background

Blog

Latest News Thumbnail

DEI Weighs High, But Shunted by Corporates?

Sonal Desai


Two recent developments caught the DEI world by storm.

1. Microsoft laid off its DEI team

2. John Deere rejected DEI policies

These are just two examples of large multinational firms that decided to put profits before people.

Sadly, the number of enterprises side-lining DEI teams, casually rejecting policies, and scrapping DEI teams is on the rise. The issue came to the limelight because two major organizations, each a giant in its industry segment, decided to lean on DEI.

Globally, similar reports by many organizations going slow on DEI are coming out.

Corporate reality:

Although consolidated data on the issue is yet to be established, the trend is contrary to DEI reports by leading market analysis and advisory companies.

Market analyst reports indicate that most corporates have a DEI strategy in place and that these organizations are faring better in the ESG Index.

For example, recent S&P 1500 data shows that firms with diverse leadership consistently earn higher environmental ratings from MSCI, an ESG data provider in the United States.

The scenario is not so different at home in India. Several conversations with leading CXOs and decision-makers in large corporates across industry verticals reveal that these enterprises lag in DEI.

This is not because they do not have the necessary strategy or policy in place, but because revenues, business, and investors take center stage. And the two events are not harmonious.

Cover-ups?

“It is more about corporate culture. We have started implementing DEI, but that is more towards women empowerment,” a leading CXO told me.

Another corporate consultant asked to survey a client’s employee satisfaction index for DEI was gently warned against asking probing questions. He framed the questions in such a manner that the responses were indexed on a scale of 1 to 10. Needlessly to say, there was no qualitative analysis or follow-ups. The company proudly presented its DEI report in the ESG and integrated components of the annual report.

The World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap score in 2023 stands at 68.4%, with India ranking 127 out of 146 countries in terms of gender parity.

These frank admissions coincide with the recent findings of the WriteCanvas-ASSOCHAM survey. The survey reveals that the social component of which DEI is a formidable part is most often subsumed with CSR, governance, and environment. Three aspects stand out:

· Corporates equate gender equality with DEI. Nonetheless, women’s representation at the board level was marginalized

· Corporates have all the necessary DEI policies covered under the Company’s Act and global mandates in place. The reality is that not many have adequate physical and digital infrastructure for persons with disabilities.

· Community development, equal access and opportunity, and child labor are gaining ground as part of CSR activities.

Are things turning around in India?

The Companies Act and SEBI mandate women’s representation on Indian boards, leading to remarkable growth in women’s participation on boards.

CareEdge advisory analyzed the top 1000 companies’ board composition from a diversity perspective, observing upticks in the top 150 listed companies and trends in big manufacturing organizations prioritizing inclusion of different genders and persons with disabilities, observes Swati Agrawal, President CareAnalytics.

However, there is no focused regulation or policy regarding Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in India. The focus must be on addressing gender gaps and gender equality, while sustainability reporting focuses on gender gaps and gender equality. The industry must offer employment opportunities and address the banking requirements for employees and customers.

The change can be brought about just in the manner in which the shareholders are forcing corporates to consider environmental concerns to fight climate change. They must closely monitor how corporates implement DEI and ensure that the organizations are not just tick-boxing against all the parameters!

My take:

I believe that DEI adoption in its entirety will take a while. India is at the cusp of implementing DEI. Globally, enterprises are at least taking a small step towards diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Many organizations have promptly begun back-to-work policies for women. This is certainly a positive step. The shift is happening in the corporate sector, and that is a start.

Moreover, business leaders, stakeholders, and shareholders should understand that DEI is not just about improving diversity, but embracing the host of benefits that come along with it.

But there is also a nagging fear. Are Microsoft, John Deere and the ilk setting a precedent? Providing impetus to organizations to exploit loopholes and circumvent the regulations?


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

background

Blog

Latest News Thumbnail

Are corporates using the BRSR loopholes rope to climb up?

Sonal Desai


Are corporates using the BRSR loopholes as a means of ascent?

Recent surveys and reports have brought to light not just the lapses in the questionnaire format developed by the market regulator, but also how the corporate sector has leveraged the BRSR loopholes for its benefit.

WriteCanvas has highlighted how certain companies have utilized experts to help them navigate the different regulatory requirements and mandates mostly by tick-boxing.

The reasons these companies have been able to get away with greenwashing are that there are no metrics to measure a corporate’s sustainability/ESG claims and the callous attitude of the watchdogs to conveniently look the other way.

