Banking On Sustainability: Research Methodology And Survey Results (march 2007)
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Banking On Sustainability: Research Methodology And Survey Results (march 2007) as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 4,367
- Pages: 15
I. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND SURVEY RESULTS The Research Context This report focuses on sustainable banking as one of the fastest changing segments of sustainable finance. The research done to support this report had several objectives. First, it had to capture the overall picture of the emerging market banking sector with regard to its view on social and environmental issues and integration of sustainability practices in business decisionmaking. Second, it had to document the concrete experience of emerging market banks in successfully implementing social and environmental management system, and explore their business rationale for pursuing opportunities related to sustainability. Third, it had to determine the role of IFC capacity building programs in improving understanding and promoting implementation of sustainable finance principles in emerging markets. Fourth, it had to build and expand the findings of the previous research on this subject, summarized in IFC’s 2003 publication, Beyond Risk. In the view of these objectives, the research methodology included two components: Stage 1. Administration of a survey, based on an online questionnaire to all financial institutions that had participated in IFC Competitive Business Advantage (CBA) workshops from July 2002 to September 2005. These institutions had already been introduced to the concept of sustainable finance through the workshops. Stage 2. Collection and analysis of best practice examples of emerging market banking institutions that had participated in the workshops.
The Questionnaire-based Survey Scope of the Questionnaire The issues covered in the questionnaire included: ⁻ The respondent’s professional level and functional role ⁻ Profile of the financial institutions, including industries financed, domestic or foreign status, main lines of business, average number of employees, value of assets, transaction size ⁻ Main sources of social and environmental risks for the financial institutions and its clients ⁻ Views of financial institutions on the ways to capitalize on sustainability opportunities ⁻ Key reasons to consider social and environmental sustainability issues ⁻ Implementation of social and environmental sustainability standards, tools, and management systems ⁻ Barriers to implementation ⁻ Key business impacts of considering social and environmental sustainability issues ⁻ Demand for IFC assistance on sustainability issues, such as further information, technical assistance and advisory services, financial support, product offerings in sustainability areas, and providing means to enhance sustainability learning. Respondent Profiling and Generation of a Distribution List To meet the goals of this report and expand the findings of the Beyond Risk research, the 2005 survey included financial institutions that participated in IFC’s Competitive Business Advantage workshops from October 2002 to September 2005. To ensure the accuracy of the survey data, representatives of IFC who attended these workshops were excluded from the survey. Survey Administration The survey was administered through a professional online engine that allowed for easy distribution, high interactivity of the questionnaire depending on individual responses, and effective tracking of responses. An invitation to complete a survey was sent out through the online engine. The invitation then directed survey respondents to a Web site where they could view and complete the questionnaire. The engine also provided tools for initial analysis of survey results.
1
To ensure a higher response rate, the questionnaire was translated and distributed in Russian and Spanish to respondents from Russian‐ and Spanish‐speaking countries. Telephone calls were made to the entire survey distribution list to ensure that prospective respondents had received the questionnaire and to address any question or technical issues they might have. Sample Size and Response Rate The initial survey distribution list consisted of 498 potential respondents. Despite the obvious advantages of an online survey, a common technical obstacle is inaccessibility of certain e‐mail addresses because of server failures or the fact that these addresses no longer exist. In this case, 121 responses were received and 84 e‐mail addresses on the original list were unreachable. Therefore, the overall response rate was 24 percent, if technical failures are not taken into account. However, the response rate increases to 29 percent if the calculation is based on the number of actual survey recipients (total number of survey invitations sent less the number of “bounce‐back” e‐mail addresses).
Best Practice Examples Best practice examples were collected from 17 financial institutions, whose representatives have participated in Competitive Business Advantage workshops. For the selection process, the following criteria were applied: • Focus on the banking sector: Since this study has a specific focus on the banking sector, institutions had to be engaged in a variety of activating related to commercial banking, such as lending, leasing, and/or commercial microfinance. • Focus on regional diversity: To demonstrate the business case in all emerging markets, the choice of best practice examples was also diversified by region. • Focus on expertise in sustainability management: The examples had to be from financial institutions that had made concrete steps toward implementing a SEMS. • Focus on the business case for innovation: Financial institutions had to align sustainable innovation with their business goals and strategy. • Focus on diversity of sustainability areas: Examples had to cover innovations in a wide variety of sustainability‐ related areas discussed in this report, such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, biodiversity conservation, and social finance. Representatives of these financial institutions were contacted and personal interviews were conducted by phone. The interviews focused on: • Business goals of financial institutions • Recent market challenges they faced • Social and environmental management practices used to identify and mitigate risks and/pursue opportunities • Elements of the SEMS developed by financial institutions and their integration into corporate management systems, such as risk management, human recourse management, monitoring and evaluation, and reporting • Concrete examples of sustainability‐related investment projects; the focus included both projects that invest directly in sustainability areas (such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, and biodiversity conservation) and “business as usual” projects that included sustainability‐related components that led to overall improvement in projects (such as risk reduction, cost reduction, revenue increase) • Overall financial and nonfinancial results achieved by a financial institution as a result of considering social and environmental issues Additional information for the best practice examples was also collected through: • Documentation and additional information supplied by financial institutions • Official information available through the financial institution’s Web site and financial and nonfinancial reports (such as sustainability reports) • Internal IFC documents and project files • Personal interviews with IFC investment staff
2
II. SURVEY RESULTS The 2005 IFC survey collected and analyzed data from over a hundred emerging markets financial institutions in 43 countries. While the analysis in this publication focused on survey results reported by commercial banks, the quantitative data that follows represents aggregated results for all financial institutions that participated in the survey, unless otherwise stated.
