- 12 September 2024
- Research
It was a privilege for Seneca Impact Advisors to be invited by the Securities Commission Malaysia to participate in the 15th Annual Roundtable on Restoring Humanity in Finance at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. We discussed the global community’s awareness of the need to direct public and private financing towards climate- and nature-positive projects. However, we also acknowledged the numerous challenges and setbacks faced by the sustainable finance sector.
In the realm of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria, misleading representations are a significant concern. These range from the misuse of the term “ESG” to false claims about additionality and the overestimation of carbon removal and biodiversity benefits. Such misrepresentations can undermine the credibility of ESG initiatives and mislead stakeholders about the true impact of their investments.
To address these controversies, various organizations have developed their own impact standards. However, each set of criteria is tailored to a specific target audience. This often results in standards that are either too broad for effective monitoring and evaluation or too narrow to be practically applied across different industries and project types.
The session aimed not to offer a one-size-fits-all solution for impact and sustainability measurement. Instead, we focused on examining the structure and calibration of various criteria to provide insights into selecting the most relevant standards for an organization and its stakeholders. By understanding these nuances, we can ensure that the chosen standards are both practical and robust, leading to more accurate and meaningful impact assessments.