The Intrinsic Link Between Sustainability and ESGs

November 2, 2021

November 2, 2021


Today's guest blog was written by ISRI’s VP of Sustainability, Cheryl T. Coleman. The original post can be read here.


For years, sustainability was synonymous with environment, but the concept of sustainability has evolved to encompass so much more. There was, and remains, a huge emphasis on preserving natural resources, environmental compliance, and safety. Today, though, sustainability is also about having a business culture that:

  • Protects the environment;
  • Ensures a diverse staff that receive wages that allow them to thrive, and;
  • Operates with governing principles starting at the CEO level that include business ethics; cybersecurity; health and safety of employees and surrounding communities; and enterprise risk management including continuous monitoring of all threats and opportunities.


We often see these principles summed up through environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria, which are a set of standards for a company’s operations that many investors use to screen potential investments. The three components of ESGs are complementary and represent a company’s responsibility to its employees, investors, and the broader society. Investors are increasingly applying these non-financial factors as part of their analysis process to identify material risks and growth opportunities. Environmental assesses the risk of a company, its suppliers, and partners from climate events, and its impact on the physical environment. Social assesses a company’s relative social impact and associated risk from societal actions, including from its direct and indirect employees, customers, and the communities in which it operates. Governance assesses the timing and quality of decision-making, governance structure, and the distribution of rights and responsibilities across different stakeholder groups.


Regulations are one of the main elements driving companies to make sure their ESG criteria meet today’s standards.. Earlier this year, President Biden issued an Executive Order on climate change. Additionally, regulations and policies related to climate change and emissions reductions are being proposed and/or implemented at the federal, state, and local government levels.


Recycling is currently on aggressive regulatory agendas of many local, state, and federal policy makers, as well as stakeholders. Investors, customers, and consumers are also concerned about emissions as well as other issues including recycling; safety; and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The data related to these factors, including whether companies are making this information publicly available, is being analyzed by interested stakeholders. Instead of waiting on the federal government to mandate that this information be available publicly, many stakeholders are now asking for it. Many indicators suggest federal requirements for making data on these factors public are coming, and it’s likely that stakeholder demands will continue to increase. These demands will affect our industry and it is important that we demonstrate that the recycling industry is essential to manufacturing, a circular and robust economy, as well as thriving communities.


For more information on sustainability and ESGs, view the Sustainability: Benefits for Your Company and the Industry webinar, which is currently available to watch on demand for ISRI members.



Disclaimer: Guest blogs represent the opinion of the writers and may not reflect the policy or position of the Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.

Share Post

By Megan Fontes May 29, 2025
The Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) published its Chemical Recycling Policy Position on May 30, 2025. The purpose of the policy statement is to articulate guiding principles for environmentally responsible chemical recycling of plastics. NERC supports the conservation of natural resources, waste minimization, and recognizes the role of recycling in reaching these goals. Plastic is a prevalent material for packaging and other products due to its material properties. Producing virgin plastic from fossil fuels is an extractive process with negative environmental and social impacts. Therefore, NERC supports reduction, reuse, and recycling processes that displace virgin production in plastics where environmentally preferable. You can view the policy statement here: https://www.nerc.org/chemical-recycling . The Policy Position was developed by the Subcommittee of the NERC Chemical Recycling Committee. Participants on the Subcommittee included Committee Chair Tom Metzner, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CTDEEP); Claudine Ellyin, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP); John Fay, Northeast Waste Management Officials' Association (NEWMOA); Anthony Fontana, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Retired ; Michael Fowler, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP); Timothy Kerr, Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), Left MDE ; Shannon McDonald, Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE); Chaz Miller, Ex-Officio, NERC Board; Elizabeth Moore, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CTDEEP); Marc Moran, Pennsylvania Department Of Environmental Protection; Michael Nork, New Hampshire Department Of Environmental Services; Megan Schulz-Fontes, Northeast Recycling Council (NERC); and Richard Watson, Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA). NERC created the Chemical Recycling Committee in 2022 with the goal of sharing information on new technologies called “chemical recycling.” The Committee shares information on the efficacy, cost, and impacts of these new technologies. Our Policy is the result of those efforts. The Committee is open to NERC state members and several advisory member organizations whose participation has been approved by the state members serving on the committee. NERC has published several other policy positions including the Post-Consumer Recycled Content Policy (2019) and Product Stewardship and Producer Responsibility Policy (2018), which can be found among others on NERC’s website: https://www.nerc.org/policy-positions-and-statements . For more information, contact Megan Schulz-Fontes, Executive Director, at megan@nerc.org .
May 28, 2025
Waste Advantage NERC’s Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) Commodity Values Survey Report for the period January – March 2025 showed a slight jump in the average commodity prices for Q1. The average value of all commodities increased by 9% without residuals to $102.34 and 8% with residuals to $89.62, as compared to last quarter. Single stream increased by 12% without residuals and 11% with residuals, while dual stream/source separated increased by 10% without residuals and 9% with residuals compared to last quarter. The average percentage for outbound tons marketed per commodity in calendar year 2024 showed decreases for all commodities as compared to 2022, except for polypropylene and bulky rigids, which increased by 40% and 29%, respectively. We also see an increase in mixed glass and residue, as compared to 2022, by 31% and 8%, respectively, further offsetting the decreases in marketed commodity percentages across the board. Notably, green, brown, and clear glass had the largest fall with clear glass decreasing by 77%. Changes in calculation methodology may affect these trends. Percentages are derived from tonnages reported for calendar year 2024 as opposed to percentage breakdowns in previous years. This is the 24th quarterly report in NERC’s series of reports on the market value of commodities from MRFs in the Northeast. This report includes information from 19 MRFs representing twelve (12) states: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. These survey results reflect the differing laws and collection options in the participating states. Five of the states included in this report have beverage container deposit laws. As a result, fewer glass bottles, PET bottles and aluminum cans are processed in MRFs in those states. Those MRFs are also likely to have less revenue from those recyclables. In addition, the report reflects a mix of single stream, dual stream, and source separation to collect recyclables with single stream being the most common approach. The type of collection used will have an impact on MRF design and operation. Thus, the data from this report reflects the unique blend of facilities and statewide laws in the reporting states. Residual refers to the incoming material that cannot be marketed and goes to disposal. The value without residuals reflects the value of a perfect ton of marketed material, while the value with residuals reflects the value of each ton processed with the costs associated of disposing unmarketable material. Note: In many cases, recovered glass goes to market but at a negative value. This data is not intended to be used as a price guide for MRF contracts. NERC’s database represents single and dual stream MRFs, states with and without beverage container deposits, a wide variety in markets and geographic access to markets, and variety of materials collected for processing at the participating facilities. As a result, it represents the diversity of operating conditions in these locations and should not be used as a price guideline for a specific program. For more information, contact Megan Schulz-Fontes, Executive Director, at megan@nerc.org or visit www.nerc.org .
By Megan Fontes May 22, 2025
2024 Average Percentage of Outbound Tons Marketed per Commodity Published; New Format: Report Includes Q1 2025 Individual Commodity Average Prices
More Posts