This gives the corporate not just the wings to skirt the most pressing issues, but also ignore the red flags if any are raised. For example, in a recent circular, the National Stock Exchange has provided specific examples of how large corporates are providing insufficient details, or misrepresenting the facts by placing them under different subject heads.

Another survey by the CSE which studied 28 random reports of 14 listed companies remarked that the companies did not provide the details in most instances.

The BRSR framework in India is the first to mandate the sharing of detailed environmental performance and compliance data in the public domain.

External experts and internal auditors are supposed to keep a vigil over the information and content right from the concept till the stage when the last signatory signs it.

Identifying the problem:

Sadly, a majority of them cannot pull the plug when needed. I am certain that almost all of them can identify the BRSR loopholes and also have the solutions or refer to solutions experts.

CSE Program Director, Industrial Pollution, Nivit Yadav, believes transparency should drive investor decision-making. However, there’s room for improvement, and SEBI reviews guidance notes and BRSR format regularly.

But in a hazy world where the head honchos are busy signing M&A agreements and expanding operations with an eye on the stock market, the BRSR report is just one fly in their tea cup, possibly an irritant that needs to be tick-boxed and filed away.

The fact that some of these regulations mandate a board member to be a part of the sustainability/ESG committee can make a difference, is fast gathering dust.

The CSO, CRO significance:

I am by no means saying that the BRSR reports are fudged or the information is false. I am reiterating the points that the watchdog as well as the critics have argued–the corporates are answering all the questions, filling all the boxes, supplementing all the links, and providing internal and external audit reports. And yet, there is not a single organization globally that can claim to have met one regulatory obligation without leveraging a loophole.

As per a Havard Business Review article, the rise in corporate appointing of a chief sustainability officer (CSO) is largely due to the increasing popularity of the term, but there is still a lack of clarity about CSO’s tasks and responsibilities, leading to fragmented ownership, internal competition, and inefficiency. This confusion is partly due to the lack of history and benchmarks for the CSO role.

Secondly, traditional risk management methods are insufficient for complex risks, Companies also require a holistic approach with a Chief Risk Officer to oversee risk profile and board liaison.

The time is ripe to face the truth. The truth is that the corporate has not been able to fulfill all the obligations as demanded by the BRSR mandate. That acceptance is the first step in the right direction. This alone will require the team to look for and identify any gaps or weaknesses and then devise plans of action to close those gaps.

Our take:

Let BRSR be your friend in your sustainability journey. Let it not be the four-letter word for you to fear, and comply with the fear.

Use the pathways created by SEBI as your guideline. Instead of making it an ego hustle, pinpoint the loopholes in the questionnaires/format to the regulator when it releases consultation papers.

In all honesty, corporates are investing money, time, resources, and effort to become sustainable. The reasons can be many: regulatory, corporate policy, government action, geographic expansion, or a sincere effort to be a sustainable business.

Overall, the NSE circular and the CEI survey have come as eye-openers for all the stakeholders. This is not just a compelling pull-and-push theory or story, but a collective effort for a sustainable business, a greener planet, and able governance!

 


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

background

News

Latest News Thumbnail

Tightening loose-ends in BRSR

WriteCanvas News


Even as SEBI has mandated the top 1000 listed companies to report their green performances through BRSR, many corporates have been found lacking.

A new survey by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) reviewed 28 reports submitted by 14 top companies.

The survey comes on the heels of a recent NSE circular that highlighted the shortcomings in BRSR reporting by the top 1,000 listed companies.

According to CSE, The current BRSR questionnaire format leads to incomplete submissions, hindering the creation of a reporting structure for informed investor decision-making.

What is wrong with the current reporting guidelines?

The current BRSR format presents challenges in understanding the rationale behind parameter values and number changes.

For example, lack of consolidated company data vs unit-specific data.

Companies tweaking the questionnaire: Companies often provide data selectively and adjust information rows for convenience, but deciding how to present the data should not be their responsibility. Companies can share key indicators like water withdrawal, consumption, and discharge voluntarily under ‘Leadership Indicators’, but these can be moved to the ‘Essential Indicators’ category for mandatory data.

CSE Recommendations:

The CSE assessment suggests that a company’s sustainability can be more effectively assessed by identifying low-performing units and creating plans to improve their performance across multiple metrics.

These include:

Opt for a sector-specific approach: The current SEBI-developed disclosure format lacks sector-specific guidelines, affecting investors’ understanding of environmentally conscious businesses. A sector-specific approach, similar to international frameworks, could provide a comprehensive understanding of investment opportunities in specific industries.

Update the BRSR guidance document: In July 2023, the BRSR questionnaire and format underwent review, but the guidance document was not updated simultaneously, resulting in insufficient information on the air emissions submission format.

