Asset managers

• Sustainable Fitch has affirmed Telefonica SA's ESG Entity Rating at ‘2’. This reflects the positive social impact of its telecommunications services, including in rural and under-served areas in countries where it operates, and its well-defined ESG strategy.
• The rating is positively driven by the increase of ultra broadband and fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) accesses in 2024, continuous investments in broadband networks in rural areas, strong ESG policies and a positive trend in environmental KPIs.
• The rating is negatively affected by a high number of safety incidents with major consequences in the last three years, high CEO pay ratio and governance-related controversies.

ESG investing is currently in a state of flux, a significant reason for this is the regulatory changes that are occurring. In this session we will discuss some of the latest updates to ESG related regulations, how they continue to evolve, and the overall impact on the ESG investment landscape within EMEA.

This webinar will cover:

• The latest on the EU Omnibus package
• ESG Rating Provider Regulation
• The latest SFDR updates and their implications
• What’s next for ESG Investing

Speakers:

• Lindsey Stewart, CFA, Director of International Insights, Morningstar
• Anne Shoemaker, Senior Director, ESG Product Management, Morningstar Sustainalytics
• Andy Pettit, Director, Policy Research, EMEA, Morningstar
• Lia Mitchell, Senior Policy Analyst, Morningstar

"Just three financial institutions – Vanguard, BlackRock and JPMorgan Chase – together provided over US$1.6 trillion to the Forest 500 companies, giving them a significant influence on deforestation, conversion and associated human rights abuses.

Financial institutions headquartered in China provided the most financing by country, over US$400 billion, to the Forest 500 laggards (the 168 companies without a public deforestation commitment). This is followed by the United States (US) with US$151 billion, and French financial institutions with US$57 billion.

In 2023, 45% of the financial institutions assessed had a public deforestation policy. This fell to 40% in 2024. This troubling shift is in contrast to the trend over the previous decade, when financial institutions increasingly set deforestation policies.

Despite accelerating global heating and the increasing frequency of destructive climate events, the proportion of financial institutions that recognises deforestation as a business risk in 2024 was virtually unchanged at 37%, compared to 35% in 2023."

The ocean is vast and complex. It covers over two-thirds of the planet and holds over 90% of Earth’s water. However, anthropogenic pressures severely threaten ocean health. Climate change, habitat destruction and over-exploitation of marine resources are all key drivers of significant biodiversity loss. Marine pollution – including plastic waste, chemical runoff, and noise pollution – is a further significant cause of harm.

Given the environmental, social and economic importance of the ocean, there is a growing recognition that more needs to be done to protect and restore ocean resilience and the ecosystem services derived from the ocean.

Chronos Sustainability is working with the First Sentier MUFG Sustainable Investment Institute to collate evidence on ocean-related sustainability issues for investors. This research will inform the development of a high-level decision-making framework for institutional investors on the ocean and related issues.

The first part of this work is a survey that aims to understand how ocean sustainability is currently perceived, integrated, and prioritised within investment strategies. The survey wants to understand whether and to what extent ocean-related issues are addressed in decision-making, what are the key ocean-related themes and issues that investors are concerned about, and what are the key barriers to progress. The survey also seeks to understand what data and information investors use in decision-making, and which of the many ocean-related reporting and impact frameworks are most widely used by investors.

The survey – which will remain open until the 26th September 2025 - can be accessed at: https://forms.cloud.microsoft/pages/responsepage.aspx?id=cvWJeStze0yKwmvbg9itMQYqfvMeP2pAgz55zBxlgaBUNEtWVVVMVzhaMlNPMVM4T042OVo0SFJLUCQlQCN0PWcu&route=shorturl

Notes:

1.      First Sentier MUFG Sustainable Investment Institute: https://www.firstsentier-mufg-sustainability.com/

2.      Chronos Sustainability: https://www.chronossustainability.com/

Many investors asked us to add the chemicals sector to a suite of our corporate assessments. And we listened.

We are pleased to announce that the TPI Global Climate Transition Centre (TPI Centre) at the London School of Economics and Political Science has a new publication, “The Carbon performance assessment of chemical producers: discussion paper.”

This discussion paper proposes a new methodology to assess the Carbon Performance of chemical producers and provides the assessment results of 20 companies with high emissions intensity and diverse subsector exposure. We are keen to get feedback on our approach.

The proposed chemicals methodology adds to the TPI Centre’s sectoral methodologies to assess corporate Carbon Performance. The Centre currently assess Carbon Performance in the 12 high-emitting sectors, including electricity utilities, oil and gas producers, and high-carbon industrial and transport sectors.

The chemicals sector is significant both to investors and the climate. It is one of the largest global manufacturing industries by market capitalisation. As the largest industrial consumer of fossil fuels, the sector plays a major role in global emissions, accounting for 1.3 gigatonnes of direct carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions annually — approximately 3.6% of the global total.  This combination of broad economic influence and high emissions exposes the sector to transition risk and makes it a priority for credible decarbonisation pathways.

Fri 12th Sept 2025: 14:00 UK | 15:00 CET | 09:00 NY

Join us for a 60-minute webinar exploring aviation’s decarbonisation strategy.

