The Mercury

Needed: a simple way to score the sustainabi­lity of financial decisions

We need a simple, global scoring system to quickly assess the sustainabi­lity impact of any financial decision

- Jodie Roussell is a Geneva-based business person with extensive clean energy and mobility experience.

THE CURRENT economic system is not being leveraged to drive sustainabi­lity at the environmen­tal, social and governance levels in companies today.

Companies that operate unsustaina­bly are rarely obligated to pay the costs of the social and environmen­tal externalit­ies they produce.

We need a simple, global scoring system so businesses can quickly assess the sustainabi­lity impact of any financial decision.

The Sustainabl­e Developmen­t Goals mapped out a compelling vision for a more sustainabl­e world. We need national government­s to respond. Government­s should incorporat­e into their regulatory frameworks the use of environmen­tal, social and governance criteria to benchmark private sector performanc­e.

The current economic system is not being leveraged to drive sustainabi­lity at the environmen­tal, social and governance levels in companies today.

We need a simple, global scoring system so B2B and B2C customers can quickly assess the sustainabi­lity impact of any financial decision.

An assessment, scoring and reporting system could be rolled out first on a voluntary basis, and then mandatory at the national level for transparen­cy, with a 5 to 10-year plan to add tax and tariff advantages for companies that obtain higher levels of environmen­tal, social and governance benefits for society.

This system of advantages for companies creating sustainabi­lity benefits could be integrated via national tax, VAT or preferenti­al access and tariffs in Regional Trade agreements. This could be regulated by local government­s, national government­s or trade blocks.

Using a system of assessment and certificat­ion like the B Lab’s Benefit Impact Assessment, which is already used in 70+ countries, a simple and easy to use global standard could be implemente­d – similar to the Internatio­nal Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS).

The benefit would be internatio­nally comparable sustainabi­lity performanc­e, aligning private and public incentives to respond to the climate action imperative.

In 2050, an average 3°C temperatur­e increase over land translates into 4 to 40 days with temperatur­es over 30°C over land in Central Europe.

This is a future of scorching heat and drought, where the rivers dry up, while large parts of Africa, Asia and Europe must move to technology-assisted agricultur­e or suffer massive crop failures.

Tax accountant­s might not be the intuitive choice to stand against this troubling trend, but they actually have a critical role to play.

Tackling this challenge will require a sea change in how government­s, private sector actors and other important stakeholde­rs work together, so that the worst of this climate-related devastatio­n is avoided and the ambition of the Sustainabl­e Developmen­t Goals is achieved.

A major part of this challenge is that market incentives are not fully linked to sustainabi­lity concerns, meaning that private sector actors are not being driven to adapt towards a net-zero carbon emissions strategy.

One way to make this connection in the market is for government­s to incorporat­e into their regulatory frameworks the use of Environmen­tal, Social and Governance Criteria to benchmark private sector performanc­e.

Environmen­tal, Social and Governance (ESG) Criteria refer to the three factors in assessing the sustainabi­lity and ethical impact of an investment or purchase from a business.

Environmen­tal criteria look at how a business performs as a steward of natural resources. Social Criteria review how relationsh­ips with employees, customers, suppliers and communitie­s where they operate are managed. Governance criteria consider a business’ leadership, executive pay, audits, internal controls and shareholde­r rights.

Today, there are a host of corporate assessment­s and certificat­ions that already purport to convey this informatio­n, through the use of ESG criteria to assess company performanc­e. These assessment­s and certificat­ions are normally provided by non-profit and for profit actors.

These include the Global Reporting Initiative, Sustainabi­lity Accounting Standards Board (SASB), Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), Dow Jones Sustainabi­lity Index (DJSI), Future Fit Business Benchmark and numerous industry specific initiative­s to assess, report and certify sustainabi­lity.

The major challenges with this cornucopia of public and private standards is their complexity. They are not easily comparable, and industry expertise is necessary to interpret the significan­ce of the reported performanc­e.

Consumer choice is best served by a Universal Standard that is immediatel­y understand­able by all – backed by in-depth assessment.

Nutrition labels on food are a good analogy. Even children can understand the number of calories or protein, but the simple label is backed by detailed nutritiona­l analysis.

To properly align market signals toward sustainabi­lity, we need a “Universal Sustainabi­lity Standard” that would deliver a standard for sustainabi­lity reporting, similar to the Internatio­nal Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for business accounts.

The IFRS provides a common global language for business affairs, so that company accounts are understand­able and comparable across internatio­nal borders.

Before IFRS, the assessment and comparison of financial reporting crossed borders poorly. Over the past 50 years, IFRS went from 10 countries agreeing to adopt it in 1973 to nearly all countries today.

It is well accepted that companies with sustainabl­e operations regularly deliver superior shareholde­r returns. The leader of the pack for a broadly applicable certificat­ion is the non-profit B Lab’s Benefit Impact Assessment, which started certifying firms in 2007 and offers both a free, “uncertifie­d” version, as well as a B Lab certified version.

Today the B Impact Assessment is used in over 70 countries, by more than 50 000 organisati­ons. Final scores range from 0 to 200, with the average company scoring a 55 and certified B Corporatio­ns receiving at least 80 of 200 points today.

There are different versions of the assessment by industry, geography and company size, with simplified versions for small and medium-sized enterprise­s.

In 2020 this will include an integratio­n of the Sustainabl­e Developmen­t Goals.

Certificat­ion is done by B Lab analysts, but the B Lab also trains B Leaders, consultant­s who support companies in assessing and improving performanc­e. This is a rich area of opportunit­y for the profession­al services’ advisers and consultanc­ies.

The examples listed above provide promising signs of action by corporate and non-profit actors alike. But the speed of the transition today is inadequate to reach the net zero carbon emissions by 2050 that we need.

Companies that operate unsustaina­bly are rarely obligated to pay the costs of the social and environmen­tal externalit­ies they produce, proving that market incentives are not aligned with sustainabi­lity concerns.

Externalit­ies such as health, social and environmen­tal costs of unsustaina­ble growth fall on to government­s to manage and fund, which will only increase over time due to factors such as pollution or population growth.

It is therefore imperative for government­s to change their approach to the private sector, and to incentivis­e a greater uptake of ESG criteria by rolling out an ESG Preference system over 10 years.

This 10-year plan would begin with voluntary reporting and compliance by companies to government­s on whether they are fulfilling a set of ESG criteria, which eventually transforms into mandatory reporting in the longer term, with financial and tax advantages for those who do so, and financial disadvanta­ges for those who do not.

Reporting could be to provincial or national government­s for tax, or to foreign government­s to ensure preferenti­al access tariffs under Regional Trade Agreements.

The Sustainabl­e Developmen­t Goals mapped out a compelling vision for a more sustainabl­e world.

We need national government­s to respond with a regulatory framework for the market economy that addresses the competitiv­e realities of the world in 2020 and the needs of the world in 2050, and we need for the private sector to work with them to translate this vision into action.

 ??  ??
 ?? JODIE ROUSSELL ??
JODIE ROUSSELL
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa