z
Brussels, 11 June 2025 – The European Banking Federation has submitted a proposal to EU policymakers calling for a phased-in implementation of the EBA Guidelines on ESG Risk Management.
European banks remain firmly committed to strengthening ESG risk management. However, while welcoming the EBA’s objective of strengthening ESG risk management practices, the EBF highlights that the current implementation timeline is not realistic due to significant data, methodological, and operational challenges—many of which are being exacerbated by the ongoing Omnibus review and changes to the CSRD scope.
Key concerns include:
On this backdrop, the EBF proposes the postponement of the ESG Risk management Guidelines’ application deadline – along with that of the upcoming guidelines on ESG Scenario Analysis – until the Omnibus amendments are finalized, and a revision of the EBA Guidelines in the spirit of the Omnibus simplification and for consistency with the final versions of the CSRD/ESRS1 and CSDDD.
Should it be impossible to defer the implementation date of the EBA ESG Risk Management (and ESG Scenario Analysis Guidelines), we would urge supervisory authorities to issue a public statement supporting phased implementation, and to consider a no-action letter during this transition period.
To support this proposal, the EBF has shared with key policy makers a three-phase approach to implementation, aligned with the maturity of the requirements and institutions’ readiness.
EBF stresses that this is not a step back from ESG integration, but a pragmatic proposal to ensure high-quality, consistent, and effective adoption across the sector.
You can access the full EBF proposal here.
For more information:
Matilde Quarin, Policy Adviser – Prudential Policy & Supervision,m.quarin@ebf.eu
Denisa Avermaete, Head of Sustainable Finance, D.Avermaete@ebf.eu
x
About the EBF:
The European Banking Federation is the voice of the European banking sector, bringing together national banking associations from across Europe. The EBF is committed to a thriving European economy that is underpinned by a stable, secure and inclusive financial ecosystem, and to a flourishing society where financing is available to fund the dreams of citizens, businesses and innovators everywhere.
The post EBF Proposal for a Phased-in Implementation of the EBA ESG Risk Management Guidelines appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
Brussels, 15 April 2025 – The European Banking Federation has submitted its response to the European Banking Authority’s (EBA) consultation on the draft Guidelines for ESG Scenario Analysis.
While welcoming the development of supervisory expectations in this evolving area, the EBF emphasizes that key challenges remain—particularly related to data availability, implementation timelines, and the maturity of methodologies. The EBF’s main messages include:
You can access the full EBF response here.
For more information:
Matilde Quarin, Policy Adviser – Prudential Policy & Supervision,m.quarin@ebf.eu
Denisa Avermaete, Head of Sustainable Finance, D.Avermaete@ebf.eu
x
About the EBF:
The European Banking Federation is the voice of the European banking sector, bringing together national banking associations from across Europe. The EBF is committed to a thriving European economy that is underpinned by a stable, secure and inclusive financial ecosystem, and to a flourishing society where financing is available to fund the dreams of citizens, businesses and innovators everywhere.
The post EBF Response to the EBA consultation paper on Climate Scenario Analysis appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
Brussels, 5 June 2025 – The European Banking Federation (EBF) has submitted its detailed response to the European Commission’s call for evidence on the review of the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). The EBF welcomes the upcoming revision of the SFDR to strengthen the effectiveness of the regulation and emphasises the need for a pragmatic approach with a particular focus on the needs of retail investors, defining simpler and more meaningful disclosures.
The EBF’s key recommendations include:
For more information:
Jānis Priekulis, Policy Adviser – Sustainable Finance, j.priekulis@ebf.eu
Denisa Avermaete, Head of Sustainable Finance, D.Avermaete@ebf.eu
x
About the EBF:
The European Banking Federation is the voice of the European banking sector, bringing together national banking associations from across Europe. The EBF is committed to a thriving European economy that is underpinned by a stable, secure and inclusive financial ecosystem, and to a flourishing society where financing is available to fund the dreams of citizens, businesses and innovators everywhere.
The post EBF Calls for Pragmatic Simplification of Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
BRUSSELS, 13 February 2024 – The European Banking Federation (EBF) welcomes EFRAG’s development of the ESRS implementation guidance considering the significant complexity of the standards and the importance of ensuring the preparation of comparable and qualitative disclosures. The future and timely elaboration of specific guidance for financial institutions would be equally important and necessary given the fundamental role they have in financing the global economy.
For a comprehensive overview, kindly refer to our position paper.
