Authors: Prof. Bibek Bhattacharya and Prof. Poornima Varma

Abstract: Climate change mitigation has emerged as a central policy priority globally, and India has committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070. In response, regulators such as Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) have strengthened disclosure requirements through the Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) framework. However, while formal regulatory frameworks are expanding, firms exhibit substantial heterogeneity in their carbon emission intensity, climate disclosure quality, and decarbonization efforts

A growing body of literature suggests that board composition plays a critical role in shaping firms’ environmental and social performance. Directors bring distinct human capital, networks, and cognitive frames that influence strategic decision-making. Among these, former bureaucrats (e.g., retired IAS, IPS, IFS officers and other senior civil servants) represent a unique category of directors. Their prior experience in public administration may provide firms with regulatory expertise, policy insight, and access to government networks.

From an agency perspective, bureaucrats may enhance monitoring and long-term orientation due to their familiarity with regulatory scrutiny and public accountability norms. From a resource dependence perspective, they may provide firms with access to regulatory knowledge and political connections that help manage environmental compliance and anticipate policy shifts. However, an alternative view suggests that politically connected directors could weaken environmental accountability by shielding firms from regulatory enforcement.

Despite increasing interest in board political connections in emerging markets, little is known about how the presence of former bureaucrats on corporate boards affects carbon emission–related outcomes in India. Given India’s regulatory transition toward stricter climate governance, this question is both theoretically and policy relevant. This study aims to bridge this gap.

Authors: Prof. Akshaya Vijayalakshmi and Shanmuga Priya A.

Abstract: Firms often present sustainable but slow (e.g., no-rush shipping) and unsustainable but fast (e.g., same-day shipping) options side-by-side for the same product. In a joint evaluation situation like this, would a consumer choose a sustainable (vs. unsustainable) choice irrespective of the delay? We term this as ‘the green-time trade-off.’ For businesses, sustainable initiatives can add time delays through practices like order consolidation and slower production cycles which may have detrimental impact on the ‘quick commerce’ perception. However, it may also help them save money in terms of number of delivery personnel and number of new trips undertaken.

Through controlled experiments, we aim to examine how additional delays for sustainable option affects choice when sustainable and unsustainable alternatives are presented jointly. We find that as delay increases, proportion of people choosing sustainable option decreases. We expect that perceiving time differences between the options as fair mediates this effect, improving sustainable option uptake despite the delay. Further, we hypothesize that this effect attenuates for non-zero-sum mindset consumers who treat time as flexible versus zero-sum mindset consumers who treat time as a fixed resource.

Authors: Astha Pandey and Prof. M P Ram Mohan

Abstract:  Contemporary versions of the corporate purpose debate highlight the interconnectedness of the forces in corporate law and governance that are critical to importing social welfare as a priority concern into the governance frame. The Indian legal and regulatory framework governing corporate purpose, which embodies pluralistic stakeholderism, offers valuable insights to inform on-going deliberations on this subject in comparative corporate governance scholarship. This article contends that the Indian corporate purpose framework reflects an inherent paradox underpinning its corporate law and governance mechanisms, comprising two limbs - first, the imbalance between directors’ duties and shareholders’ rights which has left critical questions around controlling shareholders’ accountability unaddressed; and second, contradictions in the theoretical foundations underlying the framework which result in ambiguities stemming therefrom. This article seeks to examine the Indian approach to corporate purpose through an analysis of the paradox, the implication of which is that it serves to impede the implementation of stakeholder governance. In so doing, first, we assess critical features of India’s framework, through the lens of the manner in which powers, rights and duties are distributed amongst various corporate constituencies within it. Second, we examine three distinct corporate governance theories underlying the Indian framework, namely, shareholder primacy, stakeholder theory and real entity theory, their implications for corporate purpose and the manner in which they interact with and contribute to ambiguities in the framework. Lastly, we analyse the manner in which anchoring the Indian stakeholder governance approach in the real entity conception of the corporation can address the identified ambiguities and provide an appropriate theoretical basis for operationalizing a broader corporate purpose.

Keywords: corporate purpose, directors’ best interests duty, shareholder accountability, stakeholder governance, real entity theory, (Indian) Companies Act, comparative corporate governance

Professor Biju Varkkey

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has made Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) mandatory for the top 1000 listed entities, focusing on Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) regulatory disclosures. As ESG becomes a key agenda item for boards and committees due to increasing regulations, the roles of Company Secretaries in Indian public listed companies are expected to expand. However, there is a lack of research on the relationship between company secretaries and board effectiveness, especially concerning strategic decision-making in the ESG context. While literature covers the relationship between corporate strategic decisions and boards, the specific role of company secretaries in shaping corporate governance, particularly in supporting ESG in Indian public listed companies, remains unexplored. By using the 'legitimacy theory' and 'organization role theory' this research aims to delve into the evolving role of company secretaries in enhancing board effectiveness within the ESG framework.

Professor Aditya Moses

Numerous organizations operate with a purpose that goes beyond mere commercial pursuits. However, the ever-changing external environment can compel organizations to alter their operations. For instance, nonprofit social enterprises, driven by the need to generate commercial revenues, may shift their focus from social to economic value creation, necessitating a renewal of their governance structure to maintain a balance between the two. This transition may lead to mission drift, where the organization's core values become precarious amid environmental complexities. The current typologies of hybrid organizations fail to consider the influence of governance on these organizations. Governance plays a crucial role in preventing mission drift, establishing control mechanisms, and ensuring meaningful outcomes for beneficiaries. However, in some cases, mission drift can be a viable response to values-based complexity. Thus, organizations should be seen not only as governance mechanisms for protecting values but also as equilibrating mechanisms that coordinate the interests of multiple stakeholders. This research project aims to study the evolution of governance mechanisms in social enterprises and its impact on social and  organizational performance.