论调有所转变，但企业的实际行动并未改变。他强调，这正是《2025年高管可持续报告》所凸显的核心发现。他注意到企业动机发生了显著演变：十年前，企业领导者常将品牌、传播或营销列为推动可持续发展举措的关键动力，而本次调查清楚地表明，如今首要动机已转变为商业考量。事实上，大部分参与问卷调查的高管将营收增长视为他们进行可持续发展相关投资的主要原因。
西蒙斯表示，企业公开宣扬其ESG或可持续发展目标所能获得的预期效益近年来已有所减弱。但他同时强调，企业底层的行动部署始终保持着连贯性。基于在该领域25年的经验，西蒙斯谈到，他从未见过客户实际报告的行动与公众及媒体讨论基调之间存在如此巨大的偏差。他认为，仅仅依据公开声明来解读企业的ESG行动，已构成一种根本性的误判。
西蒙斯解释说，可持续发展之所以仍是企业优先事项，原因在于商业投资驱动力实则有所加强。尽管公开言论和某些市场观念可能已经变化，但企业以风险与回报为核心的根本逻辑并未动摇。西蒙斯通过一个事例生动阐释了这一观点：去年在一次亚太区首席财务官的重要集会中，他询问与会者ESG是否正变得不再重要、企业是否正在缩减气候投资。数位首席财务官当即回应：“不，一切如常。”在西蒙斯看来，这正是对当前形势最有力的概括。
他总结道，企业之所以持续投入，是因为与可持续发展和气候相关的商业迫切性——无论是机遇还是风险——只增不减。一个例外是部分涉足美国市场的企业，西蒙斯指出，过去十二个月中，这些企业所处的风险回报平衡及对可持续发展议题的关注程度已发生明显变化。
脱碳已是大势所趋，企业应主动谋划转型机遇
西蒙斯强调，我们必须认清一个基本现实：亚太地区各国政府均致力于实现净零排放目标——其中大多数国家以2050年为限，而中国的目标是2060年。他断言，社会实现净零目标的唯一可行路径在于法规监管。这一必要性源于传统化石燃料当前相较于新能源所具有的经济优势。若没有通过审慎的监管干预来重塑市场激励与抑制机制，系统性的脱碳将无法实现。因此，西蒙斯着重指出，企业——从中小企业到大型跨国公司——都必须认识到，迈向净零排放的监管驱动才刚刚开始。
他阐述了有效监管的两项核心原则。首先，政府必须精益校准其监管对策，以能真正促成转型的速度来实现预期成果。此类监管的目的在于改变企业行为，将此前外部化的成本（例如污染）内部化，并减轻可持续行业面临成本压力，从而将激励结构转向净零目标。其次，西蒙斯谈及具体的政策调整，例如欧盟《综合法案》改革中缩减了部分《企业可持续发展报告指令》的要求。他认为这并非是对气候承诺的退缩，而是为了将披露规则的重点更集中于取得切实成果。欧盟的可持续发展雄心依然坚定，但其机制正被优化，以追求更高的精准度和效力。
除成本考量外，西蒙斯着重指出了这一转型所创造的重大机遇。他以澳大利亚的能源转型作为具体例证进行说明。通过重新平衡激励措施，政府推动了从煤炭向可再生能源的转变，特别是通过对屋顶太阳能的补贴政策。这项政策催生了一个全新的市场：澳大利亚太阳能安装企业的数量从二十年前的约400家激增至如今超过10,000家，其中绝大多数是小型企业，创造了大量的直接就业岗位。虽然依赖煤炭的传统企业面临市场流失，但最终结果是创造了新的经济价值和就业机会。
西蒙斯总结道，企业必须认清政府政策的明确方向。脱碳路线图是清晰的，尽管推进步伐可能会根据经济状况、地缘政治和竞争力关切等因素进行调整——欧盟的政策校准正是基于这些考量。但这并不意味着建议立即剥离目前仍具盈利能力的资产（如煤电厂），它们对维持电网稳定仍属必要。然而，远离煤炭、转向清洁能源的长期趋势是确定的，这既会给传统企业带来转型风险，也为各种规模的企业创造了巨大机遇。他建议企业不要局限于狭隘的成本-风险视角，而应积极把握这场由政策驱动的转型所创造的机遇。
主动治理，战略融入：AI时代企业不能只做技术接受者
在探讨当下最热门的AI 话题时，西蒙斯将问题拆解为两个相互关联的维度：一是AI对工作与社会带来的颠覆性影响，二是AI在可持续发展与气候行动领域所扮演的复杂角色。
