To illustrate this concern, in France alone, we have the 17 green and sustainable development objectives inherited from the United Nations, to which are added a dozen national labels (GreenFin, CEE, etc.). The market itself is confusing for the bona fide financier because of the lack of coherence between the various green certifications. Each country, depending on its objectives and strategic choices, defines its own labels:

In France, nuclear power is the asset to reduce our carbon tax emissions;
In the United States, oil and shale gas are becoming green industries;
In China, coal is miraculously ecological.

Issuers of securities that have the ambition to attract international counterparties must choose a side and a label. Investors, who are mainly transnational funds, then include in their green portfolios assets that meet various, even incompatible requirements and, with a lot of hypocrisy, will populate funds that meet the only green denomination. It is once again the confidence, the main engine of the market, that is at risk by this amalgam.

We remember the origin of the 2008 crisis, which was the securitization and grouping in funds of assets with incompatible risk profiles: subprimes in this case.

Comments are closed.