Leveraging existing climate metrics

Data is fundamental for decision-making, especially in sustainability, where it underpins efforts from measuring project impacts to evaluating policy effectiveness. However, in our rush to gather data, we often overlook a crucial question: is the information we need already available? Many times, organizations jump to new data collection projects without first examining existing resources, leading to unnecessary costs, wasted effort, and environmental impact. Building large analytics teams, purchasing third-party data, and conducting extensive surveys are standard practices, but failing to leverage existing datasets can contradict the core principles of sustainability. In my 15 years of experience working in the sustainability field, I have observed that many organizations don’t make the best use of available data. Too often, the first response to a data need is to collect fresh data, even when high-quality datasets already exist. This results in redundant data collection efforts, with multiple surveys and analyses producing similar findings. For example, in one project, a detailed city transportation survey conducted by another team provided data on vehicle composition and age. Through an analysis of existing data sources, we achieved nearly identical results, showing that sustainable data use is achievable. This experience inspired me to look more critically at how data can be used effectively. In my recent analysis, I estimated Vehicle Kilometers Traveled (VKT) per day by car in different Indian cities using available car sales data and existing datasets. This approach allowed me to produce results that were comparable to findings from previous primary surveys, which typically involve extensive fieldwork and resource investments. Additionally, using existing data enabled me to go further by obtaining detailed breakdowns by car type, engine type, transmission type, and providing estimates across a larger number of cities than would have been possible with a single primary survey. The chart below visualizes the VKT estimates across different cities, illustrating how leveraging existing data can yield reliable results that align closely with other studies. This example underscores that sustainable data practices aren’t just about reducing costs; they’re also about minimizing environmental impact and making efficient use of existing resources. By strategically using what is already available, we conserve time, money, and energy. Effective data use in sustainability starts with clear objectives and a careful evaluation of existing resources. Before new data collection, we should ask: Why do we need this data? What level of uncertainty is acceptable? Can available data meet our needs? Sustainable data practices help save costs, reduce environmental impact, and improve efficiency by repurposing existing datasets instead of conducting costly and redundant surveys.

Today, I am pleased to share a new article I have co-authored with Professor Jürgen Ernstberger and Professor Gunther Friedl, both from Technical University of Munich, titled "How Carbon Accounting Supports Corporate Decarbonization." Our work, now published in Foundations and Trends in Accounting's special issue on Perspectives on Carbon Accounting and Reporting, explores how transactional carbon accounting can power more effective corporate decarbonization. As businesses face mounting pressure to reduce their carbon footprint, we propose leveraging traditional financial management systems as a robust foundation, not only to track emissions across Scopes 1, 2, and 3, but to allocate them precisely to products and services via product carbon footprints (PCFs). This level of granularity is critical to support decision-useful insights and transparent reporting across value chains. By integrating PCFs into ERP systems like SAP S/4HANA, companies can assess and manage emissions at the transaction and product level, linking environmental data with financial metrics. This enables the path to a Green Ledger, where carbon is treated with the same rigor as money in corporate decision-making. At SAP, this approach reflects our commitment to embed PCFs into core enterprise systems and elevate them as a strategic lever for both compliance and transformation. This method not only enhances internal steering and external accountability, but it also aligns with emerging regulatory frameworks such as the EU CSRD and SEC climate-related disclosures. Many thanks to my esteemed co-authors for their collaboration. I invite you to explore our findings in depth via the link below: https://lnkd.in/eKWHjgV9 Sophia Leonora Mendelsohn Dr. Christopher Sessar   TUM School of Management #CarbonAccounting #ProductCarbonFootprint #CorporateDecarbonization #Sustainability

