Climate Action and Financial Commitment: Exploring the Legacy and Challenges of COP Conferences
December 1, 2023
•
5 mins read
For nearly three decades, the world has annually witnessed an event of critical importance for the future of our climate: the Conferences of the Parties, better known as the COP. First held in 1995 following the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, these conferences bring together nations that have ratified this treaty in a collective effort to combat climate change, a phenomenon increasingly evident in our daily lives.
Among these conferences, two stand out for their significant impact. The first COP3, held in Kyoto in 1997, marked a turning point with the near-unanimous adoption of the Kyoto Protocol. This agreement, which came into force in 2005 after intense negotiations, mandated signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 5% by 2012. Despite its legally binding nature, some countries attempted to diminish its ambition, and others, like the United States, never ratified it. Canada withdrew from the treaty in 2011, citing the discovery of highly polluting tar sands in Alberta. At the 2012 Doha conference, the Kyoto Protocol was extended until 2020 despite the absence of the US agreement.
COP15, held in Copenhagen in 2009, acknowledged for the first time the necessity of limiting global warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels and proposed the creation of a Green Climate Fund endowed with 100 billion US dollars annually until 2020. Unfortunately, this initiative lacked legal enforcement and clear rules for fund allocation. By 2014, after the Lima conference, the Green Climate Fund had only amassed 10 billion US dollars.
Then came COP21 in 2015 in Paris, one of the most well-known conferences, which led to the landmark Paris Climate Agreement. This agreement set three primary goals:
Limit Temperature Rise: Keep the global temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels while pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Adapt to Climate Impacts: Enhance the ability of countries to adapt to climate change impacts, focusing on resilience and adaptive capacity, especially in vulnerable regions.
Align Financial Flows: Redirect financial flows towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development, ensuring consistent support for mitigation and adaptation.
Once again, the agreement was not, or only minimally, binding: Participant countries were encouraged to define their "Nationally Determined Contributions" to be re-evaluated and submitted to the UN every five years, with each submission expected to be more ambitious than the last. The only legal obligation was the transparency of national contributions and their evaluation by experts.
The Paris Agreement, however, paved the way for landmark climate litigation, including a significant case in the Netherlands where a foundation sued the Dutch government for reducing its climate ambitions. The government lost, with the European Convention on Human Rights forming the legal basis of the decision.
From Words to Deeds: The Struggle for Effective Climate Change Policies at COP28
The climate is a highly complex system with significant inertia; actions taken today might only manifest their effects in a century! As of 2020, global warming is estimated to be around +1.2°C, with an increase of approximately +0.2°C per decade.
Current policies are steering us toward a +3°C increase, underscoring the need for a COP that results in a binding agreement backed by major powers and supported by financial measures. Former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon had suggested a global tax on financial transactions to fund the Green Climate Fund.
There is also hope for new agreements to ban subsidies for fossil fuels. However, the fact that COP28 is set to take place in the United Arab Emirates, chaired by the CEO of the national oil company, sends a mixed message. It is crucial that Gulf countries play a significant role on the international stage, especially given the recent escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in late 2023, highlighting their pivotal role in both international peace and climate change issues. On the latter, the trajectory is concerning: 181 million tons of oil were extracted in 2022, an increase of nearly 11% in a year, and gas extractions, though stable over the past year, have risen by 9% since 2012. COP28, therefore, faces legitimate criticism, with the most significant being that the conference could be an exercise in greenwashing. Recent allegations reported by the BBC suggest potential misuse of the COP presidency to secure new oil and gas contracts.
Finally, responsibility contributions remain unresolved: the "Economic North" is primarily responsible for climate change, yet those who will suffer the most are the countries of the "Global South." Some island nations are even at risk of disappearing due to rising sea levels caused by climate change, and certain areas could become uninhabitable by 2050 due to extreme temperatures and humidity, preventing natural cooling processes like sweating. Addressing loss and damage will also be a central point at the conference.
Stay tuned for the second part summarizing the debates and agreements done at COP 28.
