Featured Product

    BIS Paper Sets Out Policy Actions for Design of Green Taxonomies

    October 08, 2021

    The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) published a paper that develops a framework to classify and compare existing taxonomies. The paper also identifies weaknesses that emerge from this classification and comparison and proposes five key principles for the design of effective taxonomies. The analysis in the paper concludes by setting out key policy recommendations, one of which is that authorities should aim to harmonize practices for calculating and reporting impact metrics. Furthermore, standardization of units and disclosure of computation methodologies should be encouraged and external auditing required.

    The weaknesses identified by the analyses include the lack of use of relevant and measurable sustainability performance indicators, lack of granularity, and lack of verification of achieved sustainability benefits. The key principles for the design of effective taxonomies can be employed to develop a simple framework for transition taxonomies. While certain principles, both in traditional taxonomies and in the case of climate transition finance, are intended for application over medium to longer term horizons, the paper recommends some concrete near-term policy actions:

    • Endeavor that specific taxonomies (or certification processes) correspond to specific sustainability objectives. A single taxonomy that categorizes activities or entities based on the achievement of multiple objectives, such as greenhouse gas emission reduction and social inclusion, runs the risk of increased greenwashing due to reduced market transparency resulting from complex weighting schemes to aggregate the objectives. Narrowly focused taxonomies benefit from less costly certification and verification processes. 
    • Encourage development of transition taxonomies to facilitate the channeling of funds to transition activities and increase the focus on Paris alignment. Practices and standards with respect to the reporting of climate transition plans, interim targets, and their level of alignment with Paris goals need to be harmonized further. Many institutional investors seeking to align portfolios with low-carbon transitions use environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings. Yet the metrics for the environmental pillar (the “E” of ESG) do not yet capture a forward-looking assessment on climate transition. In the absence of a globally accepted taxonomy, a wide range of transition terminologies and metrics exists, thus resulting in a low level of standardization across markets and jurisdictions. 
    • Monitor and supervise the evolution of certification and verification processes. To mitigate the risk of greenwashing, a high-quality and consistent verification process is critical. Supervisors and regulatory authorities should provide uniform standards of conduct for the providers of certification and verification services. Viable models for the supervision and regulation of providers of those services include those already in place for credit rating agencies in the United States and Euro area.
    • Shift from current voluntary guidelines of post-issuance reporting to mandatory annual impact and use-of-proceeds reports. The success of outcome-based taxonomies will depend heavily on the availability of more data and analysis on the impact of the classified assets or activities. To the extent that taxonomies move toward incorporating outcome-based key performance indicators (Principle 3), impact reports are likely to be a key supplementary requirement of these taxonomy, with provisions of the report best made available on at least an annual or even a higher frequency basis. Estimation of the promised impact of the projects financed by green bonds as well as ex post tracking of their achievement is greatly facilitated by mandatory uniform annual impact and use-of-proceeds reports. Use of proceeds and impact should be reported project by project, specifying the environmental impact categories while the information should be aggregable at individual bond level and by category or sector. 

     

    Related Links

    Keywords: International, Banking, Sustainable Finance, ESG, Taxonomy, Paris Agreement, Green Bonds, Climate Change Risk, Transition Risk, Disclosures, Reporting, Impact Reports, BIS

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    APRA Publishes Results of Climate Risk Self-Assessment Survey

    The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has published the findings of its latest climate risk self-assessment survey conducted across the banking, insurance, and superannuation industries.

    August 04, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ACPR Publishes Updates Related to CRD IV and Covered Bonds

    The French Prudential Supervisory Authority (ACPR) published a notice related to the methods for calculating and publishing prudential ratios under the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD IV) and the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL).

    August 03, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BIS Paper Contributes to Debate on Regulating NBFIs and Big Techs

    The Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of the Bank for International Settlements recently published a paper proposing a framework for classifying financial stability regulation as either entity-based or activity-based.

    August 03, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EIOPA Publishes Guidance on Climate Change Scenarios in ORSA

    The European Insurance and Occupational Pension Authority (EIOPA) published the risk dashboard based on Solvency II data and the final version of the application guidance on climate change materiality assessments and climate change scenarios in the Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA).

    August 02, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA and ECB Respond to Proposals on Sustainability Disclosures

    The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Central Bank (ECB) published their responses to the consultations of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) on sustainability-related disclosure standards.

    August 01, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BIS Report Notes Existing Gaps in Climate Risk Data at Central Banks

    A Consultative Group on Risk Management (CGRM) at the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) published a report that examines incorporation of climate risks into the international reserve management framework.

    July 29, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Publishes Multiple Regulatory Updates for Regulated Entities

    The European Banking Authority (EBA) published the final guidelines on liquidity requirements exemption for investment firms, updated version of its 5.2 filing rules document for supervisory reporting, and Single Rulebook Question and Answer (Q&A) updates in July 2022.

    July 29, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EIOPA Issues SII Taxonomy and Guide on Sustainability Preferences

    The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published Version 2.8.0 of the Solvency II data point model (DPM) and XBRL taxonomy.

    July 29, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EESC Opines on Proposals on CRR and European Single Access Point

    The European Union published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, an opinion from the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC); the opinion is on the proposal for a regulation to amend the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).

    July 29, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    HM Treasury Publishes Multiple Regulatory Updates in July 2022

    HM Treasury published a draft statutory instrument titled “The Financial Services (Miscellaneous Amendments) (EU Exit) Regulations 2022,” along with the related explanatory memorandum and impact assessment.

    July 29, 2022 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 8424