Happy to share a recent working paper, "Climate Transition Finance Metrics Effectiveness: An Industry Perspective," led by José Luis R.. This adds to our research at the Net Zero Transition Plans (https://lnkd.in/g9WsBRbr) project at the Oxford Sustainable Finance Group and the UK Centre for Greening Finance and Investment (CGFI). Context: Climate transition finance metrics (TFMs) have become crucial for directing capital toward low-carbon pathways, yet their credibility, data integrity, and effectiveness in achieving near-term climate targets remain uncertain. This study: We systematically examine TFMs reported by some of the largest global financial institutions-including banks, insurers, asset owners, and asset managers-and conduct a cross-industry global survey with 219 practitioners to assess perceptions of TFM effectiveness and data availability. Findings: (1) Our analysis uncovers a significant discrepancy: while widely adopted TFMs such as climate risk exposure and green financing metrics are regarded as moderately to highly effective, the underlying data supporting these metrics is often incomplete or fragmented. (2) Regression analysis indicates that organizations with advanced climate transition and adaptation plans exhibit greater skepticism toward conventional TFMs, suggesting that single-purpose or narrowly focused metrics may inadequately capture the complex dynamics of large-scale climate transition efforts. Implications: Looking ahead, our results highlight the importance of providing strategic recommendations for policymakers, researchers, and financial leaders to optimize TFMs for achieving both near-term and systemic climate goals. #netzero #transitionplans #transitionfinance #metrics #credibility #integrity Executive summary: https://lnkd.in/gg-Sk5uw Paper: https://lnkd.in/gbvGwwhV

If everyone knows that climate should be a priority, why aren't we doing enough? If you've been wondering that, same. And after digging into it, I realised something uncomfortable: The bottleneck isn’t innovation. It’s return on investment. Climate solutions need heavy upfront capital, not just to deploy, but even to test at scale. Infrastructure is expensive, timelines are long, regulations move slowly, and financial payoff isn’t immediate. That makes investors hesitate, even when intentions are strong. But the challenge isn’t only ROI. Policy uncertainty adds another layer of risk. When regulations shift, traditional venture investors struggle to price that volatility, even if the market fundamentals look compelling. And yet, climate startups can still build legitimacy and attract capital. It just requires understanding how investors actually evaluate early-stage climate opportunities. If you’re early and still proving your model, these are the validation mechanisms investors take seriously: For Disclosure & Enterprise Trust 🔹 ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board) - IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures The global baseline for climate-related financial disclosures. It builds on and consolidates the TCFD recommendations, and now functions as the global baseline for climate‑related financial disclosure. This is essential for B2B credibility with enterprise buyers and larger fund LPs. 🔹 SASB (Sustainability Accounting Standards Board) Industry-specific ESG metrics that show measurable, comparable impact. Now integrated into ISSB, but remains widely referenced by investors evaluating material climate risks to business performance. For Impact Measurement & Investor Alignment 🔹 IRIS+ (Impact Reporting & Investment Standards) The standardised metric catalogue used by impact investors and climate funds to measure, compare, and benchmark your impact. If you're targeting climate-focused capital, IRIS+ metrics unlock comparability and trust. 🔹 Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) Validates that your emissions reduction targets are credible and aligned with climate science. Increasingly expected by sophisticated climate investors. For Capital Access & Verification 🔹 GIIN (Global Impact Investing Network) The global network of 1,000+ impact investors that publishes research, sets measurement standards, and convenes the impact investing community. While not a regulatory body, GIIN provides credibility signals and access to the $1.6 trillion impact investing ecosystem. Participating in GIIN-backed funds or programs signals investor legitimacy. The question isn't whether the market exists. It's whether investors believe you can capture it, and frameworks help you prove it.

On just released their impact report and for me it represents a new benchmark for sports-brand ESG. Clearly linking purpose, performance and business success there is a lot for any brand in this space to use as guidance. With my Shift Cycling Culture hat on the key take-away for every sports or apparel brand: tie climate metrics to core business KPIs, showcase the win-win tech stories, and keep the progress scoreboard brutally clear. Sustainability isn’t a cost centre – done right, it’s a growth engine. Purpose with performance – the mission to “ignite the human spirit through movement” now backed by 292 000 people reached through Right To Run. Investor-grade rigour – double-materiality under #ESRS and Science-Based Targets, with Scope 3 intensity tied to gross profit. When carbon becomes a productivity metric, the CFO listens. Sustainability driving innovation – LightSpray (three-minute robotic upper, –75 % CO₂), CleanCloud EVA from captured emissions, and midsoles already at 50 % bio-attributed content. Factory action, not pledges – 100 % coal phase-out for Tier 1 factories and 27 % of suppliers already on renewables, backed by a clear decarbonisation playbook. Radical transparency – restated baselines, detailed methodology notes, and open acknowledgment of where emissions still rose. Take-away for every sports or apparel brand: link climate metrics to core business KPIs, showcase the win-win tech stories, and keep the progress scoreboard brutally clear. #ESG #SportsBusiness #SustainableInnovation #NetZero #CircularEconomy #cycling #running