Happy new year! 2018 already holds many exciting news with various projects and clients already onboard. We begin the year with 2 recently signed contracts with top-ranked hedge funds, additional features and cryptocurrencies added to L’Humeur des Marchés and published plentiful of internships and job opportunities. Moreover, following our partnership with Eagle Alpha and the event in New York last month, we will be organizing a roadshow in London to meet high-ranked hedge funds on February 7th and 8th.
Collaboration with new major clients
Recently, we have signed 2 major contracts with top-ranked hedge funds.
The first contract is with Nikko Global Wrap (one of the subsidiaries of Sumitomo Mitsui Asset Management, a major asset manager in Japan) managing JPY 1.7 trillion.
Second contract has been signed with La Française Investment Solutions, a subsidiary of La Française Group, a top 10 French asset manager with more than €64bn assets under management.
This great news proves our technology is trusted by major financial institutions and gives us more confidence to continue looking for collaboration opportunities worldwide.
Future contracts and new distributor
We are currently in negotiation talks with another major French asset manager, a bank, two insurers and a US hedge fund. We hope to keep up at the same pace for the whole year and sign new contracts in the weeks ahead.
Also, we have recently started a new partnership with Neudata, a major UK alternative data distributor. We have signed an agreement, so they could support us and promote our solutions & services.
After New York, London
Last month, SESAMm made its very 1st trip to the USA for the BIG Alternative Data Showcase week organized by our partner Eagle Alpha. It proved to be a valuable experience from which multiple business opportunities arose and we launched many product trials with significant US funds.
Next month, we are planning a roadshow in London with Eagle Alpha. We already arranged multiple meetings with hedge funds and, thanks to Eagle Alpha’s support, we are given a unique opportunity to present and show our solutions to asset managers and C-level decision makers.
New additions to L’Humeur des Marchés
Concerning our platform L’Humeur des Marchés, we are glad to announce that we will soon be providing historical data concerning the assets. This update is planned to happen during next month and will give users more flexibility and options related to their investment and strategies.
In addition, an alert module is under development and we have begun to include cryptocurrencies into the platform. Most of the top-ranked cryptocurrencies are currently covered – such as Bitcoin, Ethereum or Ripple, among others as shown below.
Developments are planned to further extend our coverage of alt-coins with the objective to include every single major capitalization into L’Humeur des Marchés.
New job opportunities
Last but not least, we will be scaling our team during 2018. Multiple internships and job offers are currently available to further support SESAMm’s growth and ambition. We are looking for candidates in the fields of IT, finance and Data science but, most of all, highly motivated individuals seeking challenges! You can find all our offers by following this link. We would be very excited to receive your applications or recommendations for profiles seeking to work with us!
Thank you for your support and best wishes to you for 2018!
A few months ago, Sylvain Forté, CEO of SESAMm, and Julia Haake, Head of ESG Ratings Agency at Ethifinance, sat down and dove deeper into how AI and new regulatory standards are reshaping the future of ESG ratings for rating providers. Download the ebook and have an insider’s view into their thoughts on ESG regulations for rating agencies, the challenges they face, and the possible solutions.
Public companies, due to their large market presence and mandatory financial disclosures, often receive a lot of attention on the Internet. Their operations and regulatory obligations put them under a media spotlight, which amplifies any ESG controversies they face in public and online discussions. In contrast, private companies operate with a higher degree of discretion and are generally less exposed to intense external scrutiny.
Although private companies are less visible to the public, there is still an underlying interest and, more importantly, a need to understand the nature of ESG controversies they face. Are these controversies different in any way, such as being less significant or having unique characteristics? This raises questions about whether certain types of risks are more susceptible to controversies in the private sector. When comparing prominent public companies with their private counterparts, do controversies differ within the same industry?
ESG Overview
In exploring the ESG landscape, a compelling comparison emerges between private and public companies. Public companies predominantly grapple with environmental and social risks. On the other hand, private companies, especially in the financial sector, are more frequently embroiled in governance-related controversies. This section highlights the ESG challenges each sector faces and the varying degrees of visibility and scrutiny these issues receive in the public and private domains.
Within the fossil fuel industry, a distinct difference emerges: public companies are predominantly associated with environmental and social risks, while private companies face more governance-related issues.
