Scholarlink

<p>The financial market response to climate urgency has resulted in the development of various approaches to measure GHG emissions associated with investments and lending. However, challenges persist. Recent findings show that current practices lack standardisation and are not enough linked to the decarbonisation of the real economy. This can result in varying outcomes and interpretations, as well as limiting investors’ contributions to keeping the world on the 1.5&#xa0;°C trajectory. This study examines and compares bottom-up methodologies associated with listed corporate assets and provides an in-depth analysis of portfolio climate impact accounting concepts, structure, indicators, variables, impact measurements and attributions. The findings demonstrate notable variations in results of assessment. Differences, reaching in some cases dozens of times for the same portfolio, depend on a methodology. This brings into question the comparability, risk and opportunity management, progress tracking, and the credibility of “net zero” and “transition” financial products. The research concludes that although current practices provide a promising starting point, there is still room for improvement. The paper suggests a range of enhancements and calls for the development of consensual approaches that better link financial sector efforts to the real-world decarbonisation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Climate performance evaluation of investment portfolios as driver of net zero economy: comparative study and analysis of existing methodologies

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月30日

查看全文
  • Ekaterina Ponomareva Reshetnikova

摘要

The financial market response to climate urgency has resulted in the development of various approaches to measure GHG emissions associated with investments and lending. However, challenges persist. Recent findings show that current practices lack standardisation and are not enough linked to the decarbonisation of the real economy. This can result in varying outcomes and interpretations, as well as limiting investors’ contributions to keeping the world on the 1.5 °C trajectory. This study examines and compares bottom-up methodologies associated with listed corporate assets and provides an in-depth analysis of portfolio climate impact accounting concepts, structure, indicators, variables, impact measurements and attributions. The findings demonstrate notable variations in results of assessment. Differences, reaching in some cases dozens of times for the same portfolio, depend on a methodology. This brings into question the comparability, risk and opportunity management, progress tracking, and the credibility of “net zero” and “transition” financial products. The research concludes that although current practices provide a promising starting point, there is still room for improvement. The paper suggests a range of enhancements and calls for the development of consensual approaches that better link financial sector efforts to the real-world decarbonisation.