他指出，生成式AI正在从根本上重塑工作形态，催生出他所称的“数字劳动力”。在他看来，这一转变要求组织彻底重新思考对劳动和价值创造的认知。随着新应用和商业模式的涌现，西蒙斯强调，必须将一系列关键议题置于首位——包括治理、伦理、韧性、隐私、安全与法律合规。在他看来，透明与信任必须成为这片新科技疆域的基石。
为驾驭这一快速演进的领域，西蒙斯建议组织采取审慎而有章法的策略。他认为企业首先应建立强健且动态的AI治理框架，在紧跟监管发展的同时，持续评估相关政策、原则与控制机制。除内部治理外，他敦促企业积极融入更广泛的AI生态系统——涵盖开发者、部署方、监管机构与客户——而非仅仅被动采用技术。这种主动姿态能使企业以符合自身战略利益的方式，参与塑造新兴市场。
此外，西蒙斯强调企业需从单纯规避风险转向主动管理风险，尤其要注重在内部培养必要的技能与人才。最后，他特别指出清晰的沟通与组织准备至关重要，主张应向员工和客户透明地阐述AI战略，并辅以情景规划、针对性技能重塑等实际举措。
谈及AI在气候行动中的应用，西蒙斯注意到观念上已出现显著转变。他承认AI基础设施——尤其是数据中心——消耗大量能源，但同时指出其推动气候行动的潜力更为巨大。根据他的分析，AI的解析能力能够驱动能源系统实现变革性增效，例如优化物流体系、提升可再生能源并网效率，从而为脱碳进程带来显著的净正效益。
为确保这一潜力得以实现，西蒙斯强调必须审慎处理AI自身的环境足迹。他提及一份即将发布的报告，该报告聚焦于协调数据中心扩张与电网脱碳之间的矛盾，并预览了几条战略路径：包括最大化就地可再生能源发电、以刺激新能源投资的方式采购绿色电力，以及签订长期购电协议以在平抑价格波动的同时保障清洁能源供应。
他还指出，将数据中心设置在规划中的可再生能源园区已成为日益明显的趋势——这些区域的电网基础设施正为迎接清洁能源而升级。此外，西蒙斯强调了智能调节计算负载的可行性：将非实时敏感的计算任务转移至可再生能源供电最充裕的时段，从而提升电网稳定性与可再生能源消纳率。
总而言之，西蒙斯总结道：组织必须推行目标明确、系统周全的AI战略，其核心应立足于治理架构、生态协作、人才储备与透明沟通。与此同时，支撑AI革命的基础设施——尤其是数据中心——也必须以同等清晰的战略视野进行规划与建设，从而确保其发展不仅顺应全球向可持续能源转型的趋势，更能够主动加速这一进程。
排放者与解决者：中国是实现全球净零目标的关键力量
在将焦点转向中国时，西蒙斯强调，中国通过太阳能电池板、风力涡轮机、电池和电解槽等产品无可比拟的大规模制造，数十年来一直在全球脱碳中扮演着重要角色，且这一作用仍在持续增强。他指出，中国规模化制造的核心意义在于，它通过让全球能够负担得起关键技术，从根本上推动了世界范围的脱碳进程。尽管他承认中国作为全球最大排放国，其排放量占全球近三分之一，但他同时强调，这也使中国成为应对气候变化斗争的关键核心区，并且是实现全球净零目标最重要的国家。西蒙斯特别指出，即将于三月发布的中国“十五五”规划至关重要，它将设定新的能源与气候目标，是影响全局的关键节点。
关于中国企业在可持续发展道路上的重点方向大圣配资，西蒙斯归纳出以下几个关键维度：
首先，他指出了向强制性的、与国际可持续发展准则理事会（International Sustainability Standards Board，简称ISSB）标准接轨的可持续发展报告制度的重大转变。他认为，与历经数十年完善的财务报告体系相比，大型企业构建这类可持续发展报告系统的时间极为有限，因此这一转型任务艰巨。
其次，他强调ESG必须完全融入核心业务运营，而非仅仅作为附加项。这需要将可持续发展深度纳入绩效指标、董事会治理和高管激励机制，顺应全球趋势，让首席可持续发展官成为企业内部的核心战略顾问。
第三，在肯定碳问题是重中之重的同时，西蒙斯建议中国企业拓宽视野，将关注点延伸到水、生物多样性、社会层面以及“双重重要性”原则。他提到一些新兴的最佳实践，例如领先企业已开始自愿依据自然相关财务信息披露工作组（Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures，简称TNFD）的框架进行披露，他认为这是一个积极的信号。