Despite growing interest in sustainable aviation fuels (SAF), the sector remains off-track for Paris alignment—under-investing in zero-emission aircraft (ZEA) and relying on technologies with uncertain scalability.

Carbon Tracker analysts Rich Collett-White and Saidrasul Ashrafkhanov will kick off with a short presentation, followed by a panel discussion featuring leading voices from policy, finance, and industry. There will also be time for audience Q&A.

Guest Speakers:

• Trishla Shah – Manager, Sustainable Aviation, Systemiq
• Gabriel Lepine – Vice President, Finance, ZeroAvia
• Menzo Reinders – Director, Energy Sector Coverage, ING
• Celeste Hicks – Policy Manager, Aviation Environment Federation (Moderator)

Key topics include:

• What are the real barriers to aviation decarbonisation?
• How realistic is the industry’s reliance on SAF?
• Is jet fuel plus carbon removals (DACCS) a viable long-term pathway?
• What can aviation learn from the rapid electrification of road transport?
• Could China’s rise in electric aviation reshape the global landscape?

This session is designed for stakeholders and policymakers seeking to understand the sector’s progress and identify levers for accountability and accelerated action.

Includes selected sustainability disclosures

Sustainability data annex 2024

Sustainability in brief

Sustainability Factbook 2024

Double Materiality Assessment 2024

Sustainable investors have typically avoided investments in defence. Geopolitical developments, and the evolution of a more nuanced view of what matters for sustainability, have now brought the sector into focus: sustainability criteria and investing in defence can be aligned as autonomy, resilience and security emerge as key investment themes, writes Sindhu Janakiram.  

The United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals seek to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that by 2030, all people enjoy peace and prosperity. They cover sustainability-related topics such as inequality and climate change.

On the 10th anniversary of their launch, Berenice Lasfargues looks at progress on their implementation and the usefulness of the SDGs for investors.     

As we enter the next phase of global decarbonisation, institutional investors are rethinking their strategies. Instead of avoiding high-emitting sectors like cement, steel, utilities, and waste management, many are now investing in their transformation—advancing climate goals while capturing long-term value.

These sectors are major contributors to global emissions but remain essential to modern economies. Divesting from them may seem like a straightforward approach to portfolio decarbonisation, but this is not reflective of economic reality and risks sidelining the progress needed to reduce emissions in the real economy. Increasingly, investors are taking a different approach: backing “improvers”—companies with credible plans and capacity to deliver value-creative decarbonisation.

Investor insights on stewardship, standards & strategic expectations for Canadian companies
August 2025

In the context of a pushback on ESG, the Securities and Exchanges Commission shifting rules on investor engagement, as well as the implementation of Canada’s anti-greenwashing (Bill C-59), investors are reaffirming their commitment to the integration of environmental, social and governance issues into investment decision making, with governance becoming a more central focus.

A climate of change: Canadian investor perspectives
September 2025

Millani’s eleventh Semi-Annual ESG Sentiment Study of Canadian Institutional Investors finds that current pushback on ESG is less a retreat than a pause, with uncertainty eroding disclosure quality, trust, and ultimately increasing the cost of capital.

When it comes to the links between sustainable investment and enhanced returns, numerous explanations focus on how companies that perform well in terms of sustainability/ESG tend to out-perform those which don’t.

There may, however, be other forces at play. Fundamentally, investment decisions are made by people, and people are driven by both logic and - crucially - emotions. As explained by research into behavioural finance, psychological factors, including biases, can influence decision making, and result in potential risks and opportunities being missed.

Sustainable investment strategies can potentially act as a remedy to bias, and thus allow investors to identify both risks and opportunities that they may otherwise have overlooked or discounted. Here, we will be focusing on the impact of four key biases: loss aversion bias, risk aversion bias, anchoring bias, and recency bias.

As a responsible investor, it is not only vital to understand non-financial risks posed to (and by) companies, but also what they are doing to mitigate these.

In the case of single materiality, this might mean how a company is preparing to adapt to climate change, and in the case of double (or single-outward) materiality, this might mean what it is doing to mitigate the risks it poses to external stakeholders, including the environment.

However, not all risk mitigation measures are created equal, and how can investors distinguish between companies that simply state they are working to limit risks (be they inward or outward) and those which are making systematic efforts to do so?

In the case of limiting outward risks to the environment, enter the environmental management system.

Key points

• Financial inclusion-focused companies help the world’s poorest become more resilient and represent a huge growth opportunity
• Nubank, Grab and Remitly provide digital-focused services that help them undercut older rivals
• However, face-to-face education remains important for the financially vulnerable, which is why HDFC Bank is opening new branches in rural India

IPR analysis of the quarter’s most consequential policy and transition developments – and their implications for investors monitoring climate risk and opportunity

Join our expert panel in the 3rd IPR Quarterly Briefing for 2025.

