Resource Center

Agriculture is estimated to account for one-quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 80 percent of deforestation, 70 percent of water use and 78 percent of ocean and freshwater pollution. This engagement theme aims to contribute to a more sustainable trajectory for the future of food.

The purpose of Thematic Engagement is to influence companies to proactively manage specific ESG risks and opportunities, as well as enabling the participating investors to play an active role in addressing material, shared sustainability challenges through raising sector and systemic standards in alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) agenda.

Our Comprehensive Thematic Engagement program combines a set of four thematic engagements in a single package: Climate Transition, Human Capital and the Future of Work, Plastics and the Circular Economy and Tomorrow’s Board. The themes have been selected to give investors the broadest possible coverage of E, S and G topics with exposure to diverse industries and companies.

Sustainalytics´ Peer Performance Insights suite of products provides information about the company’s ESG Risk Rating and its components compared to a select number of industry peers.

Sustainalytics’ Impact Metrics is a set of company-level metrics that provide a useful measure of impact. Each metric can be used to report on at least one theme in our new Impact Framework and for at least one of the 17 SDGs.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is accelerating. Technological progress, globalization and demographic shifts, will bring structural changes and disruptions to society and labor markets. This engagement supports investors in understanding how companies can proactively manage workforce needs and transitions for a sustainable labor market.

While being a vital part of the response to climate change as well as other economic and societal needs, the growing supply of cleantech products also entails environmental and social challenges within the various processes across the value chain. This engagement aims to encourage and enable the cleantech industry to grow in a more responsible manner.

Sustainalytics’ Corporate Impact Report calculates the social, environmental, and economic impact of a business, focusing on the material issues that are most relevant to its industry and region.

Engaging with marine fisheries and aquaculture producers, the focus is on managing seafood sustainability risks and opportunities, which in turn contributes to long-term operational continuity and sustainability.

This engagement focuses on addressing risks related to child- and forced labor in the targeted companies’ supply chains, as well as to remediate potential adverse labor rights impacts. Particular focus is placed on the identified high-risk commodities, namely coffee, rice, sugar, tea and tomatoes.

ESG Risk Ratings are categorized across five risk levels. Sustainalytics' ESG Risk Ratings span more than 12,000 companies and encompass most major global indices. Have questions about ESG Risk Ratings? Learn more from our FAQ

Sustainalytics’ ESG Risk Ratings are designed to help investors identify and understand financially material ESG risks in their portfolio companies and how those risks might affect performance.

Climate risk management is one of the overarching challenges facing members of society, including investors. Investors are striving to understand and integrate the financial impact of climate-related risks and opportunities in investment decisions.

Sustainalytics‘ works with leading index providers to develop and maintain indexes that track the ESG performance of companies.

The plastic waste issue is currently one of the fastest growing environmental topics on the political and business agenda. Plastic is a vital product to the global economy; however, the way it is being produced and managed is unsustainable, especially at the use and after‐use phases. The carbon footprint and emissions associated with plastic production along with the issue of the environmental and potential health impacts of plastic waste are a matter of growing concern for investors. In light of the environmental, social and financial challenges, the linear “take, make and dispose” approach cannot continue. The alternative is a circular economy approach, which focuses on maximizing resource value, making resource use more efficient and extending product value during use.

A Case Study On November 1, 2019 Moody’s cut its rating outlook for South Africa from “Baa3 stable” to “Baa3 negative,” putting the country’s bonds on the cusp of junk status after several harbingers of a potential downgrade.[i] Earlier this year, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund cut their 2019 growth forecasts for South Africa to around 0.8%, while the Institute of International Finance warned that the country’s public debt could grow to 95% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2024.[ii] The other two big credit rating agencies (CRAs) – Fitch and S&P – downgraded South Africa’s credit rating to sub-investment grade back in 2017, citing a deterioration in the country’s public finances.[iii]

As awareness around environmental and social issues has grown, so has the number of investors who deliberately seek to allocate capital to create positive social and environmental impact. Impact investing is as old as the sustainable investment industry, with the bulk of strategies to date having been executed through private equity and debt vehicles. However, as a more diversified pool of investors look to adopt impact investing strategies, fueled by the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Climate Agreement, a broader set of asset classes are being considered – here enters public equities.

As global leaders meet in Madrid for the COP25 amid mounting concern over the international response to climate change, the EU Taxonomy experienced a setback with the UK and France blocking the plans. The new framework, intended to drive financial flows that will accelerate the shift to a low carbon future, will likely become a global standard affecting investors around the world. If enacted, it could cement the EU’s position as the world’s pace setter on climate legislation.

Major global companies such Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple (known as “GAFA”) have come to dominate not just the tech industry but increasingly global commerce as well. The OECD estimates that companies like these avoid USD 100-240 billion in taxes annually, representing roughly 4-10% of global corporate income tax revenues. Attention paid to corporate taxation has also risen sharply in recent years, with increasingly heated debates on what constitutes “companies paying their fair share.”

In 2019, a wave of litigation related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) emerged in the United States, as several states filed lawsuits against PFAS manufacturers, including DuPont, Chemours and 3M. This legal action accompanies increased regulatory scrutiny of this potentially risky class of chemicals. In this article, we will focus on the risks chemical companies face related to PFAS contamination of drinking water in the United States and the ESG risks posed to chemical companies and their investors.