Carbon Pricing
Pricing the ton of carbon is a key matter – more so as an increasing number of companies aim at publicly claiming carbon neutrality. Carbon hence has a price – and this raises the much discussed question: What is a fair (or better: ‘correct’) price for carbon? In this post I present a glimpse of some of the challenges and realities related to the topic. It leaves us with the question: What went wrong in the current system that fundamentally asks us to choose between having to monetarily price natural and societal resources, and a fair, equitable access to these resources specifically for hard hit communities? The question alone should not be even asked. And yet it seems that’s what we’re left with given the current time and age.
Charles Darwin
The finance industry does have its share to play in a ‘just transition’ to a low carbon and more ‘doughnut-ty’ economy. This is a given. I have written repeatedly about it. In most contexts, the finance industry is characterised and promoted as a ‘driver’ of said transition. But is that really so? After all, the by far and distant most frequent tenor in ESG (the finance industry’s term for all things ‘sustainability’) is predominantly about risk. With that in mind, let's tell it as it is: The finance industry’s ESG discourse is opportunistic. As indeed all it’s actions and views have been, and as indeed the the industry’s clockwork is set out to be and function. Opportunistic.
Do Vote, Voting
From research we know that boards of directors lack skill and expertise when it comes to ESG and Climate Issues. But: certainly the asset owners and investors do see that point, and are worried about boards taking tangible action that would safeguard their assets? This is precisely the question that ShareAction asked in their most recent report. The insights are sobering. Particularly the Big Three asset managers (BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street) have a miserable voting record during AGM season: both, for the number of votes cast, as well as for their stance against most resolution on Climate Change and Human Rights. The good news: it rarely has been so simple to identify Greenwashers. Thanks to publicly available filings about votes cast in AGMs of listed companies.
Virtuous Circle
‘System positive’. The latest term I came a cross in the finance world, and which intends to identify business that are particularly well set up to survive the tribulations to be expected in the decades to come. Immediately the cynic in me asks: Another addition to the sustainability bullshit bingo? And yet: the 5 questions proposed for scrutinising companies are very sharp, very relevant and very insightful. They only fall short of one: Will the company thrive within or even thanks to the Doughnut Boundaries?
Doughnut Economics
In an earlier post I asked: How can business, a business, downscale the Doughnut and make it operational? In this post I look at three tools that praise themselves of being either part, or even all, of the support a business needs on the journey to integrate the Doughnut Economics concepts. Namely: Science-based Targets (SBTs), the B Impact Assessment(BIA), and the Future Fit Business Benchmark (FFBBM). What are their fundamental differences and similarities? Are they indeed a tool to help on the path to keeping within the Doughnut boundaries?
Planetary Boundaries - Stockholm Resilience Centre
Overconsumption or ‘simply’ consumption? Fair resource use, or resource depletion? Fair share, equal share or acquired share of resources? Those are questions that pop up when the Planetary Boundaries are being discussed. “Is Europe living within the limits of our planet?: An assessment of Europe's environmental footprints in relation to planetary boundaries”, published in April 2020 does exactly that: it evaluates and calculates the European performance for planetary boundaries by taking a consumption-based (footprint-based) perspective. This is turn is interesting as it relates environmental pressures to final demands for goods and services. And the results are ... shall we say: a stark call to action.
Sustain What
Few economists have truly the track record to justify themselves talking about systemic issues, impacts and outlooks - other than in blatantly generic truths. In his series 'Sustain What' - intermittently focused on the topic of the systemic aspects of Corona/Covid19 - renowned journalist Andrew Revkin has sought out a range of experts.