Respondent Profile All Respondents Fifty‐five percent of financial institutions surveyed were domestic in their respective countries, 27 percent were foreign, 4 percent were international financial organizations like IFC, and 14 percent represented other forms of ownership (such as regional banks and domestic banks with foreign capital). Sixty percent of the institutions were IFC clients; 25 percent were not. The remaining 15 percent had other forms of affiliation with IFC, such as partnerships. Types of Financial Institutions Surveyed (percent of respondents) Developme nt bank/Multilat eral organization 7
Private equity 21
Other 13
Microfinance 6
Professional Level of Survey Participants (percent of respondents)
Investment Officer 4
Commercial bank 41
Leasing Insurance 0 7
Risk Manager 3
Other 5 Senior Manager 36
Environment al Specialist 18
Business Developmen t Officer 10
Investment bank 5
Credit/Loan Officer 24
Figure 1
Figure 2
Regional Distribution of Financial Institutions Surveyed (percent of respondents)
Main Sectors Financed
63
Domestic general manufacturing
50 49
Agriculture
Rest of the World 7
Asia 2
Sub Saharan Africa 17
Middle East and North Africa 4
Infrastructure
33
Tourism
31
Extractive industries
25
Health and Education
Latin America 32
20
Hi-tech
14 13
Trade Other
Southern Europe and Central Asia 19
Central and Eastern Europe 19
8
Biodiversity
7
Construction and Real Estate
4
Finance 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
percent of respondents
Figure 3
Figure 4
3
70
Commercial Bank Respondents Sixty‐seven percent of commercial banks surveyed were domestic in their respective countries, 21 percent were foreign, 12 percent were international banks and 14 percent represented other forms of ownership (such as regional banks and domestic banks with foreign capital). Seventy‐seven percent of commercial banks were IFC clients; 14 percent were not. The remaining 9 percent had other forms of affiliation with IFC, such as partnerships. Regional Distribution of Commercial Banks Surveyed (percent of respondents)
Latin America 23
Sub Rest of the Saharan World Asia Africa 5 0 12
Southern Europe and Central Asia 30
Professional Level of Survey Participants, Commercal Banks (percent of respondents) Investment Officer 0
Middle East and North Africa 2
Environmen tal Specialist 14
Central and Eastern Europe 28
Risk Manager 8 Other 5
Business Developmen t Officer 11
Senior Manager 28
Credit/Loan Officer 34
Figure 6
Figure 5
Main Lines of Business, Commercial Banks
Corporate finance
76
Consumer finance
71
Project finance
64
SME finance
62
Housing finance
55
other
21 ‐
20
40
60
80
100
percent of respondents who mentioned a business line
Figure 7
4
Reasons Why Banks Consider Social and Environmental Issues Virtually all the survey respondents (97 percent) reported that they consider social and environmental issues either by managing risks (40 percent), developing business opportunities, or both. Some 57 percent said that their banks consider social and environmental opportunities.
Key Reasons Why Banks Consider Environmental and Social Issues 66
Increased credibility and gain in reputation
57
Demand by investors
51
Increased value to stakeholders
40
Lower risk and better returns
15
Bank/clients facing liability claims Demand by clients
13
Other
13 10
Nonperforming loan experience 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
percent of respondents
Figure 8
How Financial Institutions Perceive Social and Environmental Risks The following figures demonstrate how financial institutions that responded to IFC 2005 survey perceive social and environmental risks for their clients and for themselves.
Banks’ Perceptions of Key Social and Environmental Risks Facing Their Clients 76
Environmental legal issues 72
Health and safety for workers
70
Disruption of operations Loss of market share because of environmental regulations Market devaluation because of social or environmental liabilities
46 26 15
Loss of liability insurance coverage 0
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
percent of respondents Figure 9
5
60
70
80
Key Social and Environemntal Risks Indentified by Financial Insitutions
Reputational risk / Negative publicity w ith customers, shareholders and the general public
76 59
Credit risk (defaults, payments rescheduling)
45
Nonperforming loans/investments/leases
39
Security (devalued collateral)
38
Loss of financing from international financial institutions Liability for clean up of contaminated property/collateral
32
Reduced access to capital from private financial institutions/international bond market
32 31
Potential civil or criminal liability for negligence
11
Loss of depositors or retail clients
3
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
percent of respondents
Figure 10
Main Areas of Social and Environmental Business Opportunities The following figure shows areas where financial institutions that responded to IFC 2005 survey see opportunities to benefit from considering social and environmental issues
Main Areas of Social and Environmental Business Opportunities Developing business in sustainable areas
66
Getting access to new markets
59
Providing loans for environmental projects
55
Improving access to financing from international financial institutions Providing advisory services/loans for ecoefficiency and cleaner production
55 44 11
Attracting improved terms of insurance
2
Other 0
10
20
30
40
percent of respondents
Figure 11
6
50
60
70
Implementation of Social and Environmental Sustainability Management Practices Eighty‐two percent of financial institutions that answered the survey reported that they used one or several social and environmental procedures before participating in the IFC Competitive Business Advantage (CBA) workshops. The types of procedures and tools used are presented in the following figures. Sixty‐eight percent reported that their institutions have developed a formal SEMS following their participation in a CBA workshop. Twelve percent reported that their financial institutions have also developed financial products in sustainable areas. Use of Social and Environmental Tools Prior to IFC Workshops
Use of Social and Environmental Standards Prior to IFC Workshops
Local social and environmental regulations
85
IFC's exclusion list
54
IFC's project categorization
77
Environmental impact
72
Environmental audit
41
IFC's safeguard policies
Site visit
Environmental liability
11
Cleaner production
13
Other
9
37
Other
34
15 0 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Percent of respondents
80
20
40
60
80
100
Perent of respondents
90
Figure 13
Figure 12
Elements of Environmental and Social Sustainability Management System Developed
75
Identified social and environmental risks and opportunities Developed procedures to integrate social and environmental considerations into project screening and client evaluation
58 48
Articulated objectives for social and environmental risk management Developed an action plan and/or allocated resources system implementation
41 38
Designed a formal sustainability policy Established a monitoring and evaluation procedure for social and environmental management Identified internal training needs for environmental and sustainability management Specified criteria to use for reviewing and screening investments (e.g. exclusion lists, local environmental regulations) Held media events and/or undertook reporting initiatives to communicate sustainability achievements both internally and to stakeholders
36 35 30 28
Defined and assigned responsibilities for system implementation
25 22