For more information:
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
x
About the EBF:
The European Banking Federation is the voice of the European banking sector, bringing together national banking associations from across Europe. The EBF is committed to a thriving European economy that is underpinned by a stable, secure and inclusive financial ecosystem, and to a flourishing society where financing is available to fund the dreams of citizens, businesses and innovators everywhere.
The post EBF response to the EFRAG ESRS Implementation Guidance consultation appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
In June 2023, the European Commission (EC) issued a proposal as one of the final components of the Sustainable Finance package, focusing on the transparency and integrity of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) rating activities. This initiative represents a significant step towards regulating the ESG ratings market, with the primary objective of augmenting integrity, transparency, responsibility, good governance, and independence of ESG rating activities and, most importantly, contributing to the transparency and increased quality and comparability of ESG ratings. The proposed Regulation also seeks to establish stringent guidelines for rating agencies’ operations, aiming to mitigate conflicts of interest and biases in the rating process.
The imperative for such regulatory intervention becomes evident in the face of an expanding demand for ESG ratings, exposing inherent issues of unreliability, inaccuracy, and untimely information delivery. The inadequacies of the current ESG ratings market have not only posed challenges for investors and companies but have also eroded confidence in the credibility of these ratings. To address this, there is a pressing need for greater comparability and reliability in ESG ratings, making transparency regarding their characteristics, data sources, and methodologies primary. Furthermore, a crucial aspect to be addressed is the lack of clarity surrounding the operational practices of ESG rating agencies, particularly in relation to conflicts of interest and governance. By establishing a framework that addresses these concerns head-on, the EC aims to foster a healthier and more functional ESG ratings market, conducive to sustainable and responsible investment practices.
The Regulation will apply to ESG ratings issued by ESG ratings providers operating in the EU that are disclosed publicly or that are distributed to regulated financial undertakings in the EU or EU Member States’ public authorities. once the Regulation will have entered into force, rating providers will need to be authorised and supervised by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). It is important to remark that the Regulation does not seek to harmonize the methodologies used to build ESG ratings, but only to enhance their transparency, allowing users to understand the ratings and compare them. In fact, under this rule, ESG ratings providers would need to comply with certain organisational, record-keeping and disclosure requirements, including in respect of conflicts of interest. Additionally, the Regulation also addresses the fees charged to clients, to make sure they are fair, reasonable, based on costs and non-discriminatory.
The European Banking Federation (EBF) strongly supports this Proposal, believing transparency to be key in ensuring the comparability and reliability of ESG ratings on the market. In particular, European banks welcome the introduction of disclosures on the websites of ESG rating providers of methodologies, information about rated companies’ fees, data sources, data “timestamps”, as well as of their level of independence. Moreover, they recommend that ESG rating providers operating in the EU are subject to the same requirements, regardless of whether they are based in the EU or not, as to ensure a level playing field among market participants. Banks as well deem important the regulation of ESG data providers whenever ESG data is modified in any manner or sourced from third parties. With data as the foundation of the sustainable finance framework, regulating ESG data providers is fundamental to ensure the overall credibility and functioning of the market. While it may not be most appropriate to address the regulation of data provides within this regulation, which was drafted with ESG Rating Providers in mind, EU banks support the introduction of a review clause for the future regulation of data providers.
While the proposal is meant to address specialized providers of ESG ratings, it may inadvertently capture products or services that may be provided by banks or asset managers, which are already regulated by rules such as the SFDR, MiFID/MIFIR, MAR, CSRD, EU Taxonomy, BMR when administrating benchmarks, and more.
For instance, some banks have developed questionnaires tailored for their clients, typically small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), aimed at assessing ESG elements within the context of evaluating banking services. To incentivize clients to complete these questionnaires, banks offer a complimentary ESG score, which clients can retain and optionally disclose on their websites. This practice addresses gaps in information and coverage by ESG providers, with the dual purpose of raising awareness amongst SMEs about sustainability issues and bridging data gaps crucial for risk management and portfolio steering.
In other instances, banks employ internal ESG rating methodologies to evaluate and compare the sustainability performance and associated risks of investment products in relation to ESG factors. Moreover, banks disclose ESG scores in documentation provided to clients and investors, particularly for funds categorized as Article 8 and Article 9 products under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). The same happens in relation to financial benchmarks (defined under Article 3(3) of the EU Benchmark Regulation) and is mandatory in regulatory public disclosures under SFDR, EU Taxonomy, Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and related European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), and Pillar 3 requirements. Further, banks also incorporate ESG ratings into investment and equity research reports, where analysts operate within a MiFID II/MAR-compliant control framework.
