|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
04004nmm a2200829 u 4500 |
| 001 |
EB002215300 |
| 003 |
EBX01000000000000001352261 |
| 005 |
00000000000000.0 |
| 007 |
cr||||||||||||||||||||| |
| 008 |
240607 ||| eng |
| 020 |
|
|
|a 9798400277054
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Gratcheva, Ekaterina
|
| 245 |
0 |
0 |
|a Sovereign Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Investing
|b Chasing Elusive Sustainability
|c Ekaterina Gratcheva, Bryan Gurhy
|
| 260 |
|
|
|a Washington, D.C.
|b International Monetary Fund
|c 2024
|
| 300 |
|
|
|a 39 pages
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environmental Conservation and Protection
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Economics
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Public debt
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Income
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Corporate social responsibility
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Sustainable development
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environmental sustainability
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environmental Economics
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Social Responsibility
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Public finance & taxation
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Debts, Public
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a National accounts
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Economics of specific sectors
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environment and Development
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Currency crises
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environmental Equity
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Sustainability
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Macroeconomics
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Brokerage
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Venture Capital
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environment and Trade
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Climate finance
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Climatic changes
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Economic & financial crises & disasters
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environmental Economics: General
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Diversity
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Institutional Investors
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Pension Funds
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Conservation of the environment
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Population Growth
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Corporate Culture
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Investment Banking
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environment
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Environmental Accounts and Accounting
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Financial Instruments
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Green finance / sustainable finance
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Debt Management
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Economics: General
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Debt
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Informal sector
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Aggregate Factor Income Distribution
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Economic sectors
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Sovereign Debt
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Non-bank Financial Institutions
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Ratings and Ratings Agencies
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Corporate Governance
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Role & responsibilities of boards & directors
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Public Finance
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Corporate governance
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Gurhy, Bryan
|
| 041 |
0 |
7 |
|a eng
|2 ISO 639-2
|
| 989 |
|
|
|b IMF
|a International Monetary Fund
|
| 490 |
0 |
|
|a IMF Working Papers
|
| 028 |
5 |
0 |
|a 10.5089/9798400277054.001
|
| 856 |
4 |
0 |
|u https://elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/001/2024/102/001.2024.issue-102-en.xml?cid=549165-com-dsp-marc
|x Verlag
|3 Volltext
|
| 082 |
0 |
|
|a 330
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a This paper evaluates the progression of the sovereign ESG landscape since the initial comprehensive assessment of the sector in 2021 in “Demystifying Sovereign ESG” by conducting a comparative analysis of the current sovereign ESG methodologies of commercial ESG providers. The 2021 study articulated the distinct nature of the sovereign ESG segment from corporate ESG and documented fundamental shortcomings in sovereign ESG methodologies, such as the “ingrained income bias”, lack of consensus on environmental performance, and conflation of risk and sustainability objectives. While sovereign ESG methodologies have evolved since 2021, the significant correlation across providers of aggregate, S, and G scores persist. In response to market demand there has been a notable shift towards greater focus on the E pillar against growing heterogeneity on climate and environmental considerations across ESG providers. The findings underscore the disparity between perceptions and realities in implementing a sustainability strategy within the sovereign debt asset class. This necessitates a reevaluation of sovereign ESG scoring methodologies towards outcome-based metrics and urges a globally coordinated effort to establish robust sustainability measurement frameworks
|