La notation d’impact ESG Pays d’IMPACTIN est disponible sur la place de marché de donnée DAWEX

Notre coeur de métier est de mesurer l’Impact ESG pour les besoins de la Finance Durable, et, à cette fin, nous venons tout juste de publier notre jeu de données Impact ESG Pays pour le premier trimestre 2020.

Notre jeu de données d’Impact ESG Pays IMPACTIN contient 48 scores d’impact et leurs tendances, pour 218 pays, soit un total de 20,928 points de données organisés en 8 domaines:

  • Notation d’Impact ESG;
  • Notation 5P — Planète, Société, Prospérité, Paix, Partenariat (Planet, People, Prosperity, Peace, Partnership);
  • Notations du Domaine SMART Environnement;
  • Notations du Domaine SMART Social;
  • Notations du Domaine SMART Gouvernance ;
  • Notations de Transition;
  • Notations de l’alignement aux 17 SDGs ;
  • Notations et rangs par groupe (économiques et géographiques).

Le jeu de données est accompagné avec un rapport de 200 pages contenant les Profils d’Impact ESG des pays, et est d’ors et déjà disponible sur la place de marché de données DAWEX: DAWEX data marketplace — cf. notrepage entreprise et nos thèmes Données pour plus de détail, et n’hésitez pas à nous contacter pour accéder aux exemples et pour plus d’information sur nos jeux de données.

La platform DAWEX est une solution leader de place de marché de données, permettant un échange de données totalement sûr.

Une notation d’impact ESG rating pour les pays unique sur le marché!

Le jeu de données d’Impact ESG Pays IMPACTIN offre de nombreux avantages par rapport aux autres offres du marché:

  • 218 pays couverts — soit 20% à 65% de pays en plus, en comparaison des jeux de données concurrents ;
  • 87% des Pays ISO couverts ;
  • 100% des grands emetteurs d’obligations souveraines couverts ;
  • 7 régions géographiques modiales 100% couvertes ;
  • 4 groupes de revenus 100% couverts ;
  • 20,928 indicateurs (notes et tendances and trends) ;
  • Notation d’impact ESG (en comparaisons des notations risques ESG de la concurrence) ;
  • Méthode objective, basée sur des indicateurs ;
  • Approche quantitative, objective, et répétable ;
  • Mise à jour fréquente vs. annuelle à pluriannuels (12, 24, 36 mois…)
  • 218 Profils ESG des pays, dans un rapport,
  • Régions géographiques et Groupes de revenus pré-filtrés, et cartographies associées.

Pourquoi une notation d’impact ESG des pays ?

Après des décennies passées dans le domaine de l’évaluation extra-financière, la RSE, l’ISR et la Finance Durable en général, nous n’étions pas satisfait des solutions disponibles sur le marché : trop de subjectivité, une qualité hétérogène des notes, un délai trop long entre les mises à jour, une approche basée sur les risques et non alignée sur la nécessité de suivre et démontrer l’impact réel d’un investissement, etc.

Investir pour un impact durable est la nouvelle frontière pour l’investissement responsable, avec un focus fort sur comment les décisions d’investissement ont un impact réel sur les facteurs ESG, par dessus la matérialité financière.

— Directrice Générale du PRI, Fiona Reynolds, décembre 2019

Pour les raisons ci-dessus, nous avons décidé d’élaborer notre propre approche : après plusieurs mois de recherche et développement, nous avons mises au points nos méthodologies exclusives de notation d’Impact ESG, pour les pays, territoires et villes, les sociétés cotées et les portefeuilles d’investissement : IMPACTIN est née avec la vision que l’investissement à impact ESG sera la prochaine étape pour la finance durable, et que des notes d’impact ESG de qualité sont nécessaires pour alimenter le développement de l’investissement à impact ESG, en pleine croissance..

Notre jeu de données d’Impact ESG Pays IMPACTIN est l’une de nos solutions de jeu de données, fournissant 48 scores d’impact et leurs tendances pour 218 pays, et individualisant l’impact de chaque pays noté au travers de nombreuses dimensions : Smart Infrastructures, Smart Health, Prosperité, Climate Change Transition, alignement avec les 17 SDGs, etc.

Nous avons plusieurs autres produits de données en cours de finalisation, et qui seront disponibles dans les semaines qui viennent—restez à l’écoute!

IMPACTIN Countries ESG Impact rating available on the DAWEX data marketplace

Our core business is to measure the ESG impact for the Sustainable Finance needs, and to this end we just released our countries ESG impact rating for the first quarter of 2020.

The IMPACTIN Countries ESG Impact Rating dataset contains 48 impact scores and their trends, for 218 countries, i.e. a total of 20,928 data points organized in 8 domains:

  • ESG Impact ratings;
  • 5P ratings — Planet, People, Prosperity, Peace, Partnership,
  • Environment Smart Areas ratings;
  • Social Smart Areas ratings;
  • Governance Smart Areas ratings;
  • Transition ratings;
  • 17 SDGs Contribution ratings;
  • Groups ratings (economical and geographical groups).

The dataset comes with a 200+ pages-long Countries ESG Impact Profiles report, and is now available on the DAWEX data marketplace — see our company page and data themes for more details, and feel free to contact us for access on more information on our data offers.

The DAWEX platform is a leading and multi-awarded data marketplace, allowing a totally secure and scalable data exchange.

A unique countries ESG rating on the market

The IMPACTIN Countries ESG Impact Rating dataset offers many advantages vis-à-vis other market offers available:

  • 218 countries featured — i.e. 20% to 65% more countries than market competitors
  • 87% of ISO Countries covered
  • 100% of larger sovereign bonds emitters covered
  • 7 Geographical Regions 100% covered
  • 4 Income Groups 100% covered
  • 20,928 indicators (scores and trends)
  • ESG impact scores vs. ESG risk scores
  • Indicators-based vs. criteria-based
  • Quantitative, objective, and repeatable approach vs. qualitative and subjective rating
  • Quarterly updates vs. Yearly
  • 218 Country ESG Impact profiles featured in a report
  • Pre-filtered geographical regions and income groups ratings, and associated geographical maps.

The case for an ESG impact rating of countries

After decades of experience in the field of extra-financial evaluation, CSR, SRI and Sustainable Finance in general, we were not satisfied with the solutions available on the market: we found there too much subjectivity, a heterogeneous quality in the ratings, a too long duration between the updates, a risk-based approach not aligned with the necessity to track and demonstrate the real impact of an investment, etc.

Investing for sustainability impact is the new frontier for responsible investment, with a stronger focus on how investment decisions have real world impact on ESG factors over financial materiality

— PRI CEO, Fiona Reynolds, Dec. 2019

For the here above reasons, we decided to craft our own approach: after months of research and development we ended with our proprietary methodologies of ESG Impact rating, for countries, territories and cities, listed companies, and investment portfolios: IMPACTIN was born, with the vision that Impact Investment is the next step for Sustainable Finance, and that high-quality Impact ratings are required to fuel the development of the growing Impact Investment landscape.

The IMPACTIN Countries ESG Impact Rating dataset solution is one of our ESG Impact Rating dataset solutions, providing 48 impact scores and their trends for 218 countries, allowing to individualize the impact of countries through many dimensions: Smart Infrastructures, Smart Health, Prosperity, Climate Change Transition, contribution to the 17 SDGs, etc.

We have several other data products on their way, which will be released in the coming weeks — stay tuned!

IMPACTIN joins Tech For Good France

Tech For Good France is the French network of entrepreneurs and investors involved in the delopment and financing of technological and digital solutions fostering the transition towards a more sustainable and responsible society.

We are delighted to announce that our application to join the network has recently been accepted, and that IMPACTIN is thus now an official member of the association! and we take the opportunity to thank the members of the board for that.

Since our ESG Impact rating approach is rooted in Sustainable and Responsible Finance expertise, leveraged thanks to Data and Digital technologies, it seemed natural to become part of a network of doers and investors sharing the same interests.

Let’s hope that in the aftermath of the Covid pandemics, we will collectively choose to deflect the course of our society towards Sustainability, and Sustainable Finance more particularly — and the Tech For Good, i.e. the positive and responsible use of technology for the society and the environment, can probably be a key to unlock this future.

We are eager to meet the members, and start to network, and get feedback, for the greater good! Stay tuned!

IMPACTIN selected for Les Ambitieuses Tech For Good Grand Finale 3rd edition

In spite of the difficult situation the world has been facing these last weeks, we had the recent opportunity to be selected to participate, early March, to the Grand Finale of the startup acceleration program “Les Ambitieuses” Tech For Good, organized by La Ruche.

The program is dedicated to impact startups, with at least a women cofounder, a tech-based solution, and a proof of market.

This allowed two of us to participate to a very interesting and well organized 2-days long training, the 10 and 11 of March, with all the other finalists selected among 90 candidates — a Bootcamp — in order to network, challenge our value proposal, to discover or reiterate with some entreneurships tools, and finally to be train to become “Serial Pitcher“!

Unfortunately, this time, we have not been selected as one the 8 winners of the award — but this experience allowed us to attend a 2 days-long training very relevant for us, to challenge our business plan, to better prepare our investor pitch and deck, and, above all, to become part of a network of wonderful women, all committed to be build a better world, throught their impact businesses. And for this, we thanks all the very professionnal and skilled people of La Ruche for the quality of the bootcamp program.

Congratulations to all of the participants, girls, you are amazing!

The reign of ESG funds quantity, and the signs of the times

According to the Novethic indicator, published last week, the offer of sustainable funds is massively growing in France, combined with an always more demanding retail market. This situation is not unique in Europe: the same trends are reflected in the national markets of countries such as Italy, Spain, or the United Kingdom, etc. The trends and market data are furthermore indisputable: in 1 year, between Dec. 2018 and Dec. 2019, the number of sustainable funds has grown from 438 to 704, and AUM have almost doubled, from €149bn to €278bn.

There is indeed a very strong momentum for Sustainable Finance, and especially for Thematic Funds, representing a quarter of the offer, but with a greater collection ratio (45%) compared with non-thematic sustainable funds.

So far, so good, we might say, but, but, unfortunately, quantity is not a synonym for quality. Behind the scene, for most of all these “so-called” sustainable funds, the situation is far from brilliant, when the ESG criteria’s quality is investigated… with a transparency almost lacking.

The french “Label ISR” (SRI Label) as so far been granted to 263 funds, among other certified funds with a national label. This kind of label is supposed to be the first step on the way towards a greater transparency, but it is still, today, not sufficient to be fully trusted, and here is why: the Label ISR only ensures that a selection process exists, and that it integrates ESG criteria. The rest is left a the discretion of the fund manager: how the process is applied, what are the thresholds, etc. For instance, a Label ISR fund doesn’t need to be 100% ESG-compliant. No opinion is provided by the certification authority on the companies composing the funds, or the quality of the method used, the existence of positive or negative impact metrics or score… And regarding the non-labelized sustainable funds, the situation is even worst and more obscure… with sometimes only a slight “greening” for some new or existing funds…

These are some of the reasons why the EU Taxonomy, and the future EU Label, are more than welcome. Let’s hope they will both help to provide more transparency in sustainable finance, and foster a truly sustainable investment approach. The risk faced, once again, is the generalization of greenwashing to gain market shares, which will end in the disillusion of the retail investor and strip the sustainable finance market of its whole credibility…

Until then, quantity will continue to prevail over quality, as a sign of the times.

Bloomberg, One Planet SWF Paris, and the rise of ESG integration to country risk

As the poet said, nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come. And the two last weeks probably demonstrated that the time for ESG criteria integration into country rating might have come…

Last week, we attended the One Planet Sovereign Wealth Funds initiative reception, being held in Paris, at the Shangri-La hotel, and co-organized by Bloomberg. Since 2017, the SWFs have been working to accelerate efforts to integrate financial risks and opportunities related to climate change in the management of sovereign funds and large assets. Their moto: “Integrating Climate Change Risks and Investing in the Smooth Transition to a Low Emissions Economy“. Bloomberg, through GBF, the Bloomberg Global Business Forum, is also committed to improve social and economic wellbeing in the coming decades. During the dinner, were 200 people from different countries gathered, discussions focused on the climate change urgency, and the need to take action, with no further delay.

Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come.

— Victor Hugo

The very same week, the day before the reception, Monday the 28th, Euler Hermes became the first credit insurer to add ESG criteria to country risk methodology, according to Ludovic Subran, Chief Economist at Allianz. Of course, we couldn’t agree more with this rising market trend, since, during the second semester of 2019, we had been researching this topic, and ended with our own proprietary methodology. Our ESG Impact Rating for countries was the thus the first product we developped, and released, last November. And, indeed, January the 19th, we published our own view on the subject: “Countries ESG impact rating: should it be integrated into credit rating?“.

Well… time is on our side, yes it is!

Countries ESG impact rating: should it be integrated into credit rating?

Several approaches of countries ESG rating, and worldwide ranking, are currently available on the market, mostly based on hundreds of qualitative and quantitative data. They are very similar, and share the same limitations: they do not systematically try to measure the ESG impact of a country, and agregate too many indicators, ending with a non-sensical ratings and rankings, which, e.g. benchmark highly developed countries together with emerging ones… and dilute the score of the rated country.

And then, there is the United Nation SDG initiative, which also provide, for its high-level 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), a list of hundreds indicators, updated on a yearly basis, with a heterogenous coverage depending of the country. The UN SDG evaluation ends with surprising results. For instance, the Goal #1, “No Poverty”, can be considered, according to the UN, as achieved both by France and Italy, with a respective score of 99.5% and 97.5% reached regarding extreme poverty… which is obviously not the case when, according to Eurostats, there is respectively 17.1% of the French and 28.9% of the Italian population at risk of poverty and social exclusion…

Traditional financial rating agencies, such as Fitch, S&P, etc., have tried to integrate the ESG rating in the country credit rating, with quite mitigated results… For others, the ESG rating should remain independent, or is not considered that much important, excepted for the G, the Governance part… the overall situation is unclear, and thus the research goes on. How to make sense of all that fuzz ? Indicators are indeed trustable (when of quality), but their interpretation depends on their nature, context, threshold…

According to us, a meaningful ESG rating and ranking is not only possible, but also absolutely essential and necessary. Only ESG criteria can allow us, today, to really discriminate between countries: not to recognize this point means promoting the financial indicators supremacy, and its disconnection from reality, with the deadly societal and environmental consequences in the long term, that we are now all well aware of…

With countries bonds representing representing more than half the AUM of financial investments, worldwide, the question of the integration of a reliable ESG rating into the credit rating balance must be raised, and answered—urgently.

$1,000bn: this is the forecasted size of the Green Bond market by 2021, according to HSBC. And Green Bonds are not only issued by corporations, but, increasingly, by countries, territories, or cities. It gives an idea of the importance to tackle this issue, and to provide as soon as possible a way to reliably evaluate the ESG performance and impact of Green Bonds, which means first having this reliable ESG impact rating for countries, cities, and territories. The credibility of those instruments is here at stackes.

That’s why during the last months, we had been researching, and working on ESG Impact rating methodologies, and ended with our own proprietary methodology for countries, which provide an ESG Impact rating, covering 6 ESG areas, a Transition Rating, and a SDG compliance rating, for each country. Our unique approach is to combine our sound human expertise in the field of CSR, ESG, and SRI, with a limited set of meaningful, smart indicators. IMPACTIN countries rating allow us to truly discriminate the respective performance of countries regarding ESG stakes, and to track a nation progress along its social and environmental transition.

Measuring and tracking progress, like a mantra, getting insights and adjusting the journey accordingly to the ESG goals: this path towards a more sustainable society requires meaningful, and smart ESG Impact indicators and scoring, at the country, city, corporation, or investment portfolio levels. And that’s why we provide all four of them.