In all these instances and more, banks make use of forms of ESG Ratings whose disclosure and methodology are already regulated. Therefore, their scoping into the ESG Ratings regulation would unintentionally result in a double reporting burden.
Moreover, the European banking sector does not believe it was the intention of the proposal to introduce new licensing requirements for existing regulated financial undertakings. Failing to exclude financial undertakings from the scope of the Regulation would not only result in financial institutions being forced to create numerous separate entities, leading ESMA to authorize and supervise hundreds of different entities, which would likely not be manageable, but also negatively affect emerging good practices to boost sustainability in the market. The requirement to create separate entities would also result in increased costs for end-clients and/or in a reduced offer from financial undertakings.
The support to this Regulation from the European banking sector underscores the significance of these measures in fostering a more functional and responsible ESG ratings market. Despite this support, concerns about potential unintended consequences, especially related to the scope of the regulation and its impact on financial institutions, call for careful consideration by policymakers. Clarifications in the final text are imperative to prevent any hindrance to emerging sustainability practices and to avoid unnecessary reporting burdens for activities that are already regulated. Yet, ultimately, the proposed Regulation signifies a crucial step toward cultivating a transparent, credible, and sustainable ESG ratings landscape in the European Union.
X
X
For more information:
Matilde Quarin, Financing Sustainable Growth, m.quarin@ebf.eu
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
X
The post ‘Regulating the ESG Rating Market: The European Banking Sector perspective’, Matilde Quarin, European Banking Federation appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
Louise O’Mahony, Head of Sustainable Banking at Banking & Payments Federation Ireland, guides us through the transformative changes brought about by the in the European Union. Published by the European Commission in 2021 and currently undergoing final negotiations, the EPBD targets a radical reduction in building emissions, addressing the significant role buildings play in the EU’s energy consumption and emissions. The legislation, a key component of the “Fit for 55” package, aims to shift towards a climate-neutral built environment aligned with the EU’s climate goals. With Louise, we explore the major shifts, including increased renovation rates, enhanced energy performance information, and the imperative for climate-neutral buildings by 2050. Our focus extends to the impact on banks, their preparations, and the opportunities arising for supporting transition finance in this dynamic regulatory landscape.
The review of the Energy Performance Buildings Directive (EPBD) was published in 2021 by the European Commission and is currently under final negotiation. The legislation seeks the radical and rapid reduction of building emissions within the EU, a critical objective, given the built environment is responsible for 40% of the EU’s energy consumption and 36% of its energy-related emissions.
Delivery of this legislation by the end of the year will put in place a key aspect of the European Union’s “Fit for 55” package, the legal obligation to reduce EU emissions by at least 55% by 2030 and to be climate neutral by 2050. The revised EPBD will complement other legislation introduced as part of the EU’s Renovation Wave, including the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR), the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) and the Renewable Energy Directive (RED).
EPBD’s key aims
· Increase the rate and depth of buildings renovations. · Improve information on energy performance and sustainability of buildings. · Ensure that all buildings will be in line with the 2050 climate neutrality requirements. · Introduce levers, including strengthened financial support and modernisation and system integration, to achieve this aim. |
The proposed legislation places significant new obligations on Member States, who must include progress in delivering on new National Building Renovation Plans (NBRP) in their annual National Energy and Climate Plans. Some of the most impactful changes include a re-scaling of Energy Performance Certification (EPCs); new Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) requiring the renovation of the worst performing buildings and stricter Global Warming Potential (GWP) measures to inform on the “whole life” cycle emissions of new buildings. Requirements on Member States to put measures in place to remove non-economic barriers include enhanced digitalisation, mechanisms to facilitate data exchange, Building Renovation Passports and One-Stop Shops, as well as raise awareness and inform building owners and tenants of the new regime.
The directive directly deals with social sustainability, the “S” of ESG. The NBRPs devised for each Member State’s building stock will provide an overview of national policies and measures to empower and protect “vulnerable households”, alleviate energy poverty, and ensure housing affordability. This prioritises the lowest energy performing classes of buildings, those with the highest potential for decarbonisation.