• Jennifer Anderson, Managing Director, Global Head of Sustainable Investment & ESG, Lazard Asset Management
• Lily Burge, Policy Manager, Climate Bonds Initiative
• Karoline Hallmeyer, Senior Manager for Climate & Biodiversity Strategy, Deloitte
• Jakob Thomä, Project Director, Inevitable Policy Response (IPR)
• Moderator: Daniel Gallagher, Ph.D., Senior Lead, Climate Change, PRI

Thursday, 16th October 2025

Time: 14:00 – 15:00 BST

Platform: BrightTALK

Registration Link

This report, now in it’s fourth edition, was published in June 2025 by the World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and examines the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and energy usage of the 200 leading tech companies worldwide.

The report’s 2025 edition raises the alarm on the ICT sector’s growing carbon footprint with the rapid expansion of AI. The report represents a key step in supporting companies to adopt science-aligned, transparent and accountable climate strategies.

The first report Greening digital companies: Monitoring emissions and climate commitments was published in 2022.

"Shareholder activists launched 129 campaigns in the first half of 2025, a strong showing amid increased uncertainty, though down 12% from 2024.

Our Investment Banking Shareholder Advisory team’s H1 2025 Review of Shareholder Activism also tracks an increase in activists targeting small companies, muted European activity and greater success in securing board seats."

• Hybrid vehicles are gaining favor among US drivers, and their market share is projected to increase as North American sales of electric vehicles (EVs) are forecast to decelerate.
• The easing of US fuel economy rules and the elimination of tax credits for EV purchases prompted Goldman Sachs Research to cut its forecasts for EV market penetration.
• Margins for North American operations may be 2 to 3 percentage points higher than previously assumed as traditional automakers maximize profits with an optimized balance of internal combustion and hybrid vehicles.
• Goldman Sachs Research now projects EVs to be 25% of global sales in 2030, down from a prior prediction of 28%, though its forecasts for China remain unchanged.

• 2024 was the year of transition – the two legacy teams merged formally as of May 2024.
• Policy and process documents were finalized and published for the merged entity – CMAM – on engagements, voting and exclusions, including both sectoral and controversy-based exclusions.
• The new Stewardship Committee of the group was formed, with 4 Voting members with final decision-making authority on all stewardship-related activities for all asset management entities

"As an active owner, we engage with our investee companies to influence them to appropriately manage ESG risks as well as seize ESG opportunities. By exercising our voting rights, we affirm our engagement in line with our sustainable approach during shareholder meetings. We use our voting rights and target 100% voting across all our equity and bond holdings."

9 May 2025 - "The 2024 Calvert Stewardship Report examines our engagement & proxy voting activities that aim to drive positive change on financially material sustainability topics. The report covers the period from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024, and highlights Calvert's commitment to engaging with companies on key sustainability issues, including climate change, human capital management, human rights, worker health and safety, and governance."

Note commentary and disclosures/reports are in Italian

• Date: Wednesday 17 September 2025
• Time: 2.30-4.00pm British Summer Time 
• Online livestream registration: https://lse.zoom.us/meeting/register/RENTa4PvQduwUTB3nnV9pA#/registration

The latest Carbon Performance data for the world’s largest electricity utilities, oil & gas, and diversified mining companies are now available on the TPI tool.

This update covers 73 electricity utilities, 15 oil & gas, and 10 diversified mining companies.

Together, these companies represent a combined market capitalisation of over $1.7 trillion as of July 2025.

When the UN Principles for Responsible Investment launched in 2006, it urged institutional investors to incorporate ESG issues into investment decisions. It acknowledged ESG’s impact on both performance and societal goals, highlighting the concept of double materiality. Nearly two decades later, ESG integration has become a standard practice. It’s no longer a defining characteristic of sustainable investing on its own, but instead is widely seen as part of investors’ fiduciary duty from a financial materiality perspective.

Summary

• ESG integration has evolved from a niche practice to a core tenet of investment
• Debate over whether it is a specialist activity or part of an analyst’s skillset
• Investing in ESG knowledge is a strategic decision for long-term value creation

Pemberton is pleased to share our latest insights on how responsible investing (RI) underpins our core objective: financing resilient, well-managed European businesses with strong growth potential.

As social and environmental forces reshape industries, economies, and markets, we stay focused on understanding these shifts, managing emerging risks, and uncovering long-term value. Strong governance also sits at the heart of our investment due diligence – the foundation of resilient businesses.

This report reflects that philosophy in action – access the report below.

A review of our sustainability achievements in 2024, including engagement and our sustainability value assessment ratings.

As we look ahead, the importance of investing in the water and waste infrastructure is more evident than ever.

We remain committed to driving positive change, fostering sustainable economies and delivering consistent returns for our investors.

The full 2025 Samsung Electronics Sustainability Report can be downloaded here.

Focal Points:

• Orkla cut Scope 1 & 2 greenhouse gas emissions by 65% vs. 2015, supported by 92% renewable energy use in its own operations, while total emissions (Scopes 1–3) declined 17% vs. 2015, keeping the company aligned with its net zero by 2045 commitment.
• 56% of packaging is now renewable or recycled (2023: 52%), while food waste intensity has been reduced by 27% vs. 2015, ahead of the 2025 milestone.
• Women represent 44% of managers across the group (2023: 42%), and Orkla maintained strong employee engagement (79%), supported by new health, safety and inclusion initiatives.

