2030 Impact Rubrics

Harmful

Current policies and regulatory frameworks – or their extremely weak enforcement – have the effect of reinforcing, perpetuating, or even exacerbating climate-negative practices, marginalisation and/or inequality. For example, they enable, allow or implicitly encourage the continued exploitation of workers, producers and communities and/or practices that exacerbate climate breakdown for the purpose of profit maximisation.

One or several of the following are evident:

• Businesses and industry players seeking to block and backslide any change in policies to require climate-positive and contribute to equality  dominate the policymaking process.
• Workers, producers and communities have virtually no influence over policymaking.
• Businesses needing to navigate a just transition to climate-positive practices are given no support to achieve this and may even be discouraged from doing so by the relevant government agencies.
• Business relocation to avoid regulations or requirements is common practice, and there may be active efforts to prevent any alignment of policies and regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions.

The taxation system tends to exacerbate inequality, particularly for the most vulnerable, rather than redistributing wealth. It also offers virtually no meaningful financial incentives to mitigate climate breakdown and reduce inequalities.

Unconducive

Although the reform agenda is moving in the right direction and some progress may have been made, current policies and regulatory frameworks still have very limited power to support, enable and compel climate-positive practices and reduce inequality.

One or more of the following are evident:

• Businesses and industry players supporting practices that are climate-positive and that contribute to equality have limited influence at the policymaking table; those seeking to block and backslide such change have much more influence in that process.
• Stakeholder influence over policymaking is still unbalanced, with workers, producers and communities having only a limited level of influence, much less than the more powerful stakeholders.
• Businesses needing to navigate a just transition to climate-positive practices are receiving only ineffective encouragement and support to do so by the relevant government agencies.
• Business relocation to avoid regulations or requirements occurs quite often, despite some efforts to align policies and regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions.

The taxation system has some progressive elements but these are still insufficient to contribute to the redistribution of wealth or to create financial incentives to mitigate climate breakdown and reduce inequalities.

Partly conducive

Current policies and regulatory frameworks  provide a partly conducive foundation that partly supports, enables and compels climate-positive and equitable practices. In general, the reform agenda is moving in the right direction, although many reforms do not include meaningful sanctions for climate-negative practices and those that exacerbate or fail to address inequality and marginalisation, particularly for the most vulnerable. 
Some or all of the following are evident: 

• Businesses and industry players supporting practices that are climate-positive and that contribute to equality  have sustainably increased their influence in the policymaking table; however, those seeking to block and backslide such change still have reasonable influence in that process.
• Stakeholder influence over policymaking is moving toward better balance, with workers, producers and communities having at least some power and influence, alongside other stakeholder groups.
• Businesses needing to navigate a just transition to climate-positive practices are receiving at least some encouragement and support to do so by the relevant government agencies.
• Business relocation to avoid regulations or requirements is starting to decrease as a result of a better alignment of policies and regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions. 
• Important progressive taxation initiatives are contributing to the redistribution of wealth and creating financial incentives to mitigate climate breakdown and reduce inequalities; however, more reforms are needed. 
   

Conducive & Supportive

Strong and increasingly bold policies and regulatory frameworks  provide a solid foundation that supports, enables and compels climate-positive and equitable practices  while prohibiting and sanctioning climate-negative practices and those that exacerbate or fail to address inequality and marginalisation, particularly for the most vulnerable. 
Most or all of the following are evident: 

• Businesses and industry players supporting practices that are climate-positive and that contribute to equality have strong influence in the policymaking table; those seeking to block and backslide such change have limited influence in that process.
• Stakeholder influence over policymaking is reasonably well balanced, with workers, producers and communities having a substantial, but not yet equitable, level of power and influence, alongside other stakeholder groups.
• Businesses needing to navigate a just transition to climate-positive practices are, most of the time, being sufficiently encouraged, compelled and supported to do so by the relevant government agencies.
• Business relocation to avoid regulations or requirements is low because policies and regulatory frameworks are reasonably well aligned across jurisdictions. 
• Increasingly progressive taxation is being used to redistribute wealth and create financial incentives to mitigate climate breakdown and reduce inequalities. 
   

Harmful

Most of the financial sector still enables and implicitly rewards practices that are climate-negative and that perpetuate or exacerbate inequities and marginalisation, particularly for the most vulnerable.

Some