🚀 HAPPY NEW YEARS ✨ do you know why traditional metrics aren't enough for Climate VC's? .... Let me explain. The VC business seems simple, at first. LPs (Limited Partners) give money to smart fund managers who put money into startups and get really high returns. The traditional metrics used by LPs to evaluate & compare fund performance make sense when viewing the VC from a financial asset class perspective. 🟢 Financial metrics 📈 Internal Rate of Return (IRR avg. 12-15% target): Measures the rate of return on investments before deducting expenses. 💸Multiple on Invested Capital (MOIC avg. 3-5x typical): Reflects the ratio of total value (realized + unrealized) to invested amount, showing overall profitability but not the timing of the cash flows. 💲Gross Total Value to Paid-in-Capital (TVPI avg 1.5-2.0x): Combines realized returns (DPI) and unrealized returns (RVPI) to provide a holistic view of a fund’s overall performance. A TVPI > 1, we want that! 🤔 But is this enough for a Climate fund? The IRR, MOIC, TVPI often do not fully reflect the real impact of Climate VC funds. While LPs are investing for financial returns they are also today looking at the environmental impact on the long term. Climate VCs are holding onto untapped value in terms of the measurable change that Climate startups are delivering towards a positive world, which is something more and more LPs are interested in. This needs to be a basis for fund performance. Today some funds do have 📊 Scope 1-3 GHG Emissions, Green energy and efficiency metrics in the ESG playbook and are termed dark green (Article 9 funds). 📌 However, we need a systemic & updated metric system to compare fund performance that includes Climate and System impact. 🟢 Climate Impact Metrics: 🌍 Carbon-Adjusted IRR: This considers rising carbon prices and provides a more accurate measure of returns. It's vital as carbon markets change. 💡 Impact & Scope 4: It evaluates avoided emissions from new technologies, Land use, biodiversity restored, air pollution reduced etc. ⚡ Decarbonization Velocity: Highlights how quickly emissions are cut across sectors. Speed is crucial for urgent climate goals. 🟢 System Change Metrics: 🔍 Technology Cost Curve Reduction: This checks if climate solutions are becoming more affordable like Solar PV which dropped from $4.75/W in 2010 to $0.27/W in 2023. 🌿 Green Supply Chain Impact: Encourages markets for sustainable suppliers. ex. 50+ suppliers of low-carbon materials 🏗️ Infrastructure Enabled: Supports new systems' development, like the charging network startups that unlocked $500M in additional EV infrastructure investment A holistic approach provides a true picture of Climate VC's potential. It also aligns with the goals of attracting the right investors on board. 📌 Leading a new era in climate solutions is essential. Could better metrics incentivize and revolutionize climate investment evaluation? 🚀 Thanks Included VC