Parameters:

• Data to: 31 December 2024
• Published: March 2025 (assurance date)
• Materiality Matrix: Not found
• ESG Data Centre: Not found

Focal Points:

• In 2024, absolute CO₂ emissions (Scopes 1+2) fell -22% year-on-year, down -57% vs. 2018, while Scope 3 supply-chain emissions cut -26% vs. 2018, keeping Pirelli firmly on track for its Net Zero 2040 target (validated by SBTi).
• 96% of purchased electricity was renewable (2023: 80%), while 34.5% of tyres sold reached EU top-label classes for rolling resistance and wet braking, close to the 35% by 2025 goal.
• The flagship P Zero™ E tyre reached 58.5% bio-based/recycled materials, biodiversity plans now cover 55% of sites, and women in management rose to 28.3% (2023: 27%)

Parameters

• Data to: 31 December 2024
• Published: March 2025 (assurance by PwC)
• Materiality Matrix: See Double Materiality Analysis, ESG section (pp. 45–48 and appendix)
• ESG Data Centre: Consolidated Sustainability Reporting (within Annual Report) and SASB/DJSI indices

As global and EU decarbonisation goals drive the transition to a low-carbon, just economy, sustainability-related investments have seen significant growth - especially through private financial markets. However, a substantial investment gap persists in achieving climate and broader sustainability goals.

While there is a plethora of reports providing data on capital flows into sustainability-related investments, and some studies attempting to address the so-called investor impact, measuring the impact of sustainability-related investments on the environment and society remains largely unchartered territory.

This first report of a series, developed in collaboration with Professor Timo Busch (University of Hamburg) and Eric Prüßner (Advanced Impact Research), examines current literature, methodologies, and data sources for measuring real-world impact.

It identifies critical gaps in existing approaches and offers high-level policy and research recommendations to advance measurement of the impact of sustainability-related investments on the environment, society and real economy.

This article was written by Bloomberg Intelligence Director of ESG Research Eric Kane and Senior Associate Analyst Melanie Rua. It appeared first on the Bloomberg Terminal.

Nearly 85% of the 252 respondents to Bloomberg Intelligence’s ESG Investor Survey said they expect to see growth in assets under management assigned to ESG over the next two years. Investors also indicated continued interest in climate and the energy transition as contributors to competitiveness and revenue.

AI and cybersecurity were cited as emerging themes for ESG.

Key Takeaways

• Global nuclear capacity could more than double to 860 gigawatts (GW) by 2050, from 398 GW currently.
• Investments in the nuclear value chain could reach $2.2 trillion in the next 25 years.
• China is likely to become the world’s leader in nuclear capacity by 2030, surpassing the U.S.

In recent years, a growing number of asset management firms have invested considerable sums in building out their artificial intelligence capabilities as the public at large agree that these tools should produce significant benefits to institutional investors.  

Unfortunately, this trend has prompted many asset managers to overstate the use of AI in their investment processes – a development that has created a variety of risks for both investors and the asset management firms themselves.

Abstract

This paper examines the complex relationship between natural capital and long-term economic growth. Specifically, we review resource-based growth theories and various modeling approaches. In most frameworks, natural capital is considered an additional production factor that supplements traditional inputs. However, we highlight a common conceptual confusion between economic wealth (a stock) and economic growth (a flow). 

This distinction is often overlooked in discussions about the role of natural assets in development. Using World Bank data from 1995 to 2020, we empirically estimate a Cobb-Douglas production function that incorporates produced (physical) capital, labor (human capital), renewable resources, and non-renewable resources.

We then classify countries according to their resource endowment and assess the elasticity of natural capital with respect to GDP. To address uncertainty and downside risk, we propose a stress-testing framework that integrates historical worst-case analysis, parametric methods, and extreme value theory. Our results reveal significant heterogeneity in the impact of natural capital on growth.

Most conversations around proxy voting focus on shareholder proposals and executive compensation. Meanwhile, the most significant votes tend to fly under the radar: director elections. Boards of directors play a vital role in representing shareholder interests by overseeing a company’s strategic direction, monitoring management and ensuring accountability for the creation of long-term value.

Director-election votes can be a powerful tool for weighing in on material governance issues. Increasingly, investors are doing just that. In the 2024 proxy season, directors who chaired their board’s nominating and governance committees received 5% more dissenting votes on average, reflecting investors’ willingness to hold specific directors accountable for board composition and broad governance concerns.

Beyond conventional governance issues like director independence or shareholder rights, we have leveraged director elections to convey our perspective on issues ranging from product safety and quality to executive compensation to strategic transactions.

See link for the latest regulatory developments related to ESG and stewardship worldwide.

Tracking Technology in the Indian Steel Sector

This is the third report in our series analysing the state and outlook for Indian steel majors in their ambition to expand capacity while meeting decarbonisation goals. This edition focuses on Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL). 

JSPL has set a net zero emissions target for 2047, 23 years ahead of India’s national goal. Its current crude steel capacity is 9.6 Mtpa, but it plans to nearly quadruple this by 2035, with a combined 38 Mtpa across its Angul and Raigarh sites. Most of this expansion will rely on conventional blast furnace technology. 

JSPL’s current strategy poses a significant risk of carbon lock-in. 

