Search Climate Insights Directory

The 2022 Scorecard finds that while insurance for new coal power plants outside China has largely dried up, the industry is only beginning to shift away from oil and gas. Most of the 30 assessed insurers scored poorly on oil and gas policies (1.1/10) compared to coal (3.3/10). The report identifies Allianz as a leader in underwriting policies and SCOR as a leader in divestment, while naming Berkshire Hathaway, Everest Re, PICC, Sinosure, and Starr as laggards. It also criticizes the Net-Zero Insurance Alliance (NZIA) for failing to comply with UN Race to Zero requirements to phase out unabated fossil fuels.

The document finds that Sweden's five largest banks have limited alignment with the Paris Agreement, having facilitated approximately USD 150 billion to high-emitting 'brown' sectors since 2016. While 'green' investments have increased, they remain significantly lower than 'brown' and 'grey' flows. The authors argue that a lack of granular data and standardized definitions hinders transparency, recommending the adoption of International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) standards and EU-level regulations to better track the transition to a low-emission economy.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Secretariat and Accreditation Panel (AP) assessed PT Sarana Multi Infrastruktur (PT SMI) for re-accreditation and a scope upgrade. PT SMI demonstrated significant growth in climate financing, increasing its portfolio to USD 976 million by 2021 and committing to phase out fossil fuel financing. The AP recommends re-accreditation with an upgraded scope to include medium-sized projects, equity and guarantees, and high-risk (Category A/I-1) environmental and social (E&S) projects, subject to specific conditions regarding its grievance redress mechanism and external E&S auditing.

Reclaim Finance argues that net-zero commitments must be aligned with a 1.5°C temperature goal, requiring an immediate cessation of investment in new oil, coal, and gas projects. The submission emphasizes that at least 90% of reductions should be achieved by stopping emissions at the source, with carbon removals reserved only for residual emissions. It calls for absolute interim targets—specifically a 50% reduction in CO2 by 2030—and transparent transition plans that include meaningful sanctions for non-compliance. The document also warns against the use of fossil gas as a transition fuel and the practice of selling high-emitting assets to avoid decarbonization targets.

Reclaim Finance argues that the proposed updates to the French ISR label are 'minimalist' and designed to ensure existing funds retain their label rather than drive a real energy transition. While the label may introduce exclusions for coal and unconventional energy, the organization warns that revenue-based thresholds could allow major oil and gas companies like TotalEnergies, BP, Shell, and ExxonMobil to remain eligible. Reclaim Finance specifically calls for the exclusion of companies developing new oil and gas fields to align with a 1.5°C trajectory and carbon neutrality by 2050.

The Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI) established the Social and Sustainability Bond Database (SSBDB) to provide transparency on global social and sustainability debt. The methodology employs a three-step screening process—identification, use of proceeds (UoP) analysis, and SDG mapping—to determine eligibility. To be included, instruments must be self-labelled by the issuer, provide sufficient public disclosure, and not breach minimum climate safeguards. The SSBDB covers social bonds, sustainability bonds, and sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs), with some instruments appearing in both the SSBDB and the Green Bond Database if they meet the requirements of both.

The statement evaluates a GFANZ report on the managed phaseout of high-emitting assets, agreeing with the necessity of early retirement of fossil fuel infrastructure to meet 1.5°C goals but warning against 'paper decarbonization' where assets are sold rather than shut down. It criticizes the report's dismissal of divestment and the suggestion of using carbon credits to finance retirements, which could negate emissions benefits.

The document argues that the MICI's decision to close the Alto Maipo case is premature and fails to hold the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) accountable for environmental damage and human rights violations. It highlights severe reprisals against environmental defenders, including cyber-intelligence surveillance by AES Andes, and criticizes the IDB Invest's 'cut and run' divestment strategy, which the authors claim avoids responsibility for remediation. The authors emphasize that the project accelerated desertification in the Maipo River basin, threatening the water supply for over eight million people in Santiago, and call for a formal 'Responsible Exit' framework and a comprehensive reparation mechanism within the IDB's accountability system.

Reclaim Finance argues that the GFANZ consultation draft lacks sufficient rigor and clarity, specifically regarding 2030 emission reduction targets, the cessation of fossil fuel expansion, and the definition of net zero. The organization advocates for the adoption of Race to Zero (RTZ) criteria, including a 50% reduction in financed emissions by 2030 and the requirement for permanent carbon removals (at least 1,000 years) to neutralize residual emissions. Reclaim Finance further challenges the classification of fossil gas as a transition fuel and calls for more stringent accountability mechanisms, such as the exclusion of financial institutions from alliances if they fail to implement credible, RTZ-aligned transition plans.

Reclaim Finance criticizes SCOR for inconsistencies between its investment strategies and its insurance underwriting, specifically noting that while its asset management subsidiary SCOR IP avoids oil and gas investments, the parent company continues to insure new gas fields and allows exceptions for oil projects.

An assessment of 29 Dutch companies and financial institutions reveals that none achieved a high or reasonable integrity rating for their climate targets. The 21 'real economy' businesses commit to an average emission reduction of only 19% by 2030, failing to meet the 50% reduction needed for a 1.5°C pathway. None of the assessed companies provided concrete, publicly accessible plans aligned with the Paris Agreement, and all eight financial institutions continue to finance fossil fuel value chains.

The Carbon-OFF plan, published by Scientists for Global Responsibility, outlines a strategy for philanthropic organisations to align with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. The plan focuses on three pillars: reducing operational emissions using the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi) Net Zero Standard, divesting financial assets and pensions from fossil fuels to increase the cost of capital for the industry, and leveraging funding power to require grant applicants to adopt net-zero standards and divest from fossil fuels.

Reclaim Finance evaluates Amundi's 2022 climate performance, noting a lack of transparency regarding its own climate strategy and inconsistent voting patterns. While Amundi showed progress by voting against some coal developers like Glencore, it continued to support the climate plans of oil and gas majors such as Repsol and BP despite their ongoing fossil fuel expansion.

The report finds that while net zero commitments from private financial institutions have grown substantially, representing 32% of global private financial assets, there are significant gaps in the credibility and coverage of interim targets. Most commitments originate from OECD countries, and there is a notable lack of detailed climate data and commitments in developing economies, particularly in Asia. The analysis highlights that only a small fraction of institutions have externally verified plans, and many interim targets cover only a portion of their total assets under management.

Reclaim Finance reports a decline in shareholder support for ambitious climate resolutions and a contradictory tendency for investors to approve 'pseudo-climate plans' that are incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit. The organization highlights specific voting trends at European oil and gas majors and calls for a shift toward voting against companies continuing fossil fuel development.

The Philippines Commission on Human Rights (CHR) concluded a seven-year inquiry finding that 47 'Carbon Majors' companies contributed significantly to global emissions and engaged in 'willful obfuscation' of climate science despite knowing the risks since at least 1965. The report details severe human rights impacts in the Philippines, including threats to the rights to life, health, food security, and water, disproportionately affecting vulnerable groups such as women, children, and Indigenous Peoples. The CHR asserts that these companies, and the financial institutions that fund them, have a responsibility to respect human rights and provide remediation for climate-driven harms. It recommends that states implement punitive laws for environmental harm, put a price on pollution, and transition to renewable energy by 2030 to meet the 1.5°C limit.

A coalition of NGOs argues that TotalEnergies' climate strategy is incompatible with the 1.5°C goal, citing insufficient decarbonization targets and continued fossil fuel expansion. They call on investors to vote against the company's climate strategy and the reappointment of specific directors at the May 2022 Annual General Meeting, and to suspend new financial services to the company.

A coalition of NGOs argues that TotalEnergies' climate strategy is incompatible with the 1.5°C warming limit, citing insufficient emission reductions and continued investment in fossil fuel expansion. The signatories call on investors to vote against the company's sustainable development resolution and the renewal of specific directors' mandates, while urging a halt to new financial support until the company stops developing new oil and gas projects.

Reclaim Finance criticizes RWE for maintaining a coal phase-out target of 2038, which it claims is eight years behind scientific recommendations. The organization highlights RWE's role as one of Europe's largest CO2 emitters, its reliance on fossil gas as a bridge fuel, and its efforts to obtain €2.6 billion in compensation from the German government. It specifically calls on major shareholders, including Crédit Agricole/Amundi, Société Générale, and BNP Paribas, to use the upcoming AGM to sanction the company's lack of a coherent transition strategy.

The letter asserts that GFANZ is acting as a "smokescreen" for the financial sector's lack of progress on decarbonization. It highlights a gap between GFANZ's goal of halving emissions by 2030 and the reality that many members continue to fund new coal, oil, and gas projects. The authors demand that GFANZ implement interim milestones, absolute emission targets, mandatory Scope 3 targets for fossil fuel companies, and a ban on using offsets to meet 2030 targets.