From 2028, all new buildings should be zero emissions and buildings occupied, operated or owned by public authorities must be zero emissions by 2025. For existing buildings that require retrofitting, the deadline is 2050. EPBD defines zero-emissions buildings as: “a building with a very high energy performance […] where the very low amount of energy still required is fully covered by energy from renewable sources generated on-site, from a renewable energy community […] or from a district heating and cooling system”.
The EPBD, while not constituting financial services legislation, will directly affect banks, for example, introducing voluntary Mortgage Portfolio Standards for credit institutions, which must be considered in conjunction with the existing mortgage regulatory regime.
By providing mandatory requirements for Member States and building owners, and incentives and information for buildings owners and tenants, EPBD legislation provides policy certainty for lenders as they develop green products and services that support their customers to enhance the energy performance of their buildings.
Banks, responding to European supervisory requirements, aim to manage climate-related risk in their portfolios, by improving the energy performance of the mortgaged properties on their books, a large part of which includes mortgage lending to households and businesses.
The impetus EPBD provides to clients to improve their buildings will help protect banks’ long-term assets, as over time, the proportion of their lending portfolios that can be considered sustainable will increase significantly. This will both address the risks arising from climate change events and increase compliance with the evolving regulatory regime put in place to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
Considering the ESG Pillar 3 requirements, the inclusion of wording to allow financial institutions to access information on energy performance certification is welcome. Green Asset Ratio (GAR) measures a bank’s “green assets” as a share of its total assets, with the categorization of both eligible and aligned green assets defined by the EU Taxonomy, which classifies how financial institutions disclose their financing sustainable activities. The EBA specifies banks’ reliance on EPC information required for the reporting of the GAR to prove that they are taxonomy aligned.
In January 2023, the ECB endorsed the directive, supporting efforts to enhance financial institutions’ access to EPCs, recognizing that increased access to more granular information would allow financial institutions to evaluate their climate-related transition risk and to improve the climate-related transition risk assessments of their real estate assets.
The new legislation requires Member States to streamline processes for enhancing properties’ energy performance. Banks, therefore, should identify in advance simple and clear procedures for providing related financing options to their clients in a timely manner, including preparing their staff for these changes and collaborating closely with national authorities. Many banks have already identified the opportunity of supporting clients to access affordable finance to retrofit their buildings or purchase a Zero Energy Building (ZEB). They have been training their frontline staff and relationship managers to support customers through the process and to inform them of the availability of grants already in place and facilities such as One Stop Shops.
Banks might offer green hubs, which provide practical information on sustainability and links to relevant third-party websites, case studies and details of green products and services, and any trusted partnership services.
Banks must understand the implications of enhanced digitalization, changes to EPCs information, and to EPC Databases in each Member State, which will hopefully improve the availability, quality and comparability of EPCs across the EU. Also, implications of the revised standards for buildings in a bank’s portfolio and how, for example, to calculate which buildings meet the zero-emission building standards.
The impact of the introduction of MEPS will be closely monitored in terms of the implications for the collateral held by financial institutions.
The EPBD along with other Renovation Wave legislation, has the potential to improve living and working conditions for many, bringing better health and wellbeing, but also new jobs, improved living conditions, and the reduction of energy consumption and energy costs. While the focus is on decarbonizing buildings to reach the EU’s climate targets, it also addresses issues like indoor air quality, insufficient lighting, dampness, and noise pollution.
Crucially, Member States are now required to raise awareness of methods for enhancing energy performance, and particularly to provide tailor-made information to vulnerable households, with the Commission providing up to €150 billion available to implement the MEPS, between now and 2030, and an additional €72.2 billion from the proposed Social Climate Fund, 2025 – 2032. Member States are expected to match these funds and to develop initiatives that efficiently combine public and private financing.
New Member State requirements will also improve the client’s “retrofitting journey”, for example, introducing independent control systems for energy performance certificates and renovation passports, smart readiness indicators and reports on the inspection of heating and air-conditioning systems.
In providing individual buildings owners with better opportunities to reduce the energy emissions of their buildings, an uptick in construction and renovation is anticipated, depending on the economic situation of these owners. Of course, many will require financing to pay for energy performance improvements to their property (In the euro area, about 70% of people are homeowners, with nearly 39% having no mortgage, and 27% of households are paying rent, according to the ECB).
Improvements in the energy performance of residential buildings and subsequent reduction in energy costs will give households more income at their disposal; studies have shown people in better energy performing homes are less likely to go into arrears (BoE Study). For those households seeking loans, EPBD’s push for public-private financing initiatives is also advantageous.