🙅♀️ “Avoided emissions claims cannot be trusted.” That’s what we often hear: they’re not robust, not comparable, and therefore impossible to use seriously in financial evaluations or target setting. 🌍 This is exactly why we created Climate Dividends. An extra-financial indicator and mechanism that turns avoided emissions into standardised and verified data, making them finally usable in financial decision-making. 💰But how to objectify #Climate #Positive #Impact in #Investment #decisions and #DueDiligence? -> that’s what our new White Paper “Rethinking Climate Metrics” does, via financial use cases. 📊 Discover 3 key ratios to integrate climate performance into investment processes: 1️⃣ Climate Dividends Efficiency (CDE) measures real #climate #efficiency: CO₂e “spent” but for what impact? 2️⃣ Climate Dividends Intensity (CDI) aligns revenues with #climate #impact. 3️⃣ Climate ROI (C-ROI) compares #climate #performance across different investments. 💡With case studies (Eurazeo Team for the Planet ADEME Investissement Portzamparc Groupe BNP Paribas CVE (Changeons Notre Vision de l'Energie) ACORUS), best practices, and practical tools. 👉 Download the White Paper: link in comments! Many thanks to all those who collaborated with us for this big work Erwann Le Ligné Audrey LAMBRY Samuel Vionnet Mathieu Joubrel Guillaume Coqueret Noelia Pacharotti Jérémy Rasori Damien Didier Ronan LE MOGUEN Fabio Lancellotti Stefano Bonelli, PhD Annelyse Potié Anthonin David Clémence Lacharme Alice PÉGORIER Karine Mérère Clémentine de Butler Philippe Benquet &Yohan Rossetto Marion Henriet Mehdi Coly Denis GALHA GARCIA Arthur Auboeuf, and of course Laura Beaulier for coordinating all this brain effort!

Current climate metrics penalize the companies we need most—those scaling solutions. Climate Dividends offers an interesting approach to this gap with three auditable ratios. The white paper shows how investors can embed them in due diligence, carried interest, and sustainability-linked loans. CVE (Changing Visions of Energy)'s Climate Dividends Efficiency is 2.02 (two tonnes avoided per tonne emitted). Geev's Climate ROI reached 7.18 (7,180 tCO₂e avoided per million euros invested). Over 120,000 shareholders in Team for the Planet's portfolio already receive attributed Climate Dividends. Next is an open-source benchmark that launches in H1 2026, enabling sector-by-sector comparison and turning positive impact into decision-grade data. Contributors include Stefano Bonelli, PhD, Erwann Le Ligné, etc.

As the world grapples with the impacts of climate change, data is becoming a powerful tool in tracking, analyzing, and managing our collective response to the crisis. With climate models showing a clear link between emissions and global warming, organizations and governments can leverage data to make informed, impactful decisions in their efforts to reduce emissions and protect the planet. Using tools like Power BI dashboards, we can visualize real-time data on emissions across sectors, measure progress towards reduction targets, and assess the effectiveness of various climate policies.  We can see here - a small number of countries contribute most of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, with the top 10 emitters accounting for over two-thirds of annual global greenhouse gas emissions. Did a company wise visualization of Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions for different sectors and a drill down to top companies for IT sector (basis the data availability. Data source - Company's ESG reports). The importance of climate control through data-driven insights cannot be overstated. This data empowers everyone - businesses, policymakers, and individuals - to take actionable steps toward reducing their environmental impact. It’s not just about data collection; it's about using this data to create a more sustainable future. Through dashboards and analytical tools, we are better equipped to confront climate challenges head-on and drive meaningful change. #Sustainability #ClimateAnalytics #CarbonEmissions #DataVisualization 

The UNEP–GARP report presents a practical framework for banks to implement board-level climate dashboards, providing vital insights for informed decision-making. With climate risk becoming increasingly significant in the financial landscape, boards are encouraged to understand its impact on their operations and stakeholders. The report outlines two key dashboard content categories: balance sheet details covering exposures to carbon-intensive sectors, financed emissions, and regulatory compliance, as well as operational sustainability factors such as GHG emissions and climate-related incidents. A well-designed dashboard equips boards to monitor climate risks, assess alignment with net-zero goals, and respond to growing regulatory and stakeholder expectations. Challenges often revolve around data quality limitations, especially regarding Scope 3 emissions, inconsistencies in metric standards, and seamless integration with existing reporting frameworks. Banks are advised to start with simplicity, strategically incorporate qualitative insights, and gradually adopt more advanced, scenario-based metrics. Tailoring the dashboard to fit the bank's governance structure and risk profile is crucial. Ultimately, these climate dashboards enhance strategic decision-making, strengthen risk management processes, and enhance regulatory readiness.