Include table formats to enable data capture: Businesses should be limited in their data display options, allowing for specific table formats. SEBI may provide a protected spreadsheet for the BRSR questionnaire, but not format editing.

Non-hazardous and hazardous wastes should be accounted for separately: SEBI requests data on waste generation, but only asks about management and disposal methods, not recycling, reuse, or disposal of waste. SEBI should investigate waste production and disposal in top three waste streams, including hazardous and non-hazardous materials, plastic, e-waste, biomedical waste, and non-manufacturable waste types.

Mandate specific energy and water consumption data: The company is tasked with reporting on the optional energy and water intensity parameter included in the BRSR format. The CSE recommends companies provide data on their energy consumption (SEC) and water consumption (SWC) in kilowatt or megawatt/tonne of the product. The data provided will undoubtedly indicate a company’s overall energy and water efficiency in its manufacturing process.

Lead quotes:

“The BRSR framework is the first attempt by any regulatory authority or agency in India to mandate the sharing of such detailed environmental performance and compliance data in the public domain,” notes Nivit Yadav, Program Director, Industrial Pollution, CSE. “In today’s era of climate change, where resource availability is becoming a serious issue, sharing of such data in a transparent manner should be one of the key drivers in decision-making by investors.”

“Yet, we believe there is much room for improvement in the BRSR framework. Our goal is to contribute to its strengthening in order to guarantee higher-calibre reporting from the companies. Periodically, SEBI reviews the guidance note and BRSR format. We hope that when SEBI reviews it again, it will take into account the suggestions made by CSE, which can aid in gathering more insightful data.

The BRSR framework is the first attempt by any regulatory authority or agency in India to mandate the sharing of detailed environmental performance and compliance data in the public domain.

 


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

background

News

Latest News Thumbnail

SEBI Outlines Value Chain Disclosure Provisions in BRSR Core

WriteCanvas News


A new SEBI circular outlines provisions for ESG disclosures for the value chain, including disclosures for upstream and downstream partners and reporting KPIs in the BRSR Core for their value chain.

The proposal outlines several changes to the value chain reporting system, including rationalizing the definition of ‘value chain’ to cover only significant partners.

Some of these changes include:

• The proposed changes to the definition of value chain partners include excluding upstream and downstream partners, each comprising 2% or more of a listed entity’s purchases and sales.

• This will reduce the maximum number of upstream/downstream partners from 50 to 38, ensuring coverage of key partners.

• For the first year of reporting ESG disclosures, previous year numbers will be voluntary.

• The listed entity will also disclose the percentage of total sales and purchases covered by these partners.

• The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has recommended adding a leadership indicator to BRSR, stating the number of Green Credits generated by the company and its value chain partners.

The committee also recommends redefining value chain partners to include upstream and downstream partners, each comprising 2% or more of the entity’s purchases and sales, to avoid cost burden and compliance issues for small businesses.

The new provision is a part of the Security and Exchange Board of India (Sebi)’s expert Committee that has proposed measures to improve the ease of doing business concerning BRSR.

The proposed amendments will be carried out in Regulation 34 (2)(f) of LODR Regulations, SEBI said in the circular.

The proposed amendment to the LODR Regulations and SEBI circulars on BRSR aims to replace the term “assurance” with “assessment” in the annual report, requiring listed entities to obtain an assurance assessment of the BRSE Core for their value chain.

The Regulations, 2015 mandates annual reports of the top 1,000 listed entities based on market capitalization to include a BRSR report on ESG disclosures.


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

background

News

Latest News Thumbnail

Most common mistakes listed companies make while filing BRSR

WriteCanvas News


Having reviewed the BRSR submissions made by the top 1000 listed companies for FY2022-23, the National Stock Exchange identified several areas of variation and lack of uniformity in the disclosures made.

The NSE has addressed these issues in a new circular. It has been said that listed companies must carefully consider these points when submitting the BRSR XBRL utility and avoid deviations.

After reviewing the BRSR submissions for the fiscal year 2022–2023, the Exchange found several discrepancies and inconsistencies in the disclosures provided by the listed companies.

Companies are required by the BRSR format to respond to questions about policy formulation across nine principles with a Yes/No option. Nevertheless, some businesses have not included their sustainability report in the required format or with a mapping of the questions and answers, according to the NSE circular.

Other observations:

• Certain companies only offer links to their websites; they do not offer links to specific documents.

