An insight piece with Dr Alan Whittle, Resolve ESG fund consultant
Alan argues the investment case for sustainable investing has strengthened, not weakened – attention on environmental and social impact is growing, not fading, and the case rests on identifying which companies will prove resilient over the next decade, not on ideology.
With sustainability a political football in some quarters, it would be easy to conclude the moment has passed. Alan argues the opposite – and makes the case on investment grounds, not ideological ones.
There is a certain irony in debating whether now is the right time to invest sustainably. The context keeps making the argument on its own. Recording this in the middle of one of the most severe heatwaves in decades, with the prospect of a strong El Niño ahead, Alan’s point is that the underlying data is not really in dispute.
The science, he argues, is far less controversial than the politics that swirls around it — and the direction of travel is clear enough that ignoring it makes little investment sense.
“So why would we not want to invest now when there is going to be more focus?”
— Dr Alan Whittle
The logic is straightforward. Attention on the environmental impact of investments is only going to grow, not fade. And the consequences are not solely environmental 0 they are social and economic too. A warming world is not an abstraction; it feeds directly into how people live and what things cost.
Why does Alan call this a ‘pivotal window’ rather than alarmism?
Quick answer: Because the case rests on long-term thinking, not short-term returns – identifying which companies and ways of living will prove resilient over the next five to ten years, which Alan frames as ordinary investment sense rather than climate alarmism.
Alan’s framing is that we are at a turning point, with the next five to ten years making these issues steadily more present in everyday life. The investment conclusion he draws is deliberately undramatic.
“I don’t think this is climate alarmism or anything like that. I think it is just good investment sense.”
— Dr Alan Whittle
The case rests on long-term thinking rather than short-term returns — identifying which companies, and which ways of living, will prove resilient over the coming decade and beyond. Investing now in the businesses already building for that world is, on this reading, simply sound investing. We all like to describe ourselves as long-term investors; this is what acting like one looks like.
Isn’t investing this way just a political statement?
Alan argues it doesn’t have to be – the case for an environmental, social and governance lens stands on its own investment logic: avoiding companies that are badly governed or that undermine their own long-term value.
For some, investing this way feels like planting a flag. It is a fair thing to raise, and Alan meets it directly rather than dodging it.
Politics comes into everything we do, and some people do see this as taking a political stance with their investments. But it doesn’t have to be about that. The positives of investing with an environmental, social and governance lens stand up on their own terms: you wouldn’t invest in a company that was badly governed, or one systematically destroying its own value by ignoring the environmental and social realities of how it operates.
What does it mean to reframe ESG as ‘corporate resilience’?
It means judging a company by how resilient it is to environmental change, social pressure and its own governance quality – a lens about where value lies and what can damage it, rather than a particular worldview.
There has been a push back against ESG as a concept. One response Alan finds compelling is the reframing of ESG as “corporate resilience” – because at its core, that is what it measures: how resilient a company is in the face of environmental change, social pressures and its own governance.
Seen this way, this isn’t anchored on a particular worldview, it’s about understanding where value lies and what can damage it.
“It’s how resilient is this company in the face of environmental change, social issues, and is it resilient from a governance perspective?”
— Dr Alan Whittle
Considered from this perspective as resilience, the case comes back to protection of value, both in terms of investor value and more widely.
FAQs
Is sustainable investing just a political statement?
It doesn’t have to be. The investment case for an environmental, social and governance lens stands on ordinary investment logic — avoiding companies that are badly governed or that undermine their own long-term value.
What is meant by ESG as ‘corporate resilience’?
It’s a way of judging a company by how resilient it is to environmental change, social pressure and its own governance — a lens on where value lies and what could damage it, rather than a particular ideology.
Is now still a good time to invest sustainably?
Alan argues yes – attention on environmental and social impact is growing rather than fading, and the case for investing now rests on identifying which companies will prove resilient over the next decade.
Disclaimers
- The value of your investments can go down as well as up, so you could get back less than you invested.
- Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance
- Forecasts and forward-looking statements are not a reliable indicator of future performance
- The information here is for general guidance only and does not constitute personal financial advice. If you are unsure whether an investment is suitable for you, please speak to your Becketts adviser.
- Approved by Becketts FS Ltd 02/09/2026. Becketts is a trading name of Becketts FS Ltd, authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA No. 409051)