This report finds:

1. Misalignment between short-term targets and recent performance
2. Risk of carbon lock-in from capital allocation
3. Geographical constraints could limit decarbonisation options
4. EU exposure limits future export potential
5. Emerging pathways for lower-carbon steel 

Tracking Technology in the Indian Steel Sector

This is the second report in our series that analyses the state and outlook for the Indian steel majors in their ambition to expand capacity while meeting decarbonisation goals.  This edition focuses on Tata Steel.

Tata Steel has set an ambitious target of reaching net zero emissions by 2045. With the help of government funding, its European operations are making strong progress. In India, however, Tata Steel and its competitors are rapidly scaling-up capacity to meet market demand. Confirmed and announced asset expansion plans will grow the company’s domestic steel capacity by 54% to 40-50 Mtpa by the mid-2030s . Nearly all of this new steel capacity relies on coal-consuming blast furnace technology.

This report finds:

1. Disconnect between net zero ambition, transition plan and coal-fired capacity expansion
2. Significant carbon lock-in risk from capital investments
3. Limited ability to apply CCS due to location constraints
4. Tata Steel India can stay within sight of its 2045 target and achieve 40-50 Mtpa by the mid-2030s

Do institutional investors care about your ESG ratings? Let's ask them directly...

On September 15th, 2025 at 8:30am EST /2:30pm CET /8:30pm SGT, Fruuit Consulting hosts two guest speakers: Mervyn Tang and Mimi Mayaki, both institutional investment professionals, to discuss the ratings-investment link.

Fruuit Consulting's world-class ESG ratings consultants: Michelle McCulloch, EP, Eric Fernald, and Antonios Panagiotopoulos will join the panel as our CEO moderates.

Key discussion points include:
The role of ESG ratings in shaping investment decisions
How ESG ratings give companies access to more capital
Practical strategies for improving ESG disclosures
North American, EMEA, and APAC ESG investment trends

Guest Speakers:
★ Mervyn Tang – Head of Sustainability, APAC, Schroders
★ Mimi Mayaki – Vice President, First Eagle Investment Management

For more information on Fruuit Consulting, www.fruuitconsulting.com or https://www.linkedin.com/company/fruuit-consulting/ 

We’re doing something a bit different on the Chronos Talks podcast this week and handing the mic to the Biodiversity & Nature team.

In a trilogy of podcasts Gemma James, Chronos’ Head of Biodiversity & Nature, interviews our three senior managers on their areas of specialist expertise:

• Laura Fox on regenerative agriculture (Episode 6).

• Dr. Rebecca Drury on the global wildlife trade. (Episode 7).

• Tanya Cox on the ocean and the blue economy (Episode 8).

Across the series the team:

• Tackle common misconceptions: Such as the many definitions of ‘regenerative agriculture’, and why there’s much more to the global wildlife trade than illegal items like pangolins and rhino horns.

• Talk numbers: Delving into how companies and investors analyse the $220bn market for legal wildlife products and consider the $8.4 trillion value at risk from declining ocean health.

• Get personal: Looking at how our experts got into their fields from working with shepherds in India, to scrabbling through rockpools while on the lookout for the Little Mermaid.

• Identify good practice: Considering how companies like Nestle and Danone are harnessing regenerative agriculture, Neils Yard’s sustainable use of wildlife products, and the Blue Bond Initiative in the Seychelles.

• Discuss solutions: Getting excited by how regenerative agriculture can contribute to corporate climate adaption strategies, or how ‘no take zones’ are regenerating our ocean.

  
  To listen now click on episodes 6, 7 and 8 below.

  Episode 6: Laura Fox on regenerative agriculture

  Episode 7: Dr. Rebecca Drury on the global wildlife trade

  Episode 8: Tanya Cox on the ocean and the blue economy

   

  Read more about our nature-themed services here or get in touch with our Nature & Biodiversity team via: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Many companies are responding to the urgency of transitioning their business but are running into challenges. One barrier they face is that it can be harder or more costly to access finance if they are penalised for using debt-based finance for transition-related investments.

Transition finance is a critical part of the global transition that will be needed to meet the requirements of the Paris Agreement and the global push towards Net Zero by 2050. Despite the big financing opportunity that the climate transition represents, debt-based financial markets are still approaching this with a short-term mindset that can impose barriers to transition finance.

These barriers, which are present across financial markets, are driven by features in our economic models that determine what is valued and how costs and benefits of the transition are calculated. The most common way to work around the limitations of the current economic model is to combine debt-based finance with concessional capital, but the structures that result can be complex, they can take a long time to negotiate, and they have been criticised for delivering only limited additionality.

To take just one example, there has been substantial effort by companies, governments and multilateral development banks to support the energy transition from coal in Indonesia, and this has run into many of these barriers.  Indonesia’s Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) was signed in 2022, and the first early retirement to be replaced with renewables occurred three years later, with the announcement in February by Indonesia’s Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources that the Cirebon-1 power plant would be retired in 2035, seven years earlier than scheduled.

Replacing power generation assets is complex in any case, and there has been a lot of focus put on the Cirebon coal phase-out financing because it is a novel transaction, and is hoped to pave the way for other transactions to follow. The impact of follow-on transition finance transactions will be greatest if the learning process in each transaction speeds up the process and makes it easier for companies in the value chain to use the experience to shape their own transition plans.