第四，他建议加强价值链脱碳。由于面临欧盟碳边境调节机制（Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism，简称CBAM）等外部压力，许多中国企业已开始关注这一点。与供应商合作降低隐含碳排放，被视作一项能够长期降低风险与成本的战略。
第五，西蒙斯认为中国企业拥有利用国内技术进步的巨大机遇，可以借助AI、数据平台和分析工具来模拟排放、优化运营并增强韧性。他援引了一份近期德勤报告中的具体案例，该报告发现，若在全球范围内利用AI提升基础设施韧性，到2050年或可避免因极端天气造成的超过700亿美元损失。
最后，他倡导企业采取主动参与和协作的策略——与政策制定者、标准制定者以及整个价值链伙伴合作，共同促成有利的监管环境，确保企业不仅是转型的接受者，更是积极的参与者，从而开辟长期价值创造的道路。
脱碳与AI整合将定义未来商业格局
在探讨可持续商业的未来时，西蒙斯指出了两个相互关联、将决定企业成败的核心大趋势。
首先，他明确指出，脱碳与追求净零排放是所有企业的首要任务。他认为，那些制定了清晰的战略路线图、能妥善应对净零转型途中风险与机遇的企业，将成为最终的赢家。他强调，这一转型是我们这个时代的大趋势，其方向是明确无疑的：全球经济正在向净零迈进，这将同时带来巨大的风险与前所未有的机遇。他相信，无论短期政治言论或选举周期如何变化，这一轨迹都将持续。
其次，西蒙斯强调了AI的变革性整合。在他看来，将AI嵌入业务运营核心所带来的机遇是巨大的。他指出，成功不会来自浅尝辄止的试验，而源于从根本上重新思考AI如何能改造商业模式，从而驱动营收和利润增长。他将驾驭AI与应对可持续发展议题相提并论：两者都要求企业将其视为关键而复杂的商业议题，并以清醒的战略意图来对待——充分理解其中的风险与机遇至关重要。
西蒙斯承认，同时驾驭这两大趋势是复杂的，尤其对那些仍将可持续发展视为较新范式的企业而言。然而，他欣喜地看到，一个重大转变已经发生：越来越多的企业已从抱有愿望转向采取具体行动。可持续发展不再仅仅是讨论的话题，而是必须融入核心决策的当务之急。
他总结道，关键的挑战已不再是决定是否追求净零，而是如何在一个不确定的政治与监管环境中，以最大化股东回报并降低风险的方式来实现它。为了在这条方向明确但进程多变的道路上顺利前行，西蒙斯强调，运用情景分析等工具，并主动与监管机构、客户、合作伙伴等所有塑造市场的利益相关方进行沟通，具有至关重要的意义。他认为，这一做法是实现长期价值最大化的关键。
以下为英文原文：
Beyond the Hype: ESG is Now Revenue-Driven
Symons observes that while public rhetoric around ESG, sustainability, and climate has shifted over the past few years, corporate action has not. This, he emphasizes, is the core finding highlighted by the 2025 C-Suite Sustainability Report. He notes a significant evolution in corporate motivation: whereas a decade ago, business leaders often cited brand, communications, or marketing as key drivers for sustainability initiatives, the survey now clearly shows that the primary motivation has become commercial. In fact, a large proportion of respondents identified revenue generation as their main reason for pursuing sustainability-related investments.