Created an environment/sustainability department or unit Identified environmentally related business opportunities using business case matrix
19
Established incentive schemes to motivate the investment officers to pay attention to social and environmental issues Nominated board representative responsible for social and environmental sustainability
12 12 0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent of respondents
Figure 14
7
60
70
80
Financial Products in Sustainable Areas Developed
Other
18 18
Renewable energy finance Environmental venture capital
12 12
Environmental credit cards Cleaner production technology
24
Carbon emission trading schemes Sustainable leasing
6 12
Environmental loan for SMEs
41 6
Sustainable equity fund Environmental liability insurance
0 6
Green mortgages Green investment funds
24 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Percent of respondents
Figure 15
Perceptions of Barriers to Implementing Social and Environmental Sustainability Management Practices and System Financial institutions that considered social and environmental issues in their management practices reported a number of barriers to implementation. The survey results varied depending on whether financial institutions had implemented (or were in the process of implementing) a SEMS or had not yet implemented a formal social and environmental sustainability the system. Perceptions of Barriers to Implementation, Financial Institutions that Had Not Implemented a Social and Environmental Management System
Perceptions of Barriers to Implementation, Financial Institutions that Had Implemented a Social and Environmental Management System
Lack of best practice cases about social and environmental management for financial institutions in the emerging markets
49
45
No qualified environmental consultants to advise clients
35
26
Cost of developing and implementing internal guidelines and procedures is too high
32
35
Lack of know-how/in-house capacity
30
43
Senior management does not see the need for social and environmental risk management
24
17
Other
24
12
19
25
19
11
It is not standard financial practice
19
18
The belief that there is no business gain
8
15
Customers do not demand it
8
0
Concerns on how shareholders will view this change
8
11
Potential inconsistencies between government regulations and IFC/organization social and/or environmental requirements No qualified environmental consultants to advise your institution
Table 1
8
Business Impact of Considering and Managing Social and Environmental Issues Most of the financial institutions that responded to the survey—81 percent—reported that positive changes had resulted from their steps to integrate social and environmental sustainability issues in their business, either by implementing a formal SEMS or using other procedures. About a quarter of these respondents (26 percent) perceived these changes as significant. Not a single respondent reported a negative change from considering social and environmental issues. These figures varied for financial institutions that considered social and environmental risks only as opposed to considering both risks and sustainability‐related opportunities. While 79 percent of respondents whose financial institutions considered risks only reported a positive change in their business, this figure was higher (84 percent) for those who considered both risks and opportunities. Notably, only 21 percent of respondents whose institutions considered risks only perceived this change to be significant compared to 33 percent for those who considered both.
Benefits of Considering Social and Environmental Issues Increased revenues
59
Improved community relations
50
Reduced risk
41
Improved access to international financing
39
Improved brand value and reputation
29
Cost savings
13
Better quality of work
9
Developed new business
7
Developed new products and services Other
4 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Percent of respondents
Figure 16
IFC Assistance Requested All Respondents Most financial institutions (85 percent) that responded to the survey indicted that they would like to receive further assistance from IFC on social and environmental sustainability issues. The type of assistance requested was distributed as follows: ⁻ Providing technical assistance and advisory services (82 percent) ⁻ Providing information (79 percent) ⁻ Providing means to enhance sustainability learning (66 percent) ⁻ Providing sustainability‐related business opportunities and new products (57 percent) ⁻ Providing financial resources (54 percent). The figures below break down the preferences within these categories.
9
Technical Assistance and Advisory Services Training staff in environmental risk management and sustainability opportunities Advanced workshops for implementing performance-focused social and environmental management system Advice on how to identify the risks and determine what insurance is required
76 61 57 51
Advisory services for sustainability business development
49
Technical assistance for IFC's sustainability products
44
Training local consultants to assist clients In-house support on social and environmental management system implementation Advice/assistance on how to incorporate insurance requirements into the financing agreements
39 32 1
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percent of respondents
Figure 17 Informational Support Industry risk briefings: provide updated information on international risk/opportunities by sector
76
Market briefings: signaling environmental value-added to regional analysts, raters, media, central banks)
62
Country-specific sustainability topics
61 47
Sector strategies (e.g. sustainability in auto industry) Private Equity/Venture Capital and Sustainability
43
Socially Responsible Investing (SRI)
43
Share insurance market intelligence in each country (local players, availability of coverage pricing etc.)
33 6
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percent of respondents
Figure 18
Most useful
Means to Enhance Sustainability Learning
Less useful Dedicated web-page - for sustainability in the financial sector
77
14
Practical tools (ex. Software for environmental assessments interactive CD-Rom)
76
16
Newsletter for wide distribution to workshop parcitipants
55
36 Directory of sustainability companies in emerging markets
54
34
Directory of sustainability suppliers in emerging markets
51
36
-On-line direct learning
51
38
Create a networking platform between IFC workshop participants
38 0
10
20
30
40
47 50
Percent of respondents
Figure 19
10
60
70
80
90
Financial Assistance
Sustainability-related business opportunities and new products
74
Agri-business
Debt
56
60
Energy Efficiency Finance
Partial Risk Guarantees
57
Renewable Energy
55
Eco-tourism
43
Non-reimbursable Grants
52
Clean Technologies
53
37
Equity
40
Bio-diversity conservation
4
Other 0
10
30
Reimbursable Grants
36
Carbon Finance
7
Other 20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
Percent of respondents
10
20
30
40
50
60
Percent of respondents
Figure 20
Figure 21
Commercial Bank Respondents Among commercial banks that responded to the survey, 86 percent indicted that they would like to receive further assistance from IFC on social and environmental sustainability issues. The type of assistance requested was distributed as follows: ⁻ Providing means to enhance sustainability learning (73 percent) ⁻ Providing information (70 percent) ⁻ Providing technical assistance and advisory services (68 percent) ⁻ Providing sustainability‐related business opportunities and new products (51 percent) ⁻ Providing financial resources (49 percent) The figures below break down the preferences within these categories.
Technical Assistance and Advisory Services: Commercial Bank Response Training staff in environmental risk management and sustainability opportunities Advanced w orkshops for implementing performance-focused social and environmental management system Advice on how to identify the risks and determine w hat insurance is required
72 66 63 59
Advisory services for sustainability business development Technical assistance for IFC's sustainability products
44
Training local consultants to assist clients
44
In-house support on social and environmental management system implementation Advice/assistance on how to incorporate insurance requirements into the financing agreements
34 22
Other
0 0
10
Figure 22
11
20
30 40 50 60 Percent of respondents
70
80
Informational Support: Commercial Bank Response Industry risk briefings: provide updated information on international risk/opportunities by sector Market briefings: signaling environmental value-added to regional analysts, raters, media, central banks)
88 58
Country-specific sustainability topics
55
Sector strategies (e.g. sustainability in auto industry)
55 33
Private Equity/Venture Capital and Sustainability
33
Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) Share insurance market intelligence in each country (local players, availability of coverage pricing etc.)
30 6
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percent of respondents
Figure 23 Most useful
Means to Enhance Sustainability Learning: Commercial Bank Response Practical tools (ex. Softw are for environmental assessments interactive CD-Rom)
Less useful
82 15 77
Dedicated w eb-page for sustainability in the financial sector
24 59
New sletter for w ide distribution to w orkshop participants
38
Directory of sustainability companies in emerging markets
47 47
On-line direct learning
47 47
Create a netw orking platform betw een IFC w orkshop participants
44 53 41
Directory of sustainability suppliers in emerging markets
53
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Percent of respondents
Figure 24
Sustainability-related business opportunities and new products: Commerical Bank Response
Financial Assistance: Commerical Bank Response
Agri-business
Debt
81
Partial Risk Guarantees
58
Energy Efficiency Finance
52
Renewable Energy
42
Clean Technologies Carbon Finance
39
0
26
Reimbursable Grants
3
Other
37
Equity
19
Bio-diversity conservation
52
Nonreimbursable
49
Eco-tourism
59
22 4
Other 20
40
60
80
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent of respondents
Percent of respondents
Figure 25
Figure 26
12
60
70
III. IFC COMPETITIVE BUSINESS ADVANTAGE WORKSHOP IN SUSTAINABLE FINANCE The Sustainable Finance Workshop: A Learning Experience with a Difference Three characteristics set the IFC Sustainable Finance Workshop apart from traditional seminars on environmental or social issues. Clearly defined deliverables: In the workshop you will acquire know‐how and the skills to deal with sustainability issues. However, the course is not intended to be a mere class exercise. You are expected to be productive and to work on an outline social and environmental management system (SEMS). This will be tailored to your institution and ready for implementation at the end of the workshop. The financial professionalʹs business perspective: The concepts and language used in the workshop are those familiar in the financial sector. Taking a business perspective means analyzing social and environmental issues in terms of financial risks, investment opportunities and reputation. Sustainability jargon is kept to a minimum. High interactivity: Expect a high level of interaction. The workshop is designed to create synergies between participantsʹ expertise, thought‐provoking inputs by trainers, and support by seasoned coaches.
Target Audience The workshop is tailored to management staff in financial institutions who are in charge of sustainability issues, environmental management, or credit risk management. A modular structure makes the course suitable for both beginners and advanced professionals familiar with social and environmental issues.
Practical Approach, Business Perspective Capacity‐building is the first objective of the workshop. You will acquire the skills for analyzing, discussing, and managing sustainability issues within your institution and with relevant stakeholders. The focus, however, is on the second objective: to set up an outline of SEMS that deals with the issues relevant to your institution and in your business environment. Guidance is provided in the form of a workbook designed to accompany your work on the SEMS and to serve as a blueprint before, during, and after the training event. Implementing SEMS benefits financial institutions in two ways: • Firstly, by capitalizing on the business case linked to sustainability issues. • Secondly, by ensuring compliance with IFC guidelines/policies. It is this practical focus that distinguishes the Sustainable Finance Workshops from similar courses that traditionally focus on awareness‐raising. You will start to deal with sustainability issues and to set up your SEMS while still in the workshop, while experienced coaches are on hand to provide you with any support you may require. If your institution already has social and environmental management system running, the workshop is a good opportunity to review it.
13
Content: Five Steps toward a Social and Environmental Management System In the workshop you will take six steps towards your SEMS. Each step is initiated by a presentation providing you with a thorough understanding of the issues at hand and a range of conceptual tools you may find useful in your work. Step 1: Analyze and Prioritize Step 2: Sustainability Policy Step 3: Procedures Step 4: Resources and Planning Step 5: Monitoring and Feedback Break‐out sessions will be available for those interested in particular business areas such as insurance, or for participants with expertise in managing sustainability issues.
Training and Coaching By Experienced Professionals The trainers delivering the sustainable finance workshops and the coaches supporting you in your work on the SEMS have a sound background in both finance and sustainability issues. • This encompasses, first of all, a thorough understanding of a bankʹs mechanics and business activities. • Secondly, trainers are both familiar with environmental, social, and development problems and have the expertise to discuss these from a business perspective. • Thirdly, you will be able to draw from the coachesʹ experience in setting up and maintaining management systems dealing with risk, sustainability, environmental issues and quality.
14
IV. COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL/BUSINESS ADVANTAGE WORKSHOPS, JULY 2002–MID-2006 2002
2005
Miami (September) London (October) Moscow (October)
Johannesburg (February) Sarajevo (March) Belgrade (March) Skopje (April) Tirana (April) Miami (May) Singapore (July) Ulaanbaatar (October) Bucharest (October) Tunisia (November) Sao Paulo (November) Ho Chi Minh (November) Hanoi (December)
2003 Istanbul (February) Johannesburg (June) Lagos (June) Budapest (November) Miami (December) Washington, DC (December)
2004
2006
Dakar (March) Washington, DC (April) Sao Paulo (May) Beijing (June) Sao Paulo (July) Dhaka (October) Bucharest (October) Moscow (November) Miami (December)
Singapore (March) Cairo (May) Apia (May) Casablanca (June) Hong Kong (June) Shanghai (October)
Note: For the list of workshops from November 1997 to October 2002, see Beyond Risk (IFC, 2003).
