-converti-depuis-jpg.webp)
Join SESAMm for breakfast in Midtown during Climate Week NYC on September 23rd from 8:30 am - 10:30 am. We'll give a short, informal walkthrough of what's new on the platform and what's coming next, then open it up for coffee and conversation with the SESAMm team and other users in ESG, risk, and compliance.
This is a small gathering for SESAMm clients and prospects. Space is limited - looking forward to seeing you there!
SESAMm is pleased to announce the appointment of Steven Carroll to its Advisory Board. Over a career spanning more than 25 years, Steven has built a uniquely broad perspective on financial data, having operated at a senior level across every major corner of the industry, from quant analytics and content to AI-powered research tools and global data platforms.
A Career at the Heart of Financial Data
Steven has seen financial data from every angle: quant analytics at StarMine, content and indices at Thomson Reuters, and AI-powered search at AlphaSense. At Refinitiv and then LSEG, he took on progressively broader remits, culminating in his role as Head of Customer Strategy and Execution, where he was responsible for go-to-market across Workspace, Data and Feeds, FTSE Russell, and Risk Intelligence and Analytics. Throughout, Steven's roles have sat at the intersection of product, marketing, and sales, spanning multiple geographies, including Australia, Singapore, the UK, and the United States.
Deep Roots in the Institutions and Workflows SESAMm Serves
Steven is a subject-matter expert on the content sets and workflows that underpin institutional investment and risk management, including fundamental data, estimates, broker research, ESG, sentiment, and credit analytics. He has also worked closely with the firms that consume this data, from private equity and asset managers to commercial banks and insurers, giving him a first-hand understanding of how they evaluate, adopt, and integrate new data and analytics tools into their processes.
.avif)
Expanding SESAMm's Reach Across Global Financial Markets
Steven's appointment comes as SESAMm continues to expand its AI-powered risk intelligence platform and deepen its relationships with private equity firms, asset managers, commercial banks, insurers, and financial institutions globally. His perspective will provide valuable insight, bringing a practitioner's understanding of how financial data businesses grow and scale.
Steven is also the founder of CCAS (Carroll Consulting and Advisory Services), a London-based advisory practice supporting startups and established vendors across the information services ecosystem. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Management Institute and the Institute of Consulting, a member of the Institute of Directors and the CFA Institute, and serves on the Board of Governors at Greenwich Waldorf School.
We're thrilled to welcome Steven to SESAMm's Advisory Board and look forward to working together as we continue advancing AI-powered risk intelligence for investment firms and corporations worldwide.
COP30 has just begun in Belém, Brazil. Every year, the Conference of the Parties (COP) serves as the world’s central stage for climate diplomacy, where governments, scientists, and civil society gather to decide how to respond to the global climate emergency. Over the decades, these meetings have shaped major milestones, from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement. Yet behind the speeches and pledges, questions persist: how much progress is being made on the ground, and how inclusive are these negotiations in practice?
As countries meet again to assess their collective efforts, looking back at the most recent COPs offers a perspective on how politics, accountability, and competing interests continue to influence the global climate agenda.
The Conference of the Parties (COP) is the annual United Nations summit that brings together the 198 signatories to the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Its purpose is to coordinate international action on climate change through negotiation, progress assessment, and new commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
COPs are usually held in November or December and last about two weeks. The first took place in 1995 in Berlin, and the tradition has continued ever since. COP27 was hosted by Egypt in 2022, COP28 by the United Arab Emirates in 2023, and COP29 by Azerbaijan in 2024. This year, COP30 marks Brazil’s turn to host the event in the Amazonian city of Belém.
Over the years, COPs have produced landmark outcomes, from the Kyoto Protocol (1997) to the Paris Agreement (2015). More recent debates have focused on climate finance, adaptation, and the global transition away from fossil fuels. Yet, as recent conferences show, progress often comes with friction, delays, and controversy.
Held in Sharm el-Sheikh, COP27 centered on the question of climate justice. Developing nations demanded compensation for loss and damage caused by climate impacts that they did little to create. Therefore, the creation of a Loss and Damage Fund was a landmark step, though details on financing and governance were deferred.
Egypt’s hosting of the summit drew criticism over restrictions on civil society. Amnesty International reported hundreds of arrests before the event, including activists detained for online content. Tight surveillance and limited protest spaces highlighted how political control intersected with the climate agenda.
Meanwhile, energy security concerns following the war in Ukraine exposed inconsistencies in global climate policy. Some European nations resumed coal use or sought new gas projects in Africa, while methane leaks from natural gas infrastructure were found to be worse than estimated. These developments raised questions about whether short-term energy strategies were undermining long-term climate goals.
The 2023 summit in Dubai was among the most debated in COP history. The appointment of Sultan Al Jaber, CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, as COP president drew immediate criticism over conflicts of interest. Al Jaber’s comments, suggesting there was “no science” supporting a fossil fuel phase-out, only deepened the controversy.
Leaked letters from OPEC revealed coordinated lobbying to block references to phasing out fossil fuels in the final text. Despite this, over 100 countries advocated for clear language on ending fossil fuel use. The resulting “UAE Consensus” included the phrase “transitioning away from fossil fuels,” the first such mention in COP history. However, critics noted that the wording allowed broad interpretation and loopholes for continued production through “abatement” and carbon capture.
The summit also drew scrutiny for restrictions on activism. Human Rights Watch documented limits on protests, surveillance of delegates, and constraints on speech. Still, COP28 produced incremental steps on renewable energy commitments and adaptation finance, even as it highlighted the influence of the fossil fuel industry on global negotiations.
