ESG is no longer just a buzzword: it has become the new currency of corporate credibility. Investors, institutions, and stakeholders are demanding concrete data, transparency, and consistency. However, without a shared global standard, assessments remain fragmented and hard to compare, opening the door to arbitrary interpretations and greenwashing practices. In Italy, some schemes accredited by Accredia have introduced greater rigor and transparency, but the road toward a single ISO standard is still long. On this topic, we speak with Dr. Manolo Valori, Technical Director of CVI Italy, the Italian branch of the Slovak group CVI SRO.
By Roberta Imbimbo
Dr. Valori, what does ESG mean and why has it become so central for companies?
ESG encompasses three fundamental dimensions—environmental, social, and governance—which make it possible to assess an organization’s overall sustainability. Today it is no longer merely an ethical concept, but a strategic performance indicator. Investors and stakeholders demand transparency and accountability: integrating ESG principles into management models enables companies to strengthen resilience, mitigate risks, and increase market trust.
What are the main limitations of ESG assessments?
The main limitation is the absence of a single international standard, as exists for quality (ISO 9001), the environment (ISO 14001), or occupational health and safety (ISO 45001). There are numerous proprietary schemes, with methodologies and indicators that are not always comparable. Some ISO technical committees—particularly ISO/TC 322 “Sustainable Finance”—are working on defining global guidelines, but the process takes time and requires the consensus of multiple member countries. In this scenario, today two companies in the same sector can obtain different ESG results depending on the protocol used, due to the lack of uniform criteria and weighting. The result is a loss of coherence and, to some extent, credibility in the ESG certification market.
What is the situation in Italy?
In Italy, Accredia, the National Accreditation Body, has recognized some proprietary ESG assessment schemes (the Get It Fair ESG Rating Scheme, Ecomate ESG Rating, and ESG–SDGs Rating). All operate in accordance with the international standards ISO/IEC 17021-1 and ISO/IEC 17029, ensuring independence, competence, and traceability of the assessment process. However, each model adopts different analysis and weighting criteria, making it difficult to compare results across companies and sectors.
How can this fragmentation be overcome?
The most effective route is the definition of a specific ISO standard for ESG, recognized globally and applicable across all production sectors. A single standard would make it possible to harmonize assessment criteria, improving transparency, reliability, and comparability of ESG performance. This would allow companies to be measured against objective and verifiable parameters, with certifications of uniform value at the international level.
Are there similar precedents in the regulatory field?
Yes, a very significant example is occupational health and safety. Before the introduction of ISO 45001, there were protocols such as OHSAS 18001, which, although pursuing similar objectives, did not have ISO recognition. With the arrival of ISO 45001, the market finally had a universal reference, to which all operators gradually adapted. A similar path would also be desirable for ESG.
What advantages would a single certification system offer?
As mentioned, the benefits would be numerous: greater transparency in assessments, real comparability between companies, and the adoption of a common technical language. A unified system would also increase the credibility of the market, guaranteeing investors and institutions data that are consistent, verifiable, and based on methodologies recognized at the global level.
In conclusion, in your view, why is it crucial to arrive at a global ISO standard?
Because only a shared regulatory language can transform sustainability from a statement of intent into a concrete governance tool. The adoption of a single ISO standard would represent a decisive step toward a more transparent, competitive, and credible market, in which ESG performance is no longer a mere exercise in style, but the true measure of corporate value and responsibility. A long-awaited step that, if achieved, could finally give ESG the solidity it still lacks today.