As well as a more robust process, the support put in place by the EPBD may help resolve the challenge of affordability. Despite many countries providing an impressive array of grants, an affordability gap remains in building upgrades. In Ireland, retrofit costs are reported to range from €25,000 to €75,000+.
For the upscaling required, banks with attractive green financing propositions are aware of the importance of pricing for clients, so state support, combined with lender discounted rate will be important.
Example – Home Energy Upgrade Loan Scheme in Ireland
Example: In Ireland, lenders are currently applying for inclusion in the Home Energy Upgrade Loan Scheme announced in October 2023 by the Irish Government and the European Investment Bank (EIB). This scheme will enable property owners to borrow between €5,000-€75,000 unsecured, upto 10 years at a reduced cost due to an EIB loan guarantee and a government-funded interest rate subsidy. This is a great example of public-private finance supporting consumers and non-corporate residential landlords who wish to upgrade the energy efficiency and decarbonisation of their residential properties, with the interest rates lower than those currently available on the market. |
Prompted by the major new sustainable finance legislative regime under the EU’s Sustainable Finance Framework and national decarbonising rules and initiatives, banks have developed individual NetZero transition plans, aligned with EU and Member States’ decarbonising policies such as those for a decarbonised built environment.
The EPBD will prompt demand for finance, enabling banks to better support their customers and showcasing their critical role in supporting clients to take economic actions that support the climate transition. This development is particularly positive for banks offering financial products and services tailored to clients seeking finance for energy-efficient building projects.
Under regulatory requirements discussed earlier, there is a need for improved data on the energy efficiency of buildings to be included in banks’ risk assessments and due diligence processes. Banks engaged in transition finance need to integrate comprehensive assessments of the energy performance of buildings into their risk analysis and due diligence procedures. This could involve evaluating the energy efficiency of properties when considering loans or investments in real estate.
Effective transition planning requires increased engagement with clients, which entails the need to upskill staff so they can explain new opportunities to their clients, both households and businesses.
X
X
For more information:
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
X
The post Louise O’Mahony, Head of Sustainable Banking at Banking & Payments Federation Ireland, on the EPBD appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
Burçak Inel, the EBF Director for Financing Sustainable Growth, participated in a panel discussion at the 2023 UNEP FI Regional Roundtable on “Regulatory perspectives on promoting sustainable finance in Europe” together with representatives of the European Central Bank and the European Commission.
Burçak told the audience that banks have intrinsic reasons to commit to sustainability, beyond regulation: society is more sensitive to environmental issues, customers’ needs are changing and so are today’s leaders. And most importantly, sustainability is a way to improve the financial performance of banks and to protect banks against risks and allow them to grab opportunities. This results in banks having to consider sustainability at the core of their business strategies, and not merely as an add-on or as a compliance exercise. Sustainability seen in this way is not business as usual – it affects all business lines of banks. The regulatory framework should reflect these internal drivers of change and complement and enable these efforts.
She noted that Europe has reached an important stage where the key pieces of the sustainable finance regulation are finalized. It is important now to provide feedback to the regulators in order to finetune the regulatory framework, remove inconsistencies and possible unintended consequences and encourage further convergence with international standards, where desirable, to limit complexity and encourage a level playing field. In this regard she stressed that it was right for the EU to commit to double materiality since understanding impact inside-out is “absolutely fundamental to reach net-zero targets.’’
In Burçak’s view, banks play a key role in the sustainability transition not only because more than 70 percent of external financing of companies in the EU comes from banks, but also because banks act as intermediaries in capital markets which provide financing for innovative companies and sustainable investment opportunities for savers. Representing 40% of global banking assets, banks have committed to bringing down the emissions from their lending and investment portfolios to ‘net-zero’ by 2050. As a first step, they had to analyze their portfolios, understand where they have the most material impact, and set emission reduction targets. This was not easy, but setting targets has been easier than implementing them. Banks are now at an important point where they need to act on their commitments that reflect the varied contributions they can make to sustainability.
As one major challenge, the implementation of the sustainable finance framework continues to reveal gaps and inconsistencies, which undermine the objectives. Moreover, financiers’ efforts are complicated by the fact that there are not sufficient changes in the underlying economic activities as shaped by broader economic policy.
