SFDR, CSRD, green taxonomy, articles 6, 8, 9: behind these code names hide the most recent European regulations or classifications governing responsible investment. Their enigmatic names, “technocratic” for some, do not help to make this subject accessible to the general public.
” What a mistake ! », some will exclaim. And how to prove them wrong? Faced with the climate emergency, supporting sustainable development has become a major issue. The rules for its financing should be simple, clear and understandable by all, especially when we know that each investor can act in this area through their investment choices.
However, European regulations would be, according to its detractors, a ” Gaz factory “ paving the way for “greenwashing” by defining rules that are as complex as they are permissive in terms of sustainable investment.
The difficulty of imposing choices on consumers
So why doesn’t the European Union regulate green finance through a simple set of obligations and prohibitions? Why do we refuse to ban the oil sector from responsible investment funds? Why shouldn’t we oblige them to invest in the production of renewable energies, the fairtrade Or waste recycling? Answer: because the world is more nuanced than it seems.
Let’s understand the problem. In an ideal world, each of us would take up the challenges of sustainable development and adopt lifestyle choices in line with these principles. Unfortunately, it is clear that few of our fellow citizens act in this way, and that it is impossible, in a democracy, to impose certain choices on consumers, such as lowering their heating or using their car more occasionally.
If the effort cannot be concentrated on the demand, it can on the other hand be concentrated on the supply, that is to say on the companies which produce what we consume. With this in mind, some believe that sustainable finance must, in essence, refrain from supporting certain sectors, starting with oil, modes of transport with a high environmental impact or certain chemical professions.
The role of companies in the energy transition
This is to forget that these companies can also be leaders in the energy transition, stand out for their social inclusion policy or their good governance, three fundamental pillars of environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria. To take these subtleties into account and get out of an unproductive Manichean approach, the European Union has sought to develop a precise framework.
You have 59.68% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.