In order to implement the “Plan for the Reform of the Legal Disclosure System of Environmental Information” issued by China’s Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE) in May 2021, the MEE has issued new disclosure rules (Rules) that will require domestic entities to disclose a range of environmental information
The pressure on States and corporates to take action to address the socio-economic and environmental impacts of climate change is rapidly increasing. This pressure has resulted in a substantial rise in the number of climate change-related disputes. Although many of these disputes have thus far been brought before national courts, arbitration is likely to become an increasingly important method for resolving climate change-related disputes in the near future, since these disputes are often of an international nature and may benefit from the use of a neutral forum. In particular, there is likely to be an increase in climate change-related investment treaty arbitration, given the rising influence of climate change in the investment treaty landscape. This will bring into focus a variety of considerations affecting investments which are subject to the protection of one or more investment treaties.
Continue Reading Climate Change and Investment Treaty Arbitration
On 6 December 2021, the Netherlands became the latest European government to announce plans to introduce mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD) legislation at a national level, adding to a growing movement and proliferation of national HREDD laws. This puts the Netherlands in the company of the likes of France, Germany and Norway (which have enacted or adopted such laws) and Austria, Belgium and Switzerland, among others (which are progressing their own national HREDD laws).
This development comes despite further delay on the publication of HREDD legislation at an EU level (see our previous Blog Post). On 6 December 2021, the Dutch Foreign Trade and Development minister said that he was “very disappointed” at the European Commission’s further delay to introduce EU mandatory HREDD legislation and announced the Dutch Government’s plans to develop and introduce a national HREDD law instead.
On December 16, 2021, the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released draft principles for managing exposures to climate-related financial risks (Climate Principles). The OCC regulates national banks, federal savings associations, and federal branches and agencies of foreign banking organizations.
The Climate Principles are targeted at banks with
On December 15, 2021, the Singapore Exchange (SGX) responded to two consultations addressing a range of ESG-related topics that could significantly change the ESG reporting landscape for listed companies in Singapore. The consultations address the implementation of (i) mandatory climate-related disclosures for certain sectors aligned with the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), (ii) mandatory diversity-related disclosures for all issuers and (iii) a list of 27 “Core ESG Metrics” to help listed companies align their ESG disclosures with international standards and best practices on a voluntary basis.
As SGX otherwise requires ESG reporting on a comply-or-explain basis only, these proposals represent a shift toward an increased focus on mandatory climate and diversity disclosures that, in particular, has taken hold among Asian regulators. Just this month, the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong implemented mandatory gender diversity requirements and Hong Kong’s Cross-Agency Steering Group reported “progress towards mandating climate-related disclosures aligned with the TCFD framework by 2025 across relevant sectors”, while a group of Malaysian regulators announced their intention to implement mandatory TCFD disclosures by the end of 2024.
In this Blog Post, we highlight key aspects of the recent SGX announcements and provide guidance on how companies are already implementing ESG frameworks incorporating TCFD and more.
During the COP26 summit, a coalition of 190 countries and organisations committed to phase out coal energy by 2040 as part of their commitment to transition to a low-carbon economy. The coalition also stated, in their ‘Global Coal To Clean Power Transition Statement’, that they would provide a framework to support affected workers, sectors and communities to make a “just transition” away from unabated coal power. The coalition’s concern is that the transition to a low-carbon economy may leave many coal-dependent economies at risk of economic hardship and social unrest.
The ‘Just Transition Assessment‘ (the Assessment) recently published by the World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA) provides important insight into the metrics that NGOs may lobby for in order to achieve what they view as a “just transition” (for information on some of the WBA’s other initiatives, please see our Corporate Human Rights Benchmark publication). In carrying out the Assessment, the WBA states that it has measured the actions that some of the world’s most influential companies have taken to support workers and communities whilst they transform to low-carbon business models.
The Assessment contends that there is a “systematic lack of action by companies to identify, prepare for and mitigate the social impacts of their low-carbon strategies”. The Assessment goes on to state that these purported inadequacies need to be addressed, as transition risks being adversely affected by social unrest among those whose livelihoods are threatened.
On November 10, 2021, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) released Version 1 of the ASEAN Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance (the “ASEAN Taxonomy“). First announced in March 2021, the ASEAN Taxonomy will provide a common language for sustainable finance among the ten ASEAN Member States (AMS) that, together, comprise the fifth largest economy in the world. This is a necessary and timely development as ASEAN remains highly vulnerable to climate change, which has had a significant impact on the people, businesses and governments of ASEAN.
Version 1 is a significant step in ASEAN’s sustainability journey, as this initial document will provide the framework for continuing discussions among AMS as the ASEAN Taxonomy develops. In this Blog Post, we highlight key aspects of Version 1 of the ASEAN Taxonomy and compare this new framework against the world’s most prominent sustainability taxonomy, the EU’s Taxonomy Regulation (the “EU Taxonomy“).
Continue Reading ASEAN Releases Sustainability Taxonomy for Southeast Asia
On November 8, 2021, the acting head of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Michael J. Hsu, issued a call to action on climate change to the boards of directors of OCC-regulated banks. Specifically, he outlined an initial series of climate change-related questions that boards should be asking bank management
This blog was first published by Law.com
As usual, things ran over, but eventually the parties meeting under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and, separately but together (kind of), under the Paris Agreement, adopted two “Decisions” by consensus, being CP.26 and CMA.3 respectively.
Continue reading at Law.com.
The sheer volume of capital flows into sustainable, or ESG-focused, funds and products over recent months reflects the rapidly increasing number of investors with ESG-related preferences, or demands, when selecting those investments. Evaluating, and comparing, the ESG credentials of different investment products presents significant difficulties, however, in circumstances where information and disclosures about those products – and even the terminology used – are, at best, inconsistent, and often incomplete; and, at worst, may attract accusations of “greenwashing”, by using marketing materials to mislead investors about the ESG approaches used in their products.
Continue Reading The CFA Institute releases Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products