15
The Questionnaire-based Survey Scope of the Questionnaire The issues covered in the questionnaire included: ⁻ The respondent’s professional level and functional role ⁻ Profile of the financial institutions, including industries financed, domestic or foreign status, main lines of business, average number of employees, value of assets, transaction size ⁻ Main sources of social and environmental risks for the financial institutions and its clients ⁻ Views of financial institutions on the ways to capitalize on sustainability opportunities ⁻ Key reasons to consider social and environmental sustainability issues ⁻ Implementation of social and environmental sustainability standards, tools, and management systems ⁻ Barriers to implementation ⁻ Key business impacts of considering social and environmental sustainability issues ⁻ Demand for IFC assistance on sustainability issues, such as further information, technical assistance and advisory services, financial support, product offerings in sustainability areas, and providing means to enhance sustainability learning. Respondent Profiling and Generation of a Distribution List To meet the goals of this report and expand the findings of the Beyond Risk research, the 2005 survey included financial institutions that participated in IFC’s Competitive Business Advantage workshops from October 2002 to September 2005. To ensure the accuracy of the survey data, representatives of IFC who attended these workshops were excluded from the survey. Survey Administration The survey was administered through a professional online engine that allowed for easy distribution, high interactivity of the questionnaire depending on individual responses, and effective tracking of responses. An invitation to complete a survey was sent out through the online engine. The invitation then directed survey respondents to a Web site where they could view and complete the questionnaire. The engine also provided tools for initial analysis of survey results.
1
To ensure a higher response rate, the questionnaire was translated and distributed in Russian and Spanish to respondents from Russian‐ and Spanish‐speaking countries. Telephone calls were made to the entire survey distribution list to ensure that prospective respondents had received the questionnaire and to address any question or technical issues they might have. Sample Size and Response Rate The initial survey distribution list consisted of 498 potential respondents. Despite the obvious advantages of an online survey, a common technical obstacle is inaccessibility of certain e‐mail addresses because of server failures or the fact that these addresses no longer exist. In this case, 121 responses were received and 84 e‐mail addresses on the original list were unreachable. Therefore, the overall response rate was 24 percent, if technical failures are not taken into account. However, the response rate increases to 29 percent if the calculation is based on the number of actual survey recipients (total number of survey invitations sent less the number of “bounce‐back” e‐mail addresses).
Best Practice Examples Best practice examples were collected from 17 financial institutions, whose representatives have participated in Competitive Business Advantage workshops. For the selection process, the following criteria were applied: • Focus on the banking sector: Since this study has a specific focus on the banking sector, institutions had to be engaged in a variety of activating related to commercial banking, such as lending, leasing, and/or commercial microfinance. • Focus on regional diversity: To demonstrate the business case in all emerging markets, the choice of best practice examples was also diversified by region. • Focus on expertise in sustainability management: The examples had to be from financial institutions that had made concrete steps toward implementing a SEMS. • Focus on the business case for innovation: Financial institutions had to align sustainable innovation with their business goals and strategy. • Focus on diversity of sustainability areas: Examples had to cover innovations in a wide variety of sustainability‐ related areas discussed in this report, such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, biodiversity conservation, and social finance. Representatives of these financial institutions were contacted and personal interviews were conducted by phone. The interviews focused on: • Business goals of financial institutions • Recent market challenges they faced • Social and environmental management practices used to identify and mitigate risks and/pursue opportunities • Elements of the SEMS developed by financial institutions and their integration into corporate management systems, such as risk management, human recourse management, monitoring and evaluation, and reporting • Concrete examples of sustainability‐related investment projects; the focus included both projects that invest directly in sustainability areas (such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, and biodiversity conservation) and “business as usual” projects that included sustainability‐related components that led to overall improvement in projects (such as risk reduction, cost reduction, revenue increase) • Overall financial and nonfinancial results achieved by a financial institution as a result of considering social and environmental issues Additional information for the best practice examples was also collected through: • Documentation and additional information supplied by financial institutions • Official information available through the financial institution’s Web site and financial and nonfinancial reports (such as sustainability reports) • Internal IFC documents and project files • Personal interviews with IFC investment staff
2
II. SURVEY RESULTS The 2005 IFC survey collected and analyzed data from over a hundred emerging markets financial institutions in 43 countries. While the analysis in this publication focused on survey results reported by commercial banks, the quantitative data that follows represents aggregated results for all financial institutions that participated in the survey, unless otherwise stated.