Yet, during the structuring phase of the coal phase-out transaction, Kelvin Wong, global head of energy, renewables and infrastructure at DBS, one of the structuring banks, acknowledged that “with the difficulties we have gone through in the last 30 months, I’m more circumspect about the viability of the project”. He added, “Had we known the costs that we know now, it is debatable whether the Indonesian authorities would still have wanted to undertake this same exercise”.

Part of the challenge was due to slow and uneven follow-through on the JETP, which had the result of shifting costs onto the utility and electricity consumers. The United States, which was a co-lead along with Japan, subsequently withdrew from the JETP, highlighting the issue of reliability of concessional capital sources.

Beyond the political risks and limited accessibility of international climate finance, the rigidities in debt-based finance can make it difficult to make it resilient and adaptable enough to withstand future economic volatility related to the climate transition. Within transition projects specifically, higher debt needs mean the challenges are even greater. There needs to be sufficient funds raised to refinance debt already borrowed for existing unsustainable assets, while also investing in new physical assets (renewable energy in the case of the coal phase-out projects).

The role of concessional capital in transition finance is to provide a buffer, whether through lower-yielding debt or first-loss capital, in order to hold down the interest rate on the commercial finance mobilised at a level where the project economics work for all financial stakeholders. Projects involving the phase-out and replacement of unsustainable with sustainable assets also have to navigate a process to find an outcome that is just for all stakeholders, including affected workers and local communities. 

This is a sizeable challenge for individual transition projects, which can seem easier to manage with debt-based and concessional capital, but this structure can introduce rigidities beyond the project. It can affect the way that companies upstream in the value chain respond to transition investments. 

For example, coal phase-out projects should be designed in a way that rewards value chain participants who anticipate and mitigate their own transition risks even before the coal phase-out projects close.  Sometimes, the economics of transition work against this objective by adding additional costs for transitioning companies that don’t impact companies that ignore transition risks.

A case study covered by Climate & Capital describes the transition investments of an Indonesian coal miner that took a strategic decision to use the recent profitability in its coal business to help fund its efforts to reach 50% of non-coal revenue by 2028 through investment in renewable energy and gold mining. 

Over the short term, as it scaled up investments in its transition projects, the miner needed substantial finance, which it raised through borrowing. However, the reliance on debt for its new investments led to a cut in its credit rating because it became more highly indebted (and viewed as more of a financial risk by creditors) compared to peers who didn’t pursue transition-related investments, even though its transition investments can make it more resilient as utilities phase out coal and demand wanes. 

This is indicative of the ‘tragedy of the horizon’ that then-Bank of England governor Mark Carney warned about almost 10 years ago.  In his speech, Carney warned that the problem was that the “catastrophic impacts of climate change will be felt beyond the traditional horizons of most actors – imposing a cost on future generations that the current generation has no direct incentive to fix”. 

The increase in climate disasters is showing the cost that current and future generations already have to bear. However, we still see that for many transition-related investments, not only is there not a direct incentive to fix the issues, but the financial incentives in debt-based finance work against companies making the transition investments they need to make.

A decade ago, Carney highlighted the cost of a delayed energy transition because “earlier action will mean less costly adjustment” and can contribute to fewer companies seeing “jump-to-distress pricing because of shifts in environmental policy or performance”.  

The transition risks that Carney highlighted still exist, but many companies are disincentivised from taking the necessary action because debt-based financial markets and credit ratings on which many investors and financial institutions rely are short-sighted. They undervalue the future credit risk associated with inaction on transition risk relative to the credit risk associated with the transition investments they take.

If credit ratings disincentivise transition investments, fewer companies will pursue these investments.  For an industry in transition, delaying transition investments increases the risk of cliff-edge events when transition risk is recognised suddenly with ‘jump-to-distress pricing’ that factors in risks only after they materialise.

For coal, the transition risk is both foreseeable and well defined. IEA’s global Net Zero by 2050 roadmap expects “low-emissions electricity [to rise] so rapidly that no new unabated coal plants [that were not under construction at the beginning of 2023] are built”. This impacts coal-fired power plants and their value chain.

The risk to coal miners from the scenario in the IEA’s Net Zero by 2050 roadmap is that demand falls rapidly as power generation shifts to renewable sources. This shift has been underway for years, and in some emerging markets like Pakistan and countries across Africa, the change in demand has begun to sharply accelerate.

Companies that diversify their revenue to other sources are likely to be far better positioned than those which do not, but financial incentives in debt markets through credit ratings counteract and could lead to companies increasing their risk through inaction in pursuit of short-term gains.

Companies need time to pivot their business strategies towards less transition-exposed sources of revenue and should not be penalised for making long-term investments that reduce their transition risk. Investors and banks, as well as other stakeholders, including workers and local communities, will pay the price if credit ratings provide the wrong financial incentives related to transition risk.   

In addition to financial losses for creditors, the employees of impacted companies will face job losses, electricity consumers will face disruption and higher costs if the transition proceeds in a less orderly way, and communities will be exposed to pollution from coal-fired power plants for longer.