This disparity is partly due to the more visible and significant environmental impacts often linked to public companies, such as BP's gasoline spill cleanup in Washington state and the devastating impacts of Shell's oil spills in Nigeria. Public companies also tend to experience more social issues, like employee strikes, protests, and human rights infringements.
In contrast, private companies, particularly in the financial sector, show a higher frequency of governance risks. Examples include controversies surrounding FTX and Binance, highlighting issues like corruption, substantial fines, and money laundering allegations. This trend mirrors the earlier observation in the fossil fuel sector, where private companies, despite fewer controversies, experience more pronounced impacts when significant ESG issues arise.
It's noteworthy that private sector controversies, due to their relatively lower level of scrutiny, can gain significant traction and visibility when they do surface. This differs from the public sector, where the constant exposure to ESG risks leads to more frequent detection but not necessarily the same level of virality for each event. Public companies regularly encounter ESG risks, but the prevalence of such issues in their operations means that individual events may not always attain widespread attention.
ESG Deep-dive
Environmental risks deep-dive
Looking at environmental risks, public companies often face significant issues like emissions, climate change, and water pollution, while private firms encounter these challenges on a smaller scale and with different focuses, such as animal cruelty and environmental strategy.
In the Consumer Discretionary sector, both types of companies encounter environmental risks, but the nature of these risks differs. Public companies, particularly in the automotive industry, are often involved in incidents like fires and lawsuits related to harmful emissions. Private companies, while also dealing with fires and automotive issues, face additional problems like animal cruelty allegations in retail.
The Fossil Fuel sector shows a clear distinction in ESG issues. Public companies frequently face controversies related to climate change and atmospheric pollution, often involved in significant incidents like legal actions and fines. Private companies, on the other hand, are more focused on general environmental strategy, though their controversies tend to be of a smaller scale.
In Utilities, public companies are more involved in water pollution controversies, with significant incidents like fines for unlawful water extraction making headlines. Private companies, while also dealing with water pollution, do so less frequently and on a smaller scale.
The Healthcare sector, particularly in public companies, shows a focus on biodiversity-related controversies. Issues like animal cruelty in biotechnology are prominent.
Overall, public companies tend to be at the center of more significant and high-profile environmental controversies, particularly in sectors like fossil fuels, utilities, and financials. Private companies, while also facing environmental and ethical challenges, often do so on a different scale, indicating different approaches and impacts in their management.
Social risks deep-dive
Public companies across sectors like Consumer Discretionary, IT, Financials, and Fossil Fuels frequently confront a broad spectrum of social risks, including human rights breaches and human capital concerns. Private companies, while also facing these issues, tend to have a more focused approach, with specific concerns in areas like telecommunications, social media, and health & safety. This indicates differing strategies and impacts on their social management.
Public companies in the Consumer Discretionary sector struggle with a substantial volume of data related to human rights breaches and human capital issues. These challenges are widespread across various industries, with incidents in telecommunications, social media, and the automobile industry being particularly noteworthy. In contrast, private companies in this sector primarily confront human rights breaches, with a significant focus on issues within telecommunications and social media. This contrast indicates a more specialized concern for private companies in this sector.
Both public and private companies in the Information Technology sector experience significant risks related to fundamental human rights breaches and human capital concerns. However, public companies, particularly those in software and hardware, are more frequently linked to these issues. Private companies, while also implicated, tend to have a different focus within the same concerns.
In the Financial world, public companies exhibit a pronounced focus on human capital issues, surpassing their private counterparts. This focus spans the banking and insurance industries with notable instances of discriminatory dismissals and wage disputes. Additionally, public companies in this sector also navigate complexities related to human rights and customer relations, including racial discrimination lawsuits and data breaches. Conversely, private financial companies face significant customer relations issues, especially highlighted in financial services, and human rights concerns, such as charges against Binance for child pornography and terrorism financing.
Private companies in the Consumer Staples sector lead in mentions related to health and safety, particularly in the Food/Beverage and tobacco manufacturing industry. These references often involve serious incidents like industrial accidents and lapses in COVID protocols. Additionally, customer relations issues are slightly more pronounced in private companies compared to their public counterparts. Public companies, meanwhile, have a slightly higher proportion of mentions related to human rights risks, including labor law violations and privacy concerns.
