Summary of most important developments in the sustainability area across Asia (vol. II).
Vážený uživateli, je nám líto, ale Váš prohlížeč nepodporuje plné zobrazení webu. Doporučujeme Vám přejít na jeho aktuálnější verzi (MS Edge) nebo na některý z nejčastějších prohlížečů (Chrome, Firefox, Safari).
Home Credit
20/11/2022
Sustainability in the Asian Century (October 2022)
ESG Risks in South Asia
Regional impacts of climate hazards are most pronounced in South Asia
According to the most recent S&P Sustainability Quarterly Review[1], regional impacts of climate hazards differ significantly across regions, and are most pronounced in South Asia where 10%–18% of GDP is at risk. Impacts are also high for Central Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa.
India’s ESG Potential
Environmental Performance Index (EPI): India ranked the very lowest of 180 countries
This year, India’s top 1000 companies are recommended to publish the first dry-run Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reports (BRSR). Starting from next year, it will be their obligation.
Opportunities for Indonesia
Indonesia: The highest risk of climate impacts but also the most promising opportunities
Indonesia is one of the countries, both with the highest risk of climate impacts but also the most promising opportunities connected to the green transition.
Deep Dive: China’s Environmental Policy
China: Clean water and green hills are hills of gold and silver
At the opening ceremony of the widely covered 20th CCP Congress, president Xi Jinping pointed to environmental protection as one of the key achievements of the past decade. “Clean water and green hills are hills of gold and silver,” is the phrase Xi likes to use.
Essential Developments in the Global Context
Increasingly polarised and politically charged debate about ESG principles in the US
In the US, the past several weeks have seen an increasingly polarised and politically charged debate about ESG principles. While 24 Republican-led states lined up to forbid ESG investing via public pension funds, 13 blue states responded with an anti-backlash letter[1].
The critics argued that ESG-influenced investing goes against fiduciary duty of the fund managers, who are obliged to maximise the profits. The advocates refute that, saying the anti-ESG practices negatively impact competitive costs, and increase potential risks that will be left for others to deal with in the future. Both camps blame each other for subjecting financial decision-making to political ideology.
Sdílet na sociálních sítích