The increasing prevalence of environmental systems presents complex challenges that extend beyond conventional toxicity and persistence-based assessments. While existing Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics in sectors such as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology incorporate indicators related to chemical management, emissions, and regulatory compliance, they largely lack explicit integration of quantitative toxicological parameters that determine long-term ecological and human health impacts. This disconnect results in a critical misalignment between reported sustainability performance and actual environmental risk, particularly in high-exposure contexts such as densely populated and resource-constrained regions.
This study proposes a novel, integrative framework that combines environmental toxicology within ESG risk assessment to enable scientifically grounded prioritization of xenobiotic remediation. Using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach, the framework develops a composite risk index that combines environmental indicators (toxicity, persistence, and bioaccumulation), social dimensions (population exposure, vulnerability, and water dependency), and governance factors (regulatory effectiveness and monitoring capacity). Representative xenobiotics, including pharmaceuticals, pesticides, and heavy metals, are evaluated using secondary datasets, with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) applied for indicator weighting and prioritization.
The proposed framework advances ESG assessment from compliance-based reporting toward impact-oriented evaluation. The framework is particularly relevant for emerging economies, where episodic pollution events and infrastructural constraints amplify exposure risks. By bridging toxicological science with ESG decision-making, this approach offers a scalable and policy-relevant tool for improving environmental risk governance and enabling more informed investment and remediation strategies.