Respondent Profile All Respondents Fifty‐five percent of financial institutions surveyed were domestic in their respective countries, 27 percent were foreign, 4 percent were international financial organizations like IFC, and 14 percent represented other forms of ownership (such as regional banks and domestic banks with foreign capital). Sixty percent of the institutions were IFC clients; 25 percent were not. The remaining 15 percent had other forms of affiliation with IFC, such as partnerships. Types of Financial Institutions Surveyed (percent of respondents) Developme nt bank/Multilat eral organization 7
Private equity 21
Other 13
Microfinance 6
Professional Level of Survey Participants (percent of respondents)
Investment Officer 4
Commercial bank 41
Leasing Insurance 0 7
Risk Manager 3
Other 5 Senior Manager 36
Environment al Specialist 18
Business Developmen t Officer 10
Investment bank 5
Credit/Loan Officer 24
Figure 1
Figure 2
Regional Distribution of Financial Institutions Surveyed (percent of respondents)
Main Sectors Financed
63
Domestic general manufacturing
50 49
Agriculture
Rest of the World 7
Asia 2
Sub Saharan Africa 17
Middle East and North Africa 4
Infrastructure
33
Tourism
31
Extractive industries
25
Health and Education
Latin America 32
20
Hi-tech
14 13
Trade Other
Southern Europe and Central Asia 19
Central and Eastern Europe 19
8
Biodiversity
7
Construction and Real Estate
4
Finance 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
percent of respondents
Figure 3
Figure 4
3
70
Commercial Bank Respondents Sixty‐seven percent of commercial banks surveyed were domestic in their respective countries, 21 percent were foreign, 12 percent were international banks and 14 percent represented other forms of ownership (such as regional banks and domestic banks with foreign capital). Seventy‐seven percent of commercial banks were IFC clients; 14 percent were not. The remaining 9 percent had other forms of affiliation with IFC, such as partnerships. Regional Distribution of Commercial Banks Surveyed (percent of respondents)
Latin America 23
Sub Rest of the Saharan World Asia Africa 5 0 12
Southern Europe and Central Asia 30
Professional Level of Survey Participants, Commercal Banks (percent of respondents) Investment Officer 0
Middle East and North Africa 2
Environmen tal Specialist 14
Central and Eastern Europe 28
Risk Manager 8 Other 5
Business Developmen t Officer 11
Senior Manager 28
Credit/Loan Officer 34
Figure 6
Figure 5
Main Lines of Business, Commercial Banks
Corporate finance
76
Consumer finance
71
Project finance
64
SME finance
62
Housing finance
55
other
21 ‐
20
40
60
80
100
percent of respondents who mentioned a business line
Figure 7
4
Reasons Why Banks Consider Social and Environmental Issues Virtually all the survey respondents (97 percent) reported that they consider social and environmental issues either by managing risks (40 percent), developing business opportunities, or both. Some 57 percent said that their banks consider social and environmental opportunities.
Key Reasons Why Banks Consider Environmental and Social Issues 66
Increased credibility and gain in reputation
57
Demand by investors
51
Increased value to stakeholders
40
Lower risk and better returns
15
Bank/clients facing liability claims Demand by clients
13
Other
13 10
Nonperforming loan experience 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
percent of respondents
Figure 8
How Financial Institutions Perceive Social and Environmental Risks The following figures demonstrate how financial institutions that responded to IFC 2005 survey perceive social and environmental risks for their clients and for themselves.
Banks’ Perceptions of Key Social and Environmental Risks Facing Their Clients 76
Environmental legal issues 72
Health and safety for workers
70
Disruption of operations Loss of market share because of environmental regulations Market devaluation because of social or environmental liabilities
46 26 15
Loss of liability insurance coverage 0
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
percent of respondents Figure 9
5
60
70
80
Key Social and Environemntal Risks Indentified by Financial Insitutions
Reputational risk / Negative publicity w ith customers, shareholders and the general public
76 59
Credit risk (defaults, payments rescheduling)
45
Nonperforming loans/investments/leases
39
Security (devalued collateral)
38
Loss of financing from international financial institutions Liability for clean up of contaminated property/collateral
32
Reduced access to capital from private financial institutions/international bond market
32 31
Potential civil or criminal liability for negligence
11
Loss of depositors or retail clients
3
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
percent of respondents
Figure 10
Main Areas of Social and Environmental Business Opportunities The following figure shows areas where financial institutions that responded to IFC 2005 survey see opportunities to benefit from considering social and environmental issues
Main Areas of Social and Environmental Business Opportunities Developing business in sustainable areas
66
Getting access to new markets
59
Providing loans for environmental projects
55
Improving access to financing from international financial institutions Providing advisory services/loans for ecoefficiency and cleaner production
55 44 11
Attracting improved terms of insurance
2
Other 0
10
20
30
40
percent of respondents
Figure 11
6
50
60
70
Implementation of Social and Environmental Sustainability Management Practices Eighty‐two percent of financial institutions that answered the survey reported that they used one or several social and environmental procedures before participating in the IFC Competitive Business Advantage (CBA) workshops. The types of procedures and tools used are presented in the following figures. Sixty‐eight percent reported that their institutions have developed a formal SEMS following their participation in a CBA workshop. Twelve percent reported that their financial institutions have also developed financial products in sustainable areas. Use of Social and Environmental Tools Prior to IFC Workshops
Use of Social and Environmental Standards Prior to IFC Workshops
Local social and environmental regulations
85
IFC's exclusion list
54
IFC's project categorization
77
Environmental impact
72
Environmental audit
41
IFC's safeguard policies
Site visit
Environmental liability
11
Cleaner production
13
Other
9
37
Other
34
15 0 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Percent of respondents
80
20
40
60
80
100
Perent of respondents
90
Figure 13
Figure 12
Elements of Environmental and Social Sustainability Management System Developed
75
Identified social and environmental risks and opportunities Developed procedures to integrate social and environmental considerations into project screening and client evaluation
58 48
Articulated objectives for social and environmental risk management Developed an action plan and/or allocated resources system implementation
41 38
Designed a formal sustainability policy Established a monitoring and evaluation procedure for social and environmental management Identified internal training needs for environmental and sustainability management Specified criteria to use for reviewing and screening investments (e.g. exclusion lists, local environmental regulations) Held media events and/or undertook reporting initiatives to communicate sustainability achievements both internally and to stakeholders
36 35 30 28
Defined and assigned responsibilities for system implementation
25 22
Created an environment/sustainability department or unit Identified environmentally related business opportunities using business case matrix
19
Established incentive schemes to motivate the investment officers to pay attention to social and environmental issues Nominated board representative responsible for social and environmental sustainability
12 12 0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent of respondents
Figure 14
7
60
70
80
Financial Products in Sustainable Areas Developed
Other
18 18
Renewable energy finance Environmental venture capital
12 12
Environmental credit cards Cleaner production technology
24
Carbon emission trading schemes Sustainable leasing
6 12
Environmental loan for SMEs
41 6
