Under the EU ESG Taxonomy, investments of up to 25 million integration evaluation tasks with an intensity of £50 million being marketed with a green promotion strategy of at least 5 years a time are considered sustainable. If the company plans for continuous use in the future (beyond the lifetime of the EU ESG Taxonomy) then it will be considered as sustainable. If the company plans to cease operations before the EU ESG Taxonomy is due to end, then it will probably be encouraged to move to a less sustainable activity.
The EU ESG Taxonomy Executive provides a further analysis of the key stakeholders in the Green Deal as well as their interests in supporting the EU ESG Taxonomy. Interestingly, although they are listed as "investors" the majority of the contractors who whose jobs may (or may not) be impacted by the new system are not labelled as investors. That in my mind is not a very helpful way of identifying potential sustainable investors.
Job seekers are also not well represented on the list, although an impact on the potential of them developing a sustainable investment portfolio. Even the EU's own statistics illustrate that such a potential profile is to be largely unaltered by the EU ESG Taxonomy.
It's clear from this that the detail of the EU ESG Taxonomy is still in development as a result of prolonged debate. In this there is a significant difference between the roles to be given to the EU as a governing body, and those handed to its member states. Whilst completion of the European Green Deal still remains just a goal on the horizon, nations (and heads of state) are struggling to agree on broad approaches.
Within the EU there is growing and important work to be done on the EU ESG Taxonomy (including in sectors which the EU doesn't control, such as international investors from developing countries). For example - the EU's relatively weak Investment triggering mechanism for projects funded by people and money based outside of it’s borders could really be a roadblock to meaningful investment, and the full realisation of the potential that the EU ESG Taxonomy represents.
In the meantime, the Alliance of the European National Agencies for sustainable Investment has announced the launching of the EU-wide slowing fund to help 'protect the right investment decisions on a sustainable trading platform' ensuring 'quality and regulatory compliance'. In the European Union. This sets up an important debate on what is a 'quality investment' and how it is protected from external interference.
However, given the benefits of the modern age, this situation surrounding the EU ESG Taxonomy probably looks worse (and more complicated) than it really is, with the growing mass of governments worldwide in favour of green investment, it really feels like it’s only a matter of time before ‘green business’ is the norm, rather than the newcomer.
The European Union is at the forefront of this transition since in the EU ESG Taxonomy it already has a set of rules for sustainable green business - from which the rest of the world can take inspiration. Provided these are used correctly, and with the growing empirical evidence on renewable energy, investment business investors (and the businesses themselves can truly and accurately consider the consequences of their investments on the environment.
In conclusion - My thoughts on the EU ESG Taxonomy
My personal opinion is that the commissioning of research and investment strategies must lead to a documented view distributed within the commissioning community that the particular investment strategy is sustainable, effective and, in each case, responsible.
For this reason, I am not convinced that the same Commissioning files should be generated as local or national bodies operate.
As an example, if a MSc holder of a bio fertilisation project went to take out a compulsory licence to look at the raw materials or identification factures used, it would mean that the very same paper title would constitute a de facto licence on their very relevant steps into conducting research and investment. This is standard procedure in EU member states, where research is freely available, and is in place to support EU directives to support the EU regulation directly.