To answer that question, we grounded our discussion in the @GRI_Secretariat Sustainability Context Principle as introduced in 2002 in the 2nd generation of Sustainability Reporting Guidelines.
@aheadahead1 “There is a lot of bullshit about circular economy” says Chapter Author @hanswstegeman referring to companies like Ikea and H&M that are ultimately about fast fashion and planned obsolescence.
@BeatriceCrona@vgalaz@r3dot0 "Complex dynamics, such as threshold effects (tipping points) and strong interactions resulting in cascading effects, are all known drivers of systemic failure in any complex system. Yet
state-of-the-art risk analyses still do not adequately account
for them."
@BeatriceCrona@vgalaz@r3dot0 "Furthermore, most financial risk assessment still relies on historical data, and would underestimate or completely miss the potential for thresholds and cascading effects not previously experienced…"
@kmac "the taxonomy’s purpose … is to set a very high bar based on what scientists [say] is needed ... to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Instead of assessing sectors or companies as they are now, the taxonomy identifies … what...activities ... will lead to a safer planet"
@kmac This sets it apart from other frameworks, such as the @FSB_TCFD which seek to identify risks arising from climate change.
Or the sustainability reporting project being developed by the @IFRSFoundation, which hosts accounting standards used across the world."
"A transformational investment will not succeed without changes in how we operate. To achieve such frameworks, three objectives must be met:..."
@DWS_Group #3 "Resolve the conflict of interest along the value chain [that] are detrimental to consumers, who face uncertain definitions, higher costs and lack protection as financial products make ESG claims that cannot be verified."
@DWS_Group "Then came a formal complaint by Bill Baue … to the board of the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) about potential conflict of interests. The complaint centred around the proposed methodologies used to guide companies and investors towards net zero…"
It makes sense to briefly set the context of the significance of the issues raised in this Complaint.
In a nutshell, the Science Based Targets initiative has gained significance beyond its own direct purview, raising the stakes for it to exhibit deep integrity.
A few examples:
SBTi serves as a model for the broader initiative it has spawned, the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN), which is establishing similar thresholds-and-allocations-based methodologies for other areas of ecological impact, such as biodiversity and water.
As an original instigator of @sciencetargets it deeply saddens me to tweet this thread on the formal complaint I submitted to the SBTi Executive Board on self-dealing conflict of interests concerns.
@sciencetargets The substance of the complaint is validated by a scientific study by Anders Bjørn & Concordia University colleagues recently published as an accepted manuscript in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Research Letters:
@sciencetargets Bjørn et al raise 2 key intertwining technical problems: (mis)alignment with the “latest climate science,” and what they call “emissions imbalances” — i.e., collective carbon footprints under- or overshooting the carbon budget (slices of the pie = less or more than a single pie).