Indeed, the ultimate success of these efforts will depend on the action and interaction of all players. Investments need to make economic sense for those that decide to undertake them; it is therefore important also to have clarity on government actions, on infrastructure projects, subsidies and incentive programs that will all affect the economics of the activities. Investments need to happen before they can be financed. The sustainable solutions need to be found; then these need to be economically feasible and facilitated, for instance by way of subsidies or tax incentives. The banks can then operate as the middleperson, but they are not the owners of investment decisions.
Burçak stressed the importance of transition plans and called for sectoral decarbonization pathways adjusted per geography when relevant, with these being the key to understanding the credibility of companies’ transition plans. These elements are key when it comes to financing transition.
Finally, she spoke about the importance of SMEs, which are, collectively, a fundamental part of the transition. European SMEs will need help in order to be included in the transition, while avoiding their overburdening as they will be requested ESG information both by larger companies, of which they form part of the value chain, and banks in their efforts to evaluate the risks and impact of their portfolios (which include SME financing).
In conclusion, the overall event acknowledged that sustainability is no longer a choice but an imperative. It paid tribute to the progress made so far and to the leading role of the EU. With the sustainable finance framework almost entirely rolled out, the European Commission will now take a step back, as we shift into the implementation phase. It is now time to see how the framework works on the ground and whether, in the coming years, significant progress takes place in achieving ESG goals. However, realistically, some time will need to pass before the effects of the framework can be thoroughly assessed, with the availability of data only gradually improving over the next years and all stakeholders struggling to learn how to deal with the complexities of this new topic.
This is where we are now: from commitments to implementation. In that sense, the real challenges are still ahead of us. In the end, the overall success will depend on the progress of all – governments, companies and finance providers, with all actors ultimately being judged on actions, not words.
X
X
For more information:
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
X
The post ‘Regulatory perspectives on promoting sustainable finance in Europe’, UNEP FI Regional Roundtable Europe 2023 appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
In preparation for the forthcoming Green Asset Ratio, the Association of German Banks analysed the taxonomy profile of the broader economy. The study covering around 450 corporates shows that the GAR will not adequately represent the banks’ sustainability profile.
It concludes that only 30 percent of the economy is currently covered by the taxonomy. More precisely, the taxonomy only applies to a very limited number of sectors in a substantial manner. Those sectors are typically already the focus of discussions around sustainability, such as real estate, energy or automotive. The rest of the broader economy – around 70 percent of the economy – is not covered by the taxonomy and thus has no pathway towards sustainability within the taxonomy’s regulatory meaning.
The data also illustrates that industry is largely still at the beginning of its transition – even those sectors that are covered by the taxonomy. Only 7 percent of the analysed corporates’ turnover currently fulfils the taxonomy’s technical standards.
Since a bank’s typical balance sheet reflects the broader economy rather than a highly limited number of sectors, these low KPI values will be transferred to the bank’s taxonomy KPIs. This clashes with the immense efforts undertaken by many banks to integrate sustainability-matters into their strategies and business processes.
In fact, many methodological specifics of the GAR artificially decrease the KPI for banks even further from the industrial average. One example is the exclusion of SME-exposures from the GAR-numerator but not the GAR-denominator. This results in the exclusion of many project finance structures from the GAR, including SPV-structures commonly used in commercial real estate or sustainable energy financing.
Thus, the GAR misrepresents the actual sustainability profile of banks considerably. Correspondingly, it should not be used as a steering or controlling parameter and it should not be the basis for future regulatory measures.
Rather than focusing on less than ideal KPIs, the transition of the economy should be at the forefront of the political agenda. This transition is a steady process involving intermediate steps towards more sustainability. In order to promote this wider transition, it is necessary to move beyond the taxonomy’s binary approach and focus on transitional activities and their financing.
The study on the industry’s taxonomy profile is available here. The study analysed the taxonomy KPIs of more than 450 corporates. The analysed corporates consist of the constituents of the leading indices of the EU’s 10 largest economies and EU-based corporates included in the STOXX Europe 600.
X
X
For more information:
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
X
The post Study on Taxonomy KPIs appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
We met Brent D. Matthies, Head of ESG Framework and Coordination at Nordea, who guided us through the complexities of ESG risk disclosures. Serving as the chair of the C-ESG Risk Roundtable Data Workstream, Brent shared some insight into the Data Workstream’s recently issued report which identifies commonly applied practices for addressing data and methodological uncertainties in banks’ ESG risk disclosures under Pillar 3 (P3). In the interview, he shed light on some of the challenges faced by banks in meeting disclosure timelines and the crucial role transparency plays when navigating uncertainties.