Sustainability in finance, and beyond—a look back at 2019, and perspectives for 2020

The end of a year—or the beginning of a new one—is generally a propitious period for the (healthy) exercise of the retrospective. So, let’s look back at 2019, and try to foresee what’s coming in 2020, in the domain of sustainable finance, and sustainability in general.

In March 2018, the EU published its “Action Plan of Sustainable Finance” — a shorter name for the officially called “Commission action plan on financing sustainable growth“.  In 2019 not only the EU process accelerated, but many events also took place, in the sustainable world:

With such a global context, the risk is greatly increasing for companies, and for the countries, to be the target of legal procedures, initiated by citizens or NGOs. No doubt that the coming years will see this kind of legal case proliferating—and both companies or countries signatory of any convention (PRI, etc.), or with any moral obligation disclosed (code of conduct, sustainable guidelines, etc.) should worry about the effective respect of their own—publicly or privately taken­—engagements…

Sustainability cannot be reduced to the sole climate change issues. A sustainable society must not only transition toward a zero emissions objective, but it must also endeavor to suppress all forms of discrimination, corruption, and provide social justice, among other ESG goals.

To achieve this broader view of a sustainable finance, beyond the short term urgency of Climate Change issue, which must be now tackled with no delay, several profound evolutions in the approach of capital investment will be required: 

  • Capital flows must be reoriented towards a more sustainable economy. Transparency and long termism must be fostered in financial economy activity–The EU made indeed an excellent work considering that the current gap between the real economy, and a sustainable economy, is still a very huge one. For instance, customers’ expectations are becoming stronger and stronger vis-à-vis sustainable issues, but little has been achieved so far to fill this gap. The financial market needs so to listen to the “voice of the customer” and adapt the economical choices in this direction. To date, this is really not the case, and the investments are still not sufficient, and with no clear objectives…
  • Financial risks, and ESG impact linked to environmental and social activities, must be (better) measured. The EU is asking to foster the integration of the ESG in the credit research, and all financial and extra-financial research activities are thus concerned. To this end, the development of a common methodology, to be widely accepted by all the market, would probably be needed. Today, many approaches for the analysis of ESG topics are existing, but not for all the different classes of assets, and they are often very difficult to understand. A lot of work will be required to harmonize, and to create the solutions… Innovation will be fundamental to achieve this goal. The EU opened the path with the taxonomy, but all the work still needs to be done. Green bonds and SRI funds are strongly growing, but a reality-check of the real impact of these investment instruments need to be created. For instance, take the Green Bonds market, where the intensity of the “Green” for each project is very questionable, and different… we will also probably need the creation of a European commission to verify the accuracy of the granting of these labels… To make the sustainable market more transparent, hence credible, is absolutely essential to win the confidence of the customers.
  • Clear and measurable ESG goals must be defined and monitored in the companies or investments project, or in the investment funds. The end objective should be to measure the sustainable impact of the investments on the society, i.e. the creation of a sustainable value. To this end, such kind of KPIs should be integrated in the boards’ goals, in the grants, etc.

2020 should be a year of very hard work for people in finance, and the challenge is very high: to transform a purely ROI-oriented finance into a sustainable finance, to minimize—as much as is still possible—the effects of the climate change, and achieve a resilient economy. True conviction, and transparency are unescapable to avoid falling in the traps of sustainability/greenwashing… And to make this possible, the top management of the Finance sector must lead the way.

Thematic funds or indexes, and ESG integration—a market trend on the rise?

In June 2019, this year, 2,832 funds proclaimed to use ESG criteria, of which 168 have been created during the 1st semester of 2019.

Thematic funds were notably started by Pictet Asset Management in the 2000’s—with their first fund focused on water. Today, this kind of investements represents for Pictet AM EUR 40bn AUM, declined on different themes. Over the past 20 years, 10 new themes have been created: Timber, Smartcity, Nutrition, Security, Biotech, Digital, etc.

Their scope ? Listed companies. Their targeted customer segments ? Retail, Insurance, Asset Managers, Pension funds, Banks…

Thematic ESG impact funds have today their own momentum. Why is it so ? Because a theme gives investement a purpose, easy to grasp for the investor. And because ESG issues are the very core of our today’s concerns. And although thematic investing had been around for 20 years now, it only represents a mere 14% of the USD 28tn ESG AUM—there is still a very huge potential for growth.

