📌 Why This Matters
Demographic aging is one of the most powerful trends of the 21st century. By 2050, 1 in 6 people worldwide will be over 65 (UN, 2022). These shifts affect labor, healthcare, consumer behavior, and investment strategy. Still, ESG reporting often treats aging as invisible or irrelevant. This newsletter shares findings from a content analysis of ESG reports from leading brands—Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Walmart, Colgate-Palmolive & Costco —and shows that longevity is a critical blind spot in how these companies assess and report these topics.
📊 What We Found
Our qualitative analysis of the 2023 ESG and sustainability reports from the top five U.S. consumer goods companies revealed a consistent pattern: aging and longevity are almost entirely absent from current ESG frameworks and disclosures, even in companies with high ESG maturity and broad stakeholder reporting. All companies— Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Walmart, Colgate-Palmolive, & Costco- published detailed reports aligned with leading frameworks such as GRI, SASB, and TCFD.
These reports typically included robust disclosures on environmental sustainability, supply chain ethics, and DEI efforts focused primarily on gender and racial equity. However, a systematic review of each report across five predefined criteria revealed the following:
1. Age-Related Workforce Metrics: None of the companies disclosed age-specific workforce demographics, such as the percentage of employees over 50 or the age distribution across job categories. This absence makes it impossible to assess age diversity or monitor age-related inclusion practices.
2. Product Design and Innovation for Older Adults: No company explicitly reported tailoring product features, packaging, or digital accessibility to meet the needs of older consumers—despite their increasing market share and distinct preferences in areas such as readability, usability, or physical accessibility.
3. Financial Inclusion Strategies: Not a single report mentioned age-specific initiatives aimed at reducing barriers for older adults as consumers, whether in pricing models, access to information, or financial services inclusion.
4. Strategic Risk References: None of the reports acknowledged aging demographics or increased longevity as a strategic risk or opportunity in their materiality assessments, ESG roadmaps, or long-term market planning. This is a significant omission given demographic trends' relevance to workforce planning, healthcare costs, and product demand forecasting.
5. Governance and Oversight: There was no indication that aging trends were discussed at the board level or integrated into ESG governance structures.
While many firms referenced ESG committees, human capital reporting, or DEI oversight, none included age or intergenerational concerns within those discussions. Among the reviewed companies, only a few made limited, indirect references to aging-related themes.
--Costco disclosed that over 13,500 employees have worked at the company for 25 years or more and highlighted longevity-related employment incentives such as tenure-based retirement contributions and biannual bonuses for hourly workers (Costco, 2023, pp. 3–4).
--Procter & Gamble mentioned support for “financial and work-life well-being” of employees, including retirement planning, without addressing age segmentation (P&G, 2023, p. 7).
--The Coca-Cola Company is the only firm among those reviewed that explicitly mentions caregiver support policies for aging family members. In its 2023 Workplace & Safety Update, Coca-Cola states: “We enhanced caregiver leave in the U.S. for eligible employees to care for a family member, including aging parents” . This marks an important—though isolated—acknowledgment of the pressures facing working caregivers in aging societies.
🤔 Why Are Companies Avoiding the Topic?
The persistent lack of attention to aging and longevity in ESG disclosures can be attributed to several interrelated factors that shape both organizational behavior and the structure of ESG frameworks: regulatory sensitivity, conceptual blind spots, absence of standardized reporting indicators, short-termism and internal awareness gaps.
One major reason is regulatory sensitivity. In the United States, age is a protected category under the Age Discrmination in Employment Act (ADEA). This legal environment makes companies cautious about collecting or reporting age-specific workforce data, for fear it could expose them to accusations of bias or unequal treatment. The risk of legal liability or reputational damage may lead firms to err on the side of silence rather than transparency.
Another explanation lies in conceptual blind spots embedded within current ESG and DEI narratives. Most frameworks—whether formal (like GRI or SASB) or internal to corporate strategy—tend to prioritize issues such as gender, race, and disability. Aging, by contrast, is often viewed primarily as a retirement or healthcare concern, rather than as a cross-cutting demographic transformation that affects consumer behavior, labor markets, and governance dynamics.