Sustainable equity fund Environmental liability insurance
0 6
Green mortgages Green investment funds
24 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Percent of respondents
Figure 15
Perceptions of Barriers to Implementing Social and Environmental Sustainability Management Practices and System Financial institutions that considered social and environmental issues in their management practices reported a number of barriers to implementation. The survey results varied depending on whether financial institutions had implemented (or were in the process of implementing) a SEMS or had not yet implemented a formal social and environmental sustainability the system. Perceptions of Barriers to Implementation, Financial Institutions that Had Not Implemented a Social and Environmental Management System
Perceptions of Barriers to Implementation, Financial Institutions that Had Implemented a Social and Environmental Management System
Lack of best practice cases about social and environmental management for financial institutions in the emerging markets
49
45
No qualified environmental consultants to advise clients
35
26
Cost of developing and implementing internal guidelines and procedures is too high
32
35
Lack of know-how/in-house capacity
30
43
Senior management does not see the need for social and environmental risk management
24
17
Other
24
12
19
25
19
11
It is not standard financial practice
19
18
The belief that there is no business gain
8
15
Customers do not demand it
8
0
Concerns on how shareholders will view this change
8
11
Potential inconsistencies between government regulations and IFC/organization social and/or environmental requirements No qualified environmental consultants to advise your institution
Table 1
8
Business Impact of Considering and Managing Social and Environmental Issues Most of the financial institutions that responded to the survey—81 percent—reported that positive changes had resulted from their steps to integrate social and environmental sustainability issues in their business, either by implementing a formal SEMS or using other procedures. About a quarter of these respondents (26 percent) perceived these changes as significant. Not a single respondent reported a negative change from considering social and environmental issues. These figures varied for financial institutions that considered social and environmental risks only as opposed to considering both risks and sustainability‐related opportunities. While 79 percent of respondents whose financial institutions considered risks only reported a positive change in their business, this figure was higher (84 percent) for those who considered both risks and opportunities. Notably, only 21 percent of respondents whose institutions considered risks only perceived this change to be significant compared to 33 percent for those who considered both.
Benefits of Considering Social and Environmental Issues Increased revenues
59
Improved community relations
50
Reduced risk
41
Improved access to international financing
39
Improved brand value and reputation
29
Cost savings
13
Better quality of work
9
Developed new business
7
Developed new products and services Other
4 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Percent of respondents
Figure 16
IFC Assistance Requested All Respondents Most financial institutions (85 percent) that responded to the survey indicted that they would like to receive further assistance from IFC on social and environmental sustainability issues. The type of assistance requested was distributed as follows: ⁻ Providing technical assistance and advisory services (82 percent) ⁻ Providing information (79 percent) ⁻ Providing means to enhance sustainability learning (66 percent) ⁻ Providing sustainability‐related business opportunities and new products (57 percent) ⁻ Providing financial resources (54 percent). The figures below break down the preferences within these categories.
9
Technical Assistance and Advisory Services Training staff in environmental risk management and sustainability opportunities Advanced workshops for implementing performance-focused social and environmental management system Advice on how to identify the risks and determine what insurance is required
76 61 57 51
Advisory services for sustainability business development
49
Technical assistance for IFC's sustainability products
44
Training local consultants to assist clients In-house support on social and environmental management system implementation Advice/assistance on how to incorporate insurance requirements into the financing agreements
39 32 1
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percent of respondents
Figure 17 Informational Support Industry risk briefings: provide updated information on international risk/opportunities by sector
76
Market briefings: signaling environmental value-added to regional analysts, raters, media, central banks)
62
Country-specific sustainability topics
61 47
Sector strategies (e.g. sustainability in auto industry) Private Equity/Venture Capital and Sustainability
43
Socially Responsible Investing (SRI)
43
Share insurance market intelligence in each country (local players, availability of coverage pricing etc.)
33 6
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percent of respondents
Figure 18
Most useful
Means to Enhance Sustainability Learning
Less useful Dedicated web-page - for sustainability in the financial sector
77
14
Practical tools (ex. Software for environmental assessments interactive CD-Rom)
76
16
Newsletter for wide distribution to workshop parcitipants
55
36 Directory of sustainability companies in emerging markets
54
34
Directory of sustainability suppliers in emerging markets
51
36
-On-line direct learning
51
38
Create a networking platform between IFC workshop participants
38 0
10
20
30
40
47 50
Percent of respondents
Figure 19
10
60
70
80
90
Financial Assistance
Sustainability-related business opportunities and new products
74
Agri-business
Debt
56
60
Energy Efficiency Finance
Partial Risk Guarantees
57
Renewable Energy
55
Eco-tourism
43
Non-reimbursable Grants
52
Clean Technologies
53
37
Equity
40
Bio-diversity conservation
4
Other 0
10
30
Reimbursable Grants
36
Carbon Finance
7
Other 20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
Percent of respondents
10
20
30
40
50
60
Percent of respondents
Figure 20
Figure 21
Commercial Bank Respondents Among commercial banks that responded to the survey, 86 percent indicted that they would like to receive further assistance from IFC on social and environmental sustainability issues. The type of assistance requested was distributed as follows: ⁻ Providing means to enhance sustainability learning (73 percent) ⁻ Providing information (70 percent) ⁻ Providing technical assistance and advisory services (68 percent) ⁻ Providing sustainability‐related business opportunities and new products (51 percent) ⁻ Providing financial resources (49 percent) The figures below break down the preferences within these categories.
Technical Assistance and Advisory Services: Commercial Bank Response Training staff in environmental risk management and sustainability opportunities Advanced w orkshops for implementing performance-focused social and environmental management system Advice on how to identify the risks and determine w hat insurance is required
72 66 63 59
Advisory services for sustainability business development Technical assistance for IFC's sustainability products
44
Training local consultants to assist clients
44
In-house support on social and environmental management system implementation Advice/assistance on how to incorporate insurance requirements into the financing agreements
34 22
Other
0 0
10
Figure 22
11
20
30 40 50 60 Percent of respondents
70
80
Informational Support: Commercial Bank Response Industry risk briefings: provide updated information on international risk/opportunities by sector Market briefings: signaling environmental value-added to regional analysts, raters, media, central banks)
88 58
Country-specific sustainability topics
55
Sector strategies (e.g. sustainability in auto industry)
55 33
Private Equity/Venture Capital and Sustainability
33
Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) Share insurance market intelligence in each country (local players, availability of coverage pricing etc.)