In Baku, COP29 took place under similar scrutiny. Azerbaijan’s record on press freedom and civil rights was a major concern, with several journalists and activists arrested in the months before the event. Human rights advocate Anar Mammadli and economist Gubad Ibadoghlu were among those detained on politically motivated charges.
The conference also saw diplomatic tensions flare when President Ilham Aliyev criticized Western countries in his opening speech, prompting France to boycott the event. Regional issues, including the aftermath of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, added to the complex political backdrop.
The negotiations were dominated by debates over climate finance. Wealthy countries announced a target of $300 billion annually by 2035, largely relying on private capital and multilateral banks. Developing nations argued that the proposal lacked direct grant funding and risked increasing debt burdens. Observers reported confusion and frustration over the agreement’s final approval, with some delegations absent when it was gaveled through.
COP29 concluded with calls for greater transparency, inclusivity, and consistency in how future summits are hosted and managed.
Across COP27, COP28, and COP29, several common threads emerge. Each conference underscored both the urgency of global climate action and the difficulties of collective decision-making. The creation of new financial mechanisms and the first explicit reference to moving away from fossil fuels were significant steps. Still, they came alongside persistent divisions over fairness, responsibility, and implementation.
A recurring criticism has been greenwashing: the gap between rhetoric and reality. Host countries often present themselves as champions of sustainability while remaining heavily dependent on fossil fuels. At the same time, the presence of record numbers of industry lobbyists, particularly from oil and gas companies, has raised concerns about the balance of influence in climate negotiations.
These issues point to a broader tension: how to ensure that the COP process remains a platform for genuine progress rather than symbolic gestures. Many observers argue that transparency, stronger accountability mechanisms, and better inclusion of civil society are essential to rebuilding trust in the process.
As COP30 unfolds in Brazil, the focus is again on implementation and credibility. The last three conferences demonstrated how progress can coexist with controversy, and how global ambition must be matched by local action and political will.
While the COP framework remains the cornerstone of international climate cooperation, its effectiveness depends on whether commitments are translated into tangible outcomes. The coming days in Belém will show whether lessons from past conferences can help turn dialogue into decisive progress.
TextReveal’s web data analysis of over five million public and private companies is essential for keeping tabs on ESG investment risks. To learn more about how you can analyze web data or to request a demo, reach out to one of our representatives.
In my recent conversation with Gwen Safa, Global Head of Sustainable Corporate Solutions at Barclays Investment Bank, in the webinar “Sustainability: Competitive Advantage or Regulatory Burden?”, we discussed a question that has stuck with me:
Is ESG a cost or a value driver?
It’s not a new question, but it’s revealing, because it shows how much the conversation has shifted. A few years ago, ESG was often seen as either a bonus or a burden. Today, it’s neither. And that’s precisely what makes it interesting.
Across both public and private markets, ESG is no longer viewed as a competitive advantage. It’s a baseline expectation. Fundamentals like governance structures, reporting protocols, regulatory alignment, and sustainability disclosures are now considered standard operating procedure.
For companies approaching an IPO or seeking institutional capital, this means one thing: if you’ve checked the boxes, don’t expect applause. ESG compliance no longer earns bonus points; it simply keeps you in the game. Investors will notice if it’s missing, but they won’t reward you just because it’s there.
That’s not a dismissal of ESG. It’s a signal of maturity. Markets have evolved, and so have expectations. The absence of ESG practices is now a red flag. Their presence is table stakes.
Where ESG does create value is when it’s embedded, not just documented.
This is where the conversation shifts from compliance to strategy. ESG becomes meaningful when a company’s products, services, or operating model actively contributes to long-term sustainability outcomes, whether accelerating the energy transition, enabling supply chain transparency, or improving resilience to climate and regulatory risks.
In these cases, ESG is more than a report. It’s a lens through which companies make decisions, allocate capital, and create value.
That distinction matters. Investors increasingly look for ESG utility, not formality.
We’re already seeing this shift reflected in capital flows. Companies with credible, integrated ESG strategies are drawing more interest from Article 8 and Article 9 funds. This isn’t just box-checking capital, it’s actively seeking alignment with sustainable, future-oriented business models.
What’s changed is that investors assume you’ve handled the basics. Now they’re asking:
In other words, ESG doesn’t earn you extra attention by existing. It earns it by performing.
This evolution also reframes how ESG is discussed in investor conversations. Where there was once a long list of diligence questions, there’s now quiet confidence or concern.
If the fundamentals are in place, ESG may not even come up in detail. That silence isn’t a red flag; it means ESG has moved from the spotlight to infrastructure. From headline to hygiene.
But if something’s off, if disclosures are patchy, if governance looks weak, or if risks aren’t clearly addressed, that silence disappears fast.
So, is ESG a cost or a value driver?
It’s both, and it’s neither. It depends entirely on how it’s used. ESG can’t guarantee returns, and it won’t replace operational discipline. But when embedded into how companies operate, into procurement, product development, capital allocation, and risk management, it becomes a signal of resilience and a magnet for forward-looking capital.
The next challenge isn’t proving ESG exists. It’s proving it works.
That’s not a burden. And it’s no longer a bonus.
It’s the new baseline for doing business.
Discover unparalleled insights into ESG controversies, risks, and opportunities across industries. Learn more about how SESAMm can help you analyze millions of private and public companies using AI-powered text analysis tools.
.png)
