Resource Center

With the threats of climate change and the existing inequalities in natural resource access and availability around the world, ensuring an adequate supply of clean water is necessary to ensure the well-being of all people across the world.

Utilities have found themselves in the literal and metaphorical eye of the storm over the last year as hurricanes, floods and wildfires of increasing frequency and strength have wreaked damage on their assets. In late August, Storm Ida made landfall in Louisiana, USA and devastated the power grid lines. Entergy, the utility operating in Louisiana, supplying most of New Orleans, restored 90% of the supply only by mid-September, with 87,000 customers still without power.

Indications that a food crisis is imminent are clear. Fundamental changes in the global food system are required to address these challenges. This decade is a watershed moment for urgent efforts to close the loop, and companies and investors can play a pivotal role. Despite being closely connected to issues such as climate change and basic human rights, food waste has attracted comparatively less attention from companies, investors, and other stakeholders.

From a market perspective, engagement and voting on governance issues have been used as levers for influence for a long time. On the other hand, environmental and social issues were historically addressed from a values-based perspective or primarily for fact-finding purposes. Today, many responsible investors leverage corporate dialogue as a tool to influence and drive meaningful change and impact

There are many factors that rating agencies consider within its overall assessment. For example, ESG rating companies tend to look for at least three years of ESG metrics to determine company trends and long-term ESG targets, goals, and strategies to manage and reduce ESG risks at least five years ahead. Read on to learn about how Sustainalytics' Material Risk Engagement program promotes and protects long-term value by engaging with high-risk companies on financially-material ESG issues. (A North American Snapshot)

Pipelines play a critical role in the U.S energy infrastructure transporting natural gas, crude oil, natural gas liquids, petroleum, and petrochemical products. While these pipelines play a vital role in supporting the U.S economy, investors are increasingly scrutinizing pipeline operators' long-term economic profitability and sustainability practices. A closer look into the status of pipelines reveals a particular issue that investors need to consider.

The construction industry can have a reputation for workforce insensitivity and is highly vulnerable to economic and social variabilities. The ESG Impacts of COVID-19 drive companies to adapt to significant challenges related to the demand for construction services. This construction sector research snapshot highlights relevant social issues that corporations face due to ripple effects from the pandemic using Sustainalytics’ ESG Risk Ratings and Controversies Research.

In this blog, we look at the delay of the level 2 regulation, some aspects of the Q&A, and the ongoing confusion and divergence around SFDR. We pay special attention to the potential impact of the Principle Adverse Impact indicators, an element of SFDR.

As mass vaccination against the coronavirus started, a key challenge has been to keep millions of doses of vaccines at the right temperature. An increase in temperature inside a truck or aircraft, by half a degree, for half an hour, would reportedly result in a 'defrosted' vaccine which has then to be discarded.

On July 6th, the European Commission published its Strategy for Financing the Transition to a Sustainable Economy, the successor of the EU’s Sustainable Finance Action Plan, which launched in 2018. The strategy focuses on transforming the financial system and financing transition plans, building on the 2018 Action Plan, which centered on developing the EU Taxonomy, putting in place disclosure regimes, and developing tools for the market to develop sustainable investment solutions and prevent greenwashing.

For investors looking to enhance ESG risk management and the long-term impact of sustainability efforts, a systemic approach can help identify interventions that will most effectively mitigate the risk of negative outcomes or divert the chain of events towards a more sustainable trajectory. Typically, this involves moving from single-issue or company-specific tactics to progressively integrate system-level considerations in ESG strategies. Targeting systemic change through active ownership is one way to acknowledge and start unravelling the dynamic web of global challenges.

On May 7th, the European Commission published draft rules on how corporates and financial institutions should report on their alignment with the EU Taxonomy. The draft rules are laid out in a very technical document and not an easy read. This might explain why certain changes with significant impact on timelines and scope of the EU Taxonomy Regulation have flown under the radar of media and investors. Some of the impacts even escaped the attention of financial market participants responding to the consultation on the rules.

Une marée de réglementations liées à l’ESG s’abat sur les investisseurs institutionnels. Avec l’introduction de SFDR et les obligations de publication mises en place par l’AMF, se pose la question d’une possible obsolescence des labels ISR dans la lutte contre le greenwashing. Un phénomène qui inquiète de plus en plus les investisseurs et les régulateurs au vue de la croissance constante du marché des fond ISR. Pendant de nombreuses années, l’industrie s’est auto-régulée en s’accordant sur une définition générale de l’investissement responsable et/ou en se tournant vers les opérateurs de labels pour créer des standards de marché.

Response to EC 7th May 2021 Draft Delegated Regulation, Taxonomy From Morningstar Inc. and Sustainalytics, a Morningstar Company Submitted via the European Commission portal for feedback

Quand les nouvelles réglementations sur les investissements durables et responsables (ISR) furent annoncées avec le « EU Action Plan », les institutionnels français n'ont pas cillé. Depuis l'accord de Paris en 2015, de nombreuses nouvelles obligations réglementaires liées à la publication d’information et à l’analyse ESG ont influencé les stratégies d’investissements responsables des institutionnels français. Le règlement SFDR qui est entré en vigueur le 10 mars dernier vient s’ajouter au cadre réglementaire local en matière de reporting.

With a growing awareness around sustainability issues and accelerating regulatory developments in Europe, sustainable finance is one of the most significant talking points of our time. But what does sustainability investing mean for stakeholders and what are the resulting challenges? What’s more, what kind of impact does this have on a company’s mid to long-term strategy as well as its short-term profitability? By bringing together representatives from the regulatory side, the financial industry, the non-financial industry and an independent advisory firm, we aim to take a closer look at the consequences for the corporate world and answer a key question - is there a price to be paid for investing in ESG companies?

Material Risk Engagement helps investors promote and protect their long-term value by engaging with high-risk companies on their financially material ESG issues. This inaugural Material Risk Engagement annual report covers ten months since its launch in March 2020. Read the report to learn more about:

This year’s instalment of our 10 for series – 10 for 2019: Systemic Risks Loom Large – explores 10 environmental, social and governance (ESG) themes that could affect global investment portfolios in 2019.

While child labor remains a serious problem across industries and countries, it is only one part of the overall issues pertaining to children’s rights; companies and investors should recognize the scope and relevance of this topic.

In Sustainalytics’ paper, Combining ESG Risk and Economic Moat,[i] we examined the effect of combining the two metrics, showcasing the benefits of higher returns and lower downside risk. More specifically, investing in companies with negligible/low ESG risk and wide economic moats was advantageous for creating alpha over the past four years.