• Certain companies have disclosed the overall turnover rate for both permanent and contract workers, but they have not disclosed the specifics necessary to distinguish between contract workers, employees, and permanent and non-permanent workers.

• Businesses selling goods and services are required to offer a minimum of 100% product and NIC code bifurcation.

• Certain companies have revealed absolute figures rather than percentages, indicating a lack of consistency in their methods for sourcing sustainable inputs and materials.

• Businesses are required to disclose the procedures they use to securely retrieve products for recycling, reuse, and disposal at the end of their useful lives.

Some more inconsistencies:

Additionally, there is inconsistency in the disclosures provided under the headings of employees and workers (including differently abled) and measures of employees’ and workers’ well-being. Businesses have disclosed the actual compensation paid to all employees, but not the median compensation paid to each employee, NSE noted in the circular.

Preparing to report BRSR for FY2023-24?

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has issued a circular requiring the top one thousand listed companies to submit a Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) for the Financial Year 2023-24.

The circular provides FAQs, guidelines, and general observations for the last year’s BRSR filing.

Top 150 listed companies based on market capitalization as of March 31, 2024, are mandatory to obtain a Reasonable Assurance of BRSR Core as specified by the SEBI Circular.

Companies must provide details of their assurance provider and the type of assurance obtained in the BRSR utility. The BRSR XBRL utility at the BSE portal can be used for uploading at the NSE NEAPS portal and vice versa.

Instead of publishing the whole report, the BRSR Link can be attached with the Annual Report.

The timeline for submitting the BRSR is the same day of submission of the Annual Report with the Exchanges.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

background

News

Latest News Thumbnail

ICRA Subsidiary Receives Sebi Nod for ESG Ratings

WriteCanvas News


A couple of days after a CRISIL subsidiary received a Sebi nod to provide ESG ratings, ICRA subsidiary Pragati Development Consulting Services Limited (PDCSL), has also received a Sebi nod as an ESG rating entity.

PDCSL is a wholly owned subsidiary of ICRA. It has been registered as a Category-I ESG Rating Provider (ERP) under SEBI’s Credit Rating Agencies Regulations.

This makes it one of India’s few organizations offering comprehensive risk-monitoring solutions. The company submitted an application for ERP registration in September 2023.

Speaking on the development, Ramnath Krishnan, MD & Group CEO, ICRA Ltd, said, “The barometer of value creation is expanding from the tenets of profitability and efficiency. Businesses are playing an active role in preserving, protecting and enriching their commitment towards the environment, society and transparency for every stakeholder.”

He said that investors, particularly from developed markets, prioritize investments in compliant and sustainable companies, bolstering this widening perspective.

L Shivakumar, EVP, Business Development; and Chief Business Officer, ICRA Ltd., commented on the accomplishment, and said, “This milestone demonstrates ICRA’s commitment to ESG assessment and its ability to provide comprehensive and reliable ESG ratings to the market.”


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

background

News

Latest News Thumbnail

CRISIL ESG Ratings Unit Gets Sebi Nod

WriteCanvas News


Sebi has approved CRISIL ESG Ratings & Analytics as a Category 1 provider of ESG ratings.

CRISIL, which began its ESG scoring business in 2021, will transfer its over 1,000 companies across 65 sectors to its subsidiary, CRISIL ESG Ratings. ESG scores indicate a company’s sustainability and ethical practices, aiding asset managers and investors in selecting companies that meet their ESG criteria.

Following the development, foreign agencies offering ESG rating services to Indian entities must obtain SEBI certification. CRISIL previously provided ESG ratings as part of its general rating services.

Sebi’s order on July 5, 2023, mandates that individuals cannot act as an ESG rating provider without a certificate from the Board. However, they can continue acting for six months or until their application for a registration certificate is disposed of.

Gurpreet Chhatwal, Managing Director, CRISIL Ratings, said, “The ESG scores, which will henceforth be called ‘ESG ratings’, have already found traction among market participants. These are based on a unique India specific framework that factors in nuances at the sectoral level, while being guided by global best practices. The process includes analysis of more than 500 unique data points across the environmental, social and governance aspects for each company.”

Amish Mehta, Managing Director and CEO, CRISIL Ltd, said, “The approval comes at an opportune time when ESG disclosures have been improving and there is increasing realization in the financial markets of the need for independent ESG ratings.”

It must be noted that Sebi has established two rating entity categories based on financial status and roles to ensure transparent, practical, and accurate methodologies in the Indian environment. Accredited rating agencies must publish their ESG ratings methodology, clearly delineate the proportional weight assigned to environmental, social, and governance factors, and retain a minimum ownership interest of 26% for at least five years.


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

background

ICRA, ESG ratings

Latest News Thumbnail

ICRA to Foray in ESG Rating

WriteCanvas News


Credit rating agency ICRA has applied for an ESG Rating Provider (ERP) license under its wholly-owned subsidiary, ICRA ESG Ratings Ltd.

The new entity—ICRA ESG Ratings Ltd will commence operations after receiving the requisite license from SEBI.

Commenting on the development, Mr. Ramnath Krishnan, MD & Group CEO, ICRA, said, “ICRA ESG Ratings Ltd marks our commitment to responsible and sustainable investing. ICRA is poised to bring its expertise to this pivotal segment. I would like to highlight ICRA’s commitment to expanding its offerings and strengthening its presence in the realm of ESG ratings.”


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

background

Blogs

Latest News Thumbnail

Five challenges hindering ESG adoption in India

Renjini Liza Varghese


Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria have gained significant importance in the global investment landscape in recent years. In India, investors, particularly institutional investors, are looking at funds that align with the ESG framework. However, ESG implementation is facing some bottlenecks in the country.

Listed below are some critical challenges:

Lack of knowledge about ESG and long-term benefits: There is a lack of understanding among Indian companies and investors about ESG  frameworks and the long-term benefits they offer. As a result, ESG is not a priority for many companies. And investors may not get ESG-compliant investments.

Inadequate frameworks: The current regulatory framework in India does not have effective ESG mandates or incentives to encourage companies to prioritize ESG practices. A lack of clear and enforceable regulations and standards makes it difficult for companies to justify the costs of implementing ESG practices.

Penalties: Penalties for non-compliance vary across different countries. While ESG non-compliance is a criminal offence in some countries, it is still evolving in India. 

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has introduced several measures to promote ESG compliance among listed companies. SEBI mandated the top 1,000 listed companies to disclose their ESG performance in their annual reports. Failure to disclose ESG performance may result in penalties and other regulatory actions by SEBI. Additionally, SEBI has also proposed the introduction of ESG scores for listed companies, which will be used to determine their eligibility for inclusion in certain indices. While there is still a long way to go, these measures are a step in the right direction towards promoting ESG compliance in India.

Globally, some countries have even gone as far as making ESG non-compliance a criminal offence. For instance, France has introduced a law that criminalizes misleading information about ESG performance and imposes heavy fines and imprisonment for non-compliance.

India’s dependency on fossil fuels: India heavily dependent on fossil fuels for its energy needs. The country is the world’s third-largest consumer of oil and the fourth-largest consumer of coal. This dependency on fossil fuels is the biggest challenge for Indian companies wanting to align with ESG—particularly in the environment and climate change.

Energy transition a long way: While India has set ambitious targets to transition to renewable energy sources, the transition will likely take several years. Until then, companies in energy-intensive sectors may struggle to meet ESG standards, and investors may struggle to find ESG-compliant investments.

To overcome these challenges, there must be a concerted effort by the government, companies, and investors to prioritize ESG. This can be achieved by introducing strong regulatory frameworks and incentives to encourage compliance. These efforts must be backed with greater awareness and education about the benefits of ESG practices and their long-term impact on businesses and society.

By taking these steps, India can become an attractive destination for ESG investments and contribute to a more sustainable future.

 

 

 


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

background

News

Latest News Thumbnail

SEBI Approves Concept For Blue And Yellow Bonds

Sonal Desai


In a bid to strengthen the framework for green bonds and address rising issues concerning green washing, market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), has decided to introduce two new concepts for sustainable finance.

The new bonds—blue and yellow, are sub-categories of green debt securities. The concept of blue bonds is related to water management and the marine sector while yellow bonds pertain to solar energy, SEBI said in a press release.

According to media reports, the measures have been taken in the backdrop of increasing interest in sustainable finance in India and globally. They add impetus to align the existing framework for green debt securities with the updated Green Bond Principles (GBP) recognized by IOSCO.

It must be noted that Indian companies raised approximately $7 billion through ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) and Green bonds in 2021 viz as viz $1.4 billion in 2020 and $4 billion in 2019.


Tags: , , , , , , , ,


Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function twenty_twenty_one_the_posts_navigation() in /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-content/themes/twentytwentyone-child/archive.php:31 Stack trace: #0 /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-includes/template-loader.php(106): include() #1 /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-blog-header.php(19): require_once('/home2/writecxc...') #2 /home2/writecxc/public_html/index.php(17): require('/home2/writecxc...') #3 {main} thrown in /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-content/themes/twentytwentyone-child/archive.php on line 31