Symons states that the perceived benefit for corporations to publicly tout their ESG or sustainability goals has diminished recently. However, he stresses that their underlying actions have remained consistent. Drawing on 25 years of experience in the field, Symons remarks that he has never seen such a wide gap between what clients report doing and the tone of the public and media discourse. He believes there has been a fundamental misreading of corporate ESG action based solely on public statements.
The reason sustainability remains a top priority, Symons explains, is that the business drivers for investment have, if anything, strengthened. While public rhetoric and some market ideologies may have changed, the core corporate rationale—centered on risk and reward—has not. Symons illustrates this point with an anecdote: last year, during a significant gathering of Asia-Pacific CFOs, he asked if ESG was becoming less important and if clients were winding back climate investments. In response, several CFOs simply stated, "No, nothing's changed." To Symons, this was an eloquent summary of the current situation.
He concludes that clients continue to invest because the business imperatives related to sustainability and climate—both opportunities and risks—have only intensified. An exception, he notes, is for some clients exposed to the U.S. market, where the risk-reward balance and level of interest in sustainability have clearly shifted in the past twelve months.
With decarbonization now an unstoppable force, businesses need to actively plan for the opportunities inherent in this transformation
Symons emphasizes that a fundamental reality must be recognized: all Asia-Pacific governments are committed to net-zero targets—mostly by 2050, with China aiming for 2060. He asserts that the only viable path for society to achieve these goals is through regulation. This necessity stems from the current economic advantage held by incumbent fossil fuels over new energy sources. Without deliberate regulatory intervention to reshape market incentives and disincentives, systemic decarbonization will not occur. Therefore, Symons stresses that businesses—from small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to large multinationals—must understand that the regulatory drive toward net zero has only just begun.
He outlines two core principles for effective regulation. First, governments must precisely calibrate their regulatory responses to achieve desired outcomes at a pace that enables genuine transformation. The purpose of such regulation is to alter business behavior by internalizing previously externalized costs (e.g., pollution) and reducing cost pressures in sustainable sectors, thereby shifting the incentive structure toward net zero. Second, Symons addresses specific policy adjustments, such as the EU Omnibus reforms which scaled back some CSRD requirements. He interprets this not as a retreat from climate commitments, but as an effort to sharply focus disclosure rules on achieving tangible outcomes. The EU's sustainability ambitions remain firm, but the mechanisms are being refined for greater precision and effectiveness.
Beyond costs, Symons highlights the significant opportunities created by this transition. He illustrates this with the concrete example of Australia's energy shift. By rebalancing incentives, the government spurred a move from coal to renewables, notably through subsidies for rooftop solar. This policy created an entirely new market: the number of solar installation businesses in Australia exploded from around 400 two decades ago to over 10,000 today, predominantly small enterprises, generating substantial direct employment. While coal-dependent incumbents faced market loss, the net result was new economic value and job creation.
Symons concludes that companies must recognize the unequivocal direction of government policy. The decarbonization roadmap is clear, though the pace may adapt to economic conditions, geopolitics, and competitiveness concerns—factors behind calibrations like the EU's. This doesn't mean advising immediate divestment from currently profitable assets like coal-fired power stations, which remain essential for grid stability. However, the long-term trajectory away from coal toward cleaner energy is certain, creating both transition risks for incumbents and vast opportunities for businesses of all sizes. He advises companies to look beyond a narrow cost-risk lens and actively engage with the opportunities engineered by this policy-driven transformation.
Proactive Governance, Strategic Integration: Enterprises Must Move Beyond Being Mere Technology Takers in the AI Era
When discussing AI, Symons breaks down the issue into two interconnected dimensions: its transformative impact on work and society, and its complex role at the intersection of sustainability and climate action.
He observes that generative AI is fundamentally reshaping the nature of work, giving rise to what he terms a "digital workforce." This shift, in his view, demands a fundamental rethinking of how organizations conceptualize labor and value creation. As new applications and business models emerge, Symons stresses that a host of critical considerations—including governance, ethics, resilience, privacy, security, and legal compliance—must be placed at the forefront. Above all, he emphasizes that transparency and trust must form the bedrock of this new technological landscape.
To navigate this rapidly evolving terrain, Symons advises organizations to adopt a deliberate and structured approach. He recommends that companies first establish robust and dynamic AI governance frameworks, continually assessing policies, principles, and controls while keeping pace with regulatory developments. Beyond internal governance, he urges firms to actively engage with the broader AI ecosystem—including developers, deployers, regulators, and customers—rather than acting as passive adopters. This proactive stance allows organizations to help shape emerging markets in alignment with their strategic interests.
Furthermore, Symons highlights the importance of moving beyond mere risk avoidance to proactive risk management, with a particular focus on cultivating the necessary skills and talent within the workforce. Finally, he underscores the need for clear communication and organizational readiness, advocating for transparency in AI strategy with both employees and customers, supported by practical measures like scenario planning and targeted reskilling initiatives.
Turning to the intersection of AI and climate, Symons notes a significant shift in perspective. While acknowledging that AI infrastructure, particularly data centers, consumes substantial energy, he argues that its potential to accelerate climate action is even greater. Based on his analysis, he asserts that AI's analytical capabilities can drive transformative efficiencies in energy systems, such as optimizing logistics and improving renewable integration, yielding a significantly positive net benefit for decarbonization.
To ensure this potential is realized, Symons stresses the need to thoughtfully address AI's own environmental footprint. He references an upcoming report focused on reconciling data center expansion with grid decarbonization, previewing several strategic pathways. These include maximizing the use of on-site renewable generation, procuring green power in a way that stimulates new renewable investment, and entering into long-term power purchase agreements to secure clean energy while mitigating price volatility.
He also points to the growing trend of co-locating data centers within designated renewable energy zones, where grid infrastructure is already being enhanced for clean energy. Additionally, Symons highlights the promise of intelligently shifting non-time-sensitive computing loads to periods when renewable electricity is most abundant, thereby supporting grid stability and higher renewable utilization.
In summary, Symons concludes that organizations must pursue intentional and holistic strategies for AI—grounded in governance, active ecosystem engagement, talent development, and transparent communication. Simultaneously, the infrastructure enabling the AI revolution, especially data centers, must be developed with equal intentionality, ensuring its growth is aligned with and even accelerates the global transition to a sustainable energy future.
From Major Emitter to Decisive Solution: China's Pivotal Role in Global Net-Zero Transition
Shifting focus to China, Symons draws on his deep familiarity with the market. He underscores China's decades-long role as a significant exporter of decarbonization to the world, driven by its unparalleled scale in manufacturing solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and electrolyzers—a role that is only accelerating. He asserts that China's scaled manufacturing is fundamentally enabling global decarbonization by making key technologies affordable worldwide. While acknowledging China as the world's largest emitter—accounting for nearly one-third of global emissions—he emphasizes that this makes the country "ground zero" in the climate fight and the most important nation for achieving global net-zero goals. Symons highlights the critical importance of China's upcoming 15th Five-Year Plan, expected in March, which will set new energy and climate targets.
Regarding the priorities for Chinese corporations, Symons outlines several key areas:
He first points to the major shift towards mandatory sustainability reporting aligned with ISSB standards, a transition he describes as a massive undertaking for large firms that have had far less time to develop such systems compared to financial reporting.
Second, he stresses that ESG must be fully integrated into core business operations, not treated as an add-on. This requires embedding sustainability into performance metrics, board governance, and executive incentives, following the global trend where the Chief Sustainability Officer acts as a key internal strategic advisor.
Third, while affirming carbon is the most critical issue, Symons urges Chinese companies to broaden their focus beyond carbon to encompass water, biodiversity, social dimensions, and the principle of double materiality. He cites emerging best practices, such as early adoption of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), as positive signs.
Fourth, he advises strengthening value chain decarbonization, a focus for many Chinese companies due to pressures like the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Collaborating with suppliers to reduce embedded carbon is framed as a long-term strategy for risk and cost reduction.
Fifth, Symons sees a major opportunity for Chinese firms to leverage domestic technological advancement, using AI, data platforms, and analytics to model emissions, optimize operations, and build resilience. He provides a concrete example from a recent Deloitte report, which found that using AI for infrastructure resilience globally could avert over $70 billion in losses from extreme weather in 2050.
Finally, he advocates for proactive engagement and collaboration—with policymakers, standard-setters, and across value chains—to help influence the regulatory environment and ensure companies are active participants in the transition, thereby securing a pathway to long-term value creation.
Decarbonization and AI integration will define the future business landscape
When discussing the future of sustainable business, Symons identifies two dominant, interconnected megatrends that will define corporate success.
First, he states unequivocally that decarbonization and the pursuit of net-zero must remain front and center for all businesses. He believes that companies with a clear, strategic roadmap for navigating the risks and opportunities on the path to net zero will be the ultimate winners. He emphasizes that this transition is the megatrend of our era, and its direction is unequivocal: the global economy is moving toward net zero, creating both massive risks and monumental opportunities. This trajectory, he asserts, will persist regardless of short-term political rhetoric or electoral cycles.
Second, Symons highlights the transformative integration of artificial intelligence. In his view, the opportunity to embed AI into the very core of business operations is immense. He stresses that success will not come from superficial experimentation but from fundamentally rethinking how AI can transform business models to drive revenue and profitability. He draws a parallel between mastering AI and addressing sustainability: both require companies to treat them as critical, complex business issues. Approaching them with clear-eyed strategic intent—fully understanding the associated risks and opportunities—is essential.
Symons acknowledges that navigating these dual trends is complex, especially for companies for whom sustainability remains a relatively new paradigm. However, he finds it encouraging that a significant shift has occurred: more companies have moved from aspiration to concrete action. Sustainability is no longer merely a topic for discussion but an imperative that must be integrated into core decision-making.
He concludes by noting that the critical challenge is no longer deciding whether to pursue net zero, but determining how to do so in a way that maximizes shareholder returns and mitigates risk within an uncertain political and regulatory landscape. To navigate this clear yet unpredictable pathway, Symons emphasizes the critical importance of tools like scenario analysis and proactive engagement with all market-shaping stakeholders—including regulators, customers, and partners. This approach, he believes, is key to maximizing long-term value creation.
新浪财经ESG评级中心简介
新浪财经ESG评级中心是业内首个中文ESG专业资讯和评级聚合平台，致力于宣传和推广可持续发展，责任投资，与ESG（环境、社会和公司治理）价值理念，传播ESG的企业实践行动和榜样力量，推动中国ESG事业的发展，促进中国ESG评估标准的建立和企业评级的提升。
依托ESG评级中心，新浪财经发布多只ESG创新指数，为关注企业ESG表现的投资者提供更多选择。同时，新浪财经成立中国ESG领导者组织论坛，携手中国ESG领导企业和合作伙伴，通过环境、社会和公司治理理念，推动建立适合中国时代特征的ESG评价标准体系，促进中国资产管理行业ESG投资发展。
海量资讯、精准解读，尽在新浪财经APP
责任编辑：李欣然 大圣配资
联合证券官网提示：文章来自网络，不代表本站观点。