Adding to the problem is the absence of standardized reporting indicators for aging. Unlike emissions or board diversity, age-related issues are barely captured in most ESG guidance. This lack of structure discourages firms from proactively engaging with the topic, reinforcing a cycle in which demographic preparedness remains invisible in reporting and strategy.
Further, many ESG strategies are shaped by short-termism. Corporate sustainability efforts often focus on immediate or near-term risks—climate disclosures, quarterly DEI benchmarks, supply chain audits—rather than on slow-moving but inevitable trends like population aging. Although the demographic shift is predictable and already underway, its consequences are perceived as distant and diffuse, making it a lower priority in many boardrooms.
Finally, there may be internal awareness gaps. ESG teams and sustainability officers may not be trained or incentivized to consider aging populations as material stakeholders. Without advocacy from leadership or pressure from investors, longevity-related concerns can remain outside the operational ESG lens.
Together, these factors explain why even leading consumer goods companies—despite their broad social reach—have yet to integrate aging into ESG planning. The result is a systemic blind spot that leaves firms vulnerable to missed opportunities, hidden risks, and a growing misalignment with the realities of an aging global society.
🛠️ ESG Needs an Upgrade: Key Metrics to Add
To build resilience and accountability, ESG frameworks such as GRI and SASB should incorporate: - % of workforce aged 55+ - Age-inclusive design policies (packaging, digital interfaces) - Accessibility and usability standards for older customers - Strategic planning for workforce aging and demographic shifts
👀 Investors Are Watching
Investor coalitions representing over trillions in assets. They are pushing for long-term transparency. Aging-related blind spots undermine that mission. Firms that fail to disclose or prepare for demographic aging may face: - Valuation penalties from unaccounted labor and pension risk - Reputational damage due to exclusion of older stakeholders - Missed revenue opportunities from under-serving the "silver economy".
🛠️ Conclusion
Despite their size, influence, and alignment with leading ESG frameworks, the top U.S. consumer goods companies continue to overlook one of the most transformative forces shaping our global economy: population aging. While issues such as gender equity, emissions, and labor rights are increasingly embedded in sustainability disclosures, aging remains conceptually sidelined—treated as a retirement or health issue, not a strategic imperative.
This omission is not benign. It signals a deeper disconnect between ESG reporting and long-term demographic reality. By failing to account for older workers, aging consumers, and intergenerational equity, these companies risk overlooking both emerging vulnerabilities and significant growth opportunities in the longevity economy.
If ESG is to fulfill its promise of fostering resilient, inclusive, and forward-looking enterprises, it must evolve. That means embedding demographic foresight—especially longevity—into corporate risk assessments, board-level governance, and sustainability reporting standards. Only then can we ensure that ESG truly reflects the world we are aging into.
📚 References
Costco. (2023). Sustainability Commitment, pp. 3–4. https://www.costco.com/sustainability
Walmart. (2023). FY2023 ESG Highlights Report, p. 4. https://corporate.walmart.com/esgreport
Coca-Cola Company. (2023). Workplace & Safety Update. https://www.coca-colacompany.com/reports
Colgate-Palmolive. (2023). Sustainability and Social Impact Report. https://investor.colgatepalmolive.com
PepsiCo. (2023). 2023 ESG Summary. https://www.pepsico.com/our-impact/esg-topics-a-z
United Nations. (2022). World Population Prospects. https://population.un.org/wpp
SASB. (2018). Standards Overview. https://www.sasb.org
Eccles, R. & Krzus, M. (2018). The Nordic Model: Leading Practices in ESG Disclosure. Nordic Journal of Business, 67(1), 5–28.
Friede, G. et al. (2015). ESG and Financial Performance. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233.
Bloom, D. et al. (2011). Population Aging and Growth. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 26(4), 583–601.
Harper, S. (2014). Aging Societies. Science, 346(6209), 587–591.
Comments