We can thus expect ESG Indexes to gain also more and more traction in the passive asset management sector.

But Thematic ESG funds also come with limitations. Their biggest current problem is probably that—paradoxically—thematic ESG funds doesn’t systematicaly integrate ESG criteria… It means that, despite the fact that the theme of a fund can be, e.g., a Social or Environmental topic, the companies or states listed in the fund could nevertheless either be involved in ESG controversies, or can have a very poor ESG rating.

Here, no doubt that transparency, and thus credibility, will be a key—to avoid the greenwashing / impactwashing drift. And, when they exist, ESG Labels could also help—even if they can certainly be improved… The EU is indeed working on sustainable finance labels, and also promote a greater transparency on the existing ESG indexes.

To overtake these current limitations, and become more massively adopted by the market, we think that Thematic ESG funds should thus:

  • Propose innovative themes, taking into account macro-economic trends;
  • Systematically integrate ESG criteria, in the companies and countries selection process;
  • Measure and report the ESG impact of the fund, on the environment and the society, i.e. its capability to deliver a real value for our human societies.

That’s why, to help our customers to achieve these goals, we created our own Thematic ESG Impact Funds Library, with 30+ innovative funds concepts, and our own proprietary ESG Impact rating framework. Interested ? Let’s start the discussion.

Salon des Maires et des Collectivités Locales (SMCL) 2019 — retour sur des tendances durables

Du 19 au 21 novembre s’est tenu le Salon des Maires et des Collectivités Locales 2019, à Paris, Porte de Versailles. Nous avons visité ce salon, et s’il y a bien une tendance à retenir, c’est la suivante : « Transition Énergétique et Écologique ».

Cette tendance, qui s’inscrit logiquement dans le thème global du salon­—Villes et Territoires durables, horizon 2030—, reflète bien un sujet majeur de préoccupation, à retenir pour les villes françaises en 2019, et au-delà. Le projet de Territoire Intelligent (Smart City) d’Angers Loire Métropole (ALM), attribué la semaine d’avant à un consortium mené par ENGIE, en est d’ailleurs emblématique : les objectifs affichés par ALM sont notamment d’ « accélérer la transition écologique du territoire » et  permettre « d’importantes économies d’énergie » au travers de la mise en œuvre d’une plateforme d’hypervision de la ville. En deux mots, un territoire plus durable, grâce à une plateforme connectée aux infrastructures urbaines « intelligentes ».

Le sujet de la transition énergétique et écologique s’invite bien évidemment au cœur des stratégies des villes du fait de l’urgence climatique — comme l’ont encore montré les tragiques évènements climatiques extrêmes, qui se sont reproduits dans quart Sud-Est de la France. Ce sujet, bien qu’essentiel, n’est pas seul qui, nous semble-t-il, devrait occuper les esprits.

Dans une perspective d’impact ESG plus large des villes et territoires, nous avons ainsi développé notre propre solution de notation d’Impact des villes, qui comprend 11 domaines d’impact spécifiques. Dans ces domaines se retrouvent ceux aujourd’hui au centre des préoccupations, et qui concernent l’Énergie et Environnement, ainsi que la dimension de « Connectivité » de la ville (Communications, Infrastructures « Intelligentes », etc.), mais aussi d’autres dimensions essentielles à nos yeux pour mesurer l’impact ESG d’un territoire : Éducation, Gouvernance, Sécurité, ou encore Santé, à titre d’exemple.

Les zones urbaines, rappelons-le, regrouperont d’ici 2050 près de 70% de la population mondiale, d’après l’OCDE, alors que seulement 34% y vivaient en 1960. L’avenir de l’humanité est donc forcément entre les mains des villes, qui sont aujourd’hui les principales sources de pollution et les zones les plus à risque, mais qui constituent aussi et surtout, avec leurs éco-citoyens en devenir, notre plus grand levier pour accélérer la transition durable des sociétés humaines—et sans doute notre seul espoir.