The report presents unified perspectives from a select group of banks, focusing on the current status, key areas of uncertainty, and potential risk-mitigation strategies related to four key metrics outlined in their Pillar 3 disclosures. The included targeted suggestions aim to support improvements in disclosure transparency. While these suggestions may find relevance in the context of the CSRD or Taxonomy reporting, they were specifically formulated within the framework context of the Pillar 3 scope. It is important to note that banks are not required to take any specific actions on the back of our report, but we hope that the industry-led report would provide insights and encouragement for practitioners seeking to improve the way banks might disclose.
The scope of the Data Workstream was collaboratively determined by participating banks, with the selection of these four metrics from the Pillar 3 scope based on their associated level of uncertainties in data and methodologies. Given that three out of four chosen metrics are required to be disclosed by the end of 2023, the timely importance to increase understanding regarding the selected datapoints was also considered. The findings of the workstream reveal that, despite the requirement for banks to disclose all relevant metrics in scope by June 2024, substantial challenges exist for delivering on most of them. Within the report, these challenges are presented as stemming from either data or methodological uncertainties. As banks seek to quantify their respective exposures for each metric under current uncertainties, challenges are exacerbated at the bank level due to a limited availability of information on industry-wide data or methodological choices. This report goes some distance to provide insights into these challenges, while not seeking to be comprehensive nor definitive in its coverage.
In light of the report’s findings and observations, the aspect of comparability emerges as an area requiring consideration. The lack of data and methodological transparency concerning ESG-related metrics currently results in the utilization of low-quality data and fragmented methodological guidance, encompassing a mix of voluntary and regulatory requirements, thereby impeding comparability. To alleviate these associated uncertainties, there is a clear need for enhanced transparency and progress in both data and methods. However, the achievement of progress on the latter will take time and, in the interim, transparency enhancements are seen as forms of potential mitigation. Further, it is suggested that such enhancements might yield more beneficial outcomes than standardization, as conformity in assessing the risk landscape may not necessarily contribute to more prudent management of systemic risk within and across the European banking industry. The results of the workstream are presented as targeted suggestions, aimed at addressing either data or methodological uncertainties through increased transparency. It is crucial to note that these suggestions are not framed as ‘good practice’, but rather as approaches that offer tangible benefits for banks navigating common challenges in a dynamic landscape.
While the availability of data is very important for banks, it represents just one facet in the broader effort to improve disclosure quality or comparability. Participating banks share the same opinion that further convergence in practices will require clarifications in guidance, particularly on specific data-related topics. The emphasis here is on the significance, of clear and well-structured methodological guidance. As such guidance is still being developed, the comparability of disclosures is likely set to increase in the future. Although additional improvements in data availability under the CSRD will definitely contribute to this objective, it is essential not to perceive them as a panacea. Banks will still need to integrate such information to inform their own risk assessments in alignment with their business models, thereby creating scope for continued methodological refinement.
X
X
For more information:
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
X
The post Brent D. Matthies, Head of ESG Framework and Coordination at Nordea, on its leading role in the C-ESG Data Workstream appeared first on EBF.
]]>z
BRUSSELS, 6 September 2023 – The European Banking Federation (EBF) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Have Your Say on the European Commission’s proposal for a Regulation on the transparency and integrity of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) rating activities.
Given the pivotal role of ESG ratings in sustainable finance and the significant growth of this market, we believe that the substantial enhancement of transparency in areas such as models, assumptions, methodologies, and the introduction of supervision by ESMA would represent a significant improvement of the current ESG landscape.
In this paper, we provide the European banking industry’s advice, which aims at enhancing the regulatory framework for ESG ratings as well as ensuring greater cohesiveness and consistency within the broader sustainable finance framework.
Some key considerations are the following:
For a comprehensive overview, kindly refer to our position paper.
For more information:
Alexia Femia, Financing Sustainable Growth Adviser, a.femia@ebf.eu
x
About the EBF:
The European Banking Federation is the voice of the European banking sector, bringing together national banking associations from across Europe. The EBF is committed to a thriving European economy that is underpinned by a stable, secure and inclusive financial ecosystem, and to a flourishing society where financing is available to fund the dreams of citizens, businesses and innovators everywhere.
The post EBF comments to the European Commission proposal for a Regulation on ESG ratings appeared first on EBF.
]]>