30 6
Other 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percent of respondents
Figure 23 Most useful
Means to Enhance Sustainability Learning: Commercial Bank Response Practical tools (ex. Softw are for environmental assessments interactive CD-Rom)
Less useful
82 15 77
Dedicated w eb-page for sustainability in the financial sector
24 59
New sletter for w ide distribution to w orkshop participants
38
Directory of sustainability companies in emerging markets
47 47
On-line direct learning
47 47
Create a netw orking platform betw een IFC w orkshop participants
44 53 41
Directory of sustainability suppliers in emerging markets
53
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Percent of respondents
Figure 24
Sustainability-related business opportunities and new products: Commerical Bank Response
Financial Assistance: Commerical Bank Response
Agri-business
Debt
81
Partial Risk Guarantees
58
Energy Efficiency Finance
52
Renewable Energy
42
Clean Technologies Carbon Finance
39
0
26
Reimbursable Grants
3
Other
37
Equity
19
Bio-diversity conservation
52
Nonreimbursable
49
Eco-tourism
59
22 4
Other 20
40
60
80
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent of respondents
Percent of respondents
Figure 25
Figure 26
12
60
70
III. IFC COMPETITIVE BUSINESS ADVANTAGE WORKSHOP IN SUSTAINABLE FINANCE The Sustainable Finance Workshop: A Learning Experience with a Difference Three characteristics set the IFC Sustainable Finance Workshop apart from traditional seminars on environmental or social issues. Clearly defined deliverables: In the workshop you will acquire know‐how and the skills to deal with sustainability issues. However, the course is not intended to be a mere class exercise. You are expected to be productive and to work on an outline social and environmental management system (SEMS). This will be tailored to your institution and ready for implementation at the end of the workshop. The financial professionalʹs business perspective: The concepts and language used in the workshop are those familiar in the financial sector. Taking a business perspective means analyzing social and environmental issues in terms of financial risks, investment opportunities and reputation. Sustainability jargon is kept to a minimum. High interactivity: Expect a high level of interaction. The workshop is designed to create synergies between participantsʹ expertise, thought‐provoking inputs by trainers, and support by seasoned coaches.
Target Audience The workshop is tailored to management staff in financial institutions who are in charge of sustainability issues, environmental management, or credit risk management. A modular structure makes the course suitable for both beginners and advanced professionals familiar with social and environmental issues.
Practical Approach, Business Perspective Capacity‐building is the first objective of the workshop. You will acquire the skills for analyzing, discussing, and managing sustainability issues within your institution and with relevant stakeholders. The focus, however, is on the second objective: to set up an outline of SEMS that deals with the issues relevant to your institution and in your business environment. Guidance is provided in the form of a workbook designed to accompany your work on the SEMS and to serve as a blueprint before, during, and after the training event. Implementing SEMS benefits financial institutions in two ways: • Firstly, by capitalizing on the business case linked to sustainability issues. • Secondly, by ensuring compliance with IFC guidelines/policies. It is this practical focus that distinguishes the Sustainable Finance Workshops from similar courses that traditionally focus on awareness‐raising. You will start to deal with sustainability issues and to set up your SEMS while still in the workshop, while experienced coaches are on hand to provide you with any support you may require. If your institution already has social and environmental management system running, the workshop is a good opportunity to review it.
13
Content: Five Steps toward a Social and Environmental Management System In the workshop you will take six steps towards your SEMS. Each step is initiated by a presentation providing you with a thorough understanding of the issues at hand and a range of conceptual tools you may find useful in your work. Step 1: Analyze and Prioritize Step 2: Sustainability Policy Step 3: Procedures Step 4: Resources and Planning Step 5: Monitoring and Feedback Break‐out sessions will be available for those interested in particular business areas such as insurance, or for participants with expertise in managing sustainability issues.
Training and Coaching By Experienced Professionals The trainers delivering the sustainable finance workshops and the coaches supporting you in your work on the SEMS have a sound background in both finance and sustainability issues. • This encompasses, first of all, a thorough understanding of a bankʹs mechanics and business activities. • Secondly, trainers are both familiar with environmental, social, and development problems and have the expertise to discuss these from a business perspective. • Thirdly, you will be able to draw from the coachesʹ experience in setting up and maintaining management systems dealing with risk, sustainability, environmental issues and quality.
14
IV. COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL/BUSINESS ADVANTAGE WORKSHOPS, JULY 2002–MID-2006 2002
2005
Miami (September) London (October) Moscow (October)
Johannesburg (February) Sarajevo (March) Belgrade (March) Skopje (April) Tirana (April) Miami (May) Singapore (July) Ulaanbaatar (October) Bucharest (October) Tunisia (November) Sao Paulo (November) Ho Chi Minh (November) Hanoi (December)
2003 Istanbul (February) Johannesburg (June) Lagos (June) Budapest (November) Miami (December) Washington, DC (December)
2004
2006
Dakar (March) Washington, DC (April) Sao Paulo (May) Beijing (June) Sao Paulo (July) Dhaka (October) Bucharest (October) Moscow (November) Miami (December)
Singapore (March) Cairo (May) Apia (May) Casablanca (June) Hong Kong (June) Shanghai (October)
Note: For the list of workshops from November 1997 to October 2002, see Beyond Risk (IFC, 2003).
15
Related Documents
Banking On Sustainability (march 2007)
May 2020 0
Research Design And Methodology
May 2020 8
Planner Survey Results 2007
November 2019 6
Research Methodology
November 2019 34
Research Methodology
December 2019 30More Documents from ""