Public companies in the Fossil Fuel sector are notable for their focus on human capital issues, with references to industry-wide strikes and layoffs. In contrast, private companies in this sector demonstrate a significant focus on human rights issues, as exemplified by the case of the ex-Citgo CEO.
A divergence is seen in the Basic Materials sector, where private companies face more prevalent human capital issues, particularly in mining & metals and the chemical industry. Public companies, on the other hand, encounter a higher proportion of human rights breaches, including harassment lawsuits and violations of indigenous rights.
In summary, public companies across these sectors tend to face a wider range of social controversies, encompassing both human rights and human capital issues, often on a larger and more varied scale. Private companies, while also dealing with similar challenges, tend to do so with a more specific focus, suggesting different approaches and impacts in their social management strategies.
Governance risks deep-dive
In scrutinizing governance, we found that public firms face risks in management and governance, while private entities encounter issues like anti-competitive practices and corruption. Financial and Industrial sectors see public companies dealing with strategy and compliance challenges, whereas private firms face tax strategy risks. Overall, public companies are more involved in high-profile governance controversies, while private companies focus on specific areas like tax and anti-competitive behavior.
In the Consumer Discretionary sector, governance issues vary notably between public and private entities. Public companies, particularly in telecommunications and Social Media, encounter significant risks in senior management and governance structures, evidenced by legal actions and allegations against companies like Verizon and Ericsson. Conversely, private companies in Media & Entertainment are more embroiled in anti-competitive practices, as highlighted by Epic Games' antitrust trial against Google.
Information Technology presents a clear distinction. Private companies are frequently linked to substantial corruption issues, with the FTX scandal serving as a prime example. Public companies, on the other hand, are more inclined towards engaging in anti-competitive practices, as seen in the cases of technology giants like Google and Microsoft facing antitrust lawsuits and scrutiny for monopolistic behavior.
In the Financials sector, governance risks are predominantly tied to senior management and corporate structure. Public companies face challenges primarily in their influence on strategy and communication, with notable instances including BlackRock's lawsuit over an alleged misleading ESG strategy. Meanwhile, prominent financial services companies like PayPal have faced regulatory scrutiny, further illustrating the sector's vulnerabilities.
The Industrials sector shows similar trends among public and private companies but with a specific emphasis on tax strategy risks in private firms. This is exemplified by the PwC tax leaks scandal, indicating the deep impact of governance issues in private entities.
In the Fossil Fuels sector, corruption issues are more pronounced, especially among privately-held companies. Incidents such as the lawsuit against Citgo and the Amec bribery case settlement underscore the sector's susceptibility to governance-related controversies.
Lastly, the Utilities sector shows a higher prevalence of corruption among public companies, as demonstrated by the investigation into FirstEnergy's public corruption scandal and subsequent legal actions.
Overall, governance risks manifest differently in public and private companies across various sectors. Public companies are often at the forefront of high-profile governance controversies, dealing with issues related to management, strategy, and regulatory compliance. Private companies, while also grappling with governance challenges, tend to face issues like anti-competitive practices and tax strategy risks, reflecting a variance in operational focus and impact on governance risk management.
Conclusion
By diving into the complexities of ESG, both public and private sectors have a unique opportunity not only to enhance their financial performance but also to drive positive societal and environmental impacts. As we further examine corporate controversies and gain a deeper understanding of the nuances within the ESG landscape, it becomes increasingly clear that a commitment to these principles is essential for long-term success and global well-being. Our journey highlights the tremendous potential for positive change when corporations embrace the pressing demands of today's ESG landscape, paving the way for a more sustainable, equitable, and governance-focused world.
Download the full report to discover how different sectors navigate regulatory pressures and sustainability challenges with real-world examples to guide your strategy.
Reach out to SESAMm
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.
Stay ahead with the latest in ESG and AI intelligence
Join our mailing list to receive new reports, event invites, and updates from SESAMm directly to your inbox.
.webp)
.png)