Making progress at restructuring the debt-based financing for one link in the value chain can help to address the economic, environmental and social costs from continuing the status quo towards a disorderly transition. However, the rigidities introduced by debt-based finance may not fully alleviate risks and could just shift the risk onto another part of the value chain.

At each stage of the value chain, the transition risk is concentrated by debt, which moves the claims of some stakeholders’ interests ahead of others.  The inequity is greatest where the financial decision-making of those providing debt finance does not fully capture transition risk.

Improving consideration of transition risk can improve the situation if it adequately rewards companies for mitigating transition risk or penalises those that ignore the risk. However, since the speed of the climate transition is uncertain and can impact the intensity of transition risk exposures, debt-based finance is likely to be too inflexible to adjust to a changing reality and thus may not be the most effective way to finance the transition.

Alternative approaches that link financing returns to their success in supporting the transition can help to remove the rigidity of debt and the potentially counter-productive incentives that are created for companies. Financing the transition with instruments other than debt, including through Islamic finance, can offer more flexibility to adapt to changes in the global transition, although it may introduce other challenges in today’s debt-based financial system.

Want to stay updated about the implementation of responsible finance in OIC markets & Islamic finance? Subscribe to RFI’s free email newsletter today!

• Nature and biodiversity have rapidly risen up the sustainability agenda in recent years, becoming a mainstream theme in sustainable finance. ICMA’s Sustainable Bonds for Nature: A Practitioner’s Guide creates a new sub-label – “Nature Bond” – for green bonds that exclusively finance nature-related projects, alongside detailed guidance on nature-related projects and KPIs (for SLBs).   
• The guidance distinguishes between bonds that exclusively finance nature-related projects, to which the sub-label “Nature Bond” may be applied, and nature-themed green bonds which finance nature-related projects alongside other environmental objectives such as climate mitigation.
• Our analysis finds that few bonds allocate proceeds exclusively to the two UoP project categories that ICMA identifies as explicitly promoting nature-related outcomes – terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of living natural resources and land use.
• Of the Sustainable Fitch-rated instruments featuring sustainable management of living natural resources and land use, just 1% allocate all proceeds to this UoP, while no bonds allocate 100% of proceeds to terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity conservation. This suggests “Nature Bonds” may remain a niche category of labelled debt.   
• That said, the total amount of financing allocated to these categories across all bonds with these UoPs is not immaterial, USD72 billion, according to our database of labelled instruments, indicating GSS bonds have a potentially significant role to play in meeting the financing goals of the Global Biodiversity Framework.

A key highlight of 2024 was the publication of our engagement & escalation policy, which formalised the process for implementing escalation measures. Additionally, the automated reporting feature from Maanch Ltd. was enhanced, and the ability to track our voting activities within the tool was added, aiding us in our reporting efforts.

Focal Points:

See p4 of the report

Parameters:

• Data to: 31 Dec 2024
• Published: Filed with the French Financial Markets Authority (AMF) on 28 May 2025
• Materiality Matrix: Alstom’s Materiality Matrix (2021) is publicly available in PDF format on its website.
  ESG data centre: KPIs and targets are provided in web tables/PDFs.

Focal Points:

"In 2024, Konecranes expanded its emissions reduction ambition by committing to setting long-term net-zero targets.

We also received our fourth straight Gold rating from EcoVadis, a world-leading business sustainability rating agency, for our sustainability efforts.

EcoVadis ranked Konecranes’ sustainability work in the top 2 percent of all rated companies globally, and in the top 1 percent of general-purpose machinery peers.

We also updated our Supplier Code of Conduct, to which thousands of our suppliers commit, to include emissions reporting-related requirements and more robust human rights management"

Parameters:

• Data to: 31 Dec 2024
• Published: Annual Report 2024 with ESRS-compliant Sustainability Statement published Feb 28, 2025
  Materiality Matrix: Sustainability governance pages refer to validating materiality; the Annual Report
• contains sustainability disclosures under ESRS (materiality-based).
• ESG data centre: KPIs and targets are provided in web tables/PDFs.

Focal Points:

• 29% reduction in GHGs from own operations
• 9 prorammes providing medicines to people in need

Parameters:

• Data to: 31 Dec 2024
• Published: May 2025
• Materiality Matrix: Yes in Progress report
• ESG data centre: ESG/“Healthy Future” Progress Reports are provided as concise web pages and downloadable PDFs; IR also hosts Sustainability-Linked Bonds materials.

We have an exciting opportunity for an individual to join our Liverpool FC Foundation team as a Insights and Impact Manager.

You will be responsible for ensuring that the LFC Foundation can demonstrate the impact of its work to a wide range of stakeholders including staff, trustees, funders and the communities in which the Foundation operates.

The successful candidate will have demonstrable experience managing evaluation and research projects and extensive knowledge of using data systems such as Salesforce and Power Bi.You will be passionate and knowledgeable about different approaches and methods to obtain both quantitative and qualitative data.

JobPost: Franklin Templeton - Stewardship & Sustainability Analyst (London, close unknown)

24 mth contract

JobPost: S&P Global - Senior Principal Analyst, Climate Risk and Opportunity (London, close unknown)

JobPost: JPMorganChase: Asset Management, Product Manager - Sustainable Investing & Stewardship - Associate/Vice President (London)

JobPost: M&G - Sustainability Manager – Sustainable Investment Frameworks (London, close 7 Sept)

• Program Associate, The Global Innovation Lab for Climate Finance

  Climate Finance Intern

  Partnerships Lead | The Global Innovation Lab for Climate Finance

  Analyst - ClimateShot Investor Coalition (CLIC) / Agri-Food Systems, Africa.

  Manager - Agri-Food Systems, Africa

  Call For Applications: India Clean Energy Finance

   

JobPost: Aviva  - ESG Fixed Income Analyst (London, close unknown)

The ESG Analyst is a key member of our dynamic in-house team responsible for evaluating current and potential portfolio investments and leveraging active ownership strategies — including company engagement, proxy voting, and public policy — to advance sustainable business practices. We seek experienced and accomplished candidates with exceptional research and analytical capabilities, superior communication and relationship management skills, and the ability to effectively manage time and deliver multiple projects with keen insight and attention to detail. 

JobPost: Chanel - Senior Manager – Climate & Nature Impact Performance (Fixed-term, Maternity Cover) (London, close 30 Sept)

ShareAction’s Banking Standards team works towards holding financial institutions accountable for their impact on climate change. We have a history of campaigning on key aspects of banks’ climate strategies—such as their emission reduction targets or fossil fuel policies—and we are gradually expanding our work to include other sustainability themes and banking regulation. We have achieved significant wins, such as contributing to HSBC becoming the world’s largest bank to cease financing for new oil and gas fields, Barclays dramatically reducing its oil sands financing, and mobilising investors to call on Societe Generale to set a renewable energy target.

The team is structured around two main pillars: our campaigning and research pillar. The research pillar ensures that the team’s campaigning and advocacy work is based on sound analysis and facts. The Senior Research Manager oversees the research pillar, currently composed of three more junior researchers. The Senior Research Manager is responsible for developing and implementing a research strategy that underpins campaign needs for analysis and insight in line with campaign timelines and available resources. They oversee and contribute to the delivery of high-quality research outputs, including thematic reports, investor briefings, surveys of Europe’s largest banks, and ensure that they are underpinned by clear and robust research methodologies. Alongside the Head of Banking Programme and the Senior Campaign Manager, they act as an ambassador for the team in external forums, the media, and when meeting with and presenting to external stakeholders, including banks, civil society organisations, and investors.

Key responsibilities are detailed in the Job Description in the downloadable Candidate Pack.

If this role sounds like something that would build on your current skill set and engage you, we’d love to hear from you!

Applications will be reviewed regularly, and this advert may close earlier than stated if a suitable candidate is identified. You are therefore encouraged to apply as soon as you can. Previous applicants should not re-apply.

Apply below

Employment Type - Contract - Please note, where PRI has an office there is an expectation to work a minimum of 2 days per week
Location Hybrid · London, City of, UK
Team IIC
Seniority Mid-level
Closing: 8:00pm, 22nd Aug 2025 BST

JobPost: ShareAction - Senior Engagement Manager - Investor Engagement (London, close unknown)

JobPost: Goldman Sachs - Asset & Wealth Management, Sustainability & Impact, Value Creation, Associate - New York

See links below for further details and to apply

Account Manager, Fundraising

Senior Sponsorship Specialist, Events (8 Month Fixed Term Contract)

Senior Associate, Events (8 Month Fixed Term Contract)

JobPost: Bloomberg - Senior Sustainability Analyst, Reporting & Data - Global Sustainability Office (NYC, close unknown)

JobPost: Mondelez - ESG Data & Digital Manager (various global locations)

The Senior Engagement Manager role will sit within the Investor engagement (IE) team. The IE team is responsible for challenging asset managers and asset owners on their responsible investment practices (climate, biodiversity, social…), socialising ShareAction research relevant to advancing responsible investment standards, as well as coordinating investor engagement and outreach across the organisation.

ShareAction intends to develop an ambitious engagement strategy with asset owners to persuade them to lead and drive change across the investment and stewardship chain. One of the main focus area will be engagement with UK and EU pension funds, aimed at mobilising them to drive greater ambition through the investment system by setting high expectations of their asset managers and holding them to account for the quality and ambition of their stewardship activity, including by moving mandates where appropriate.

The role involves establishing high-calibre relationships with senior decision-makers at mainly UK and European asset owners. These relationships are developed through regular dialogue via individual meetings, roundtables or webinars, exploring the application and evolution of responsible investment standards across selected thematic areas. The impact of this dialogue will rest upon the role holder working closely with colleagues across the organisation to leverage ShareAction’s expertise across workstreams.

The Senior Engagement Manager will also support the development of ShareAction’s responsible investment standards for institutional investors, working closely with the Head of Investor Engagement and Senior Research Manager to produce research on key thematic issues. They will lead engagement with investors to gather input, shape recommendations, and drive adoption of higher standards across the investment system.

If this role sounds like something that would build on your current skill set and engage you, we’d love to hear from you!

Deadline for applications: 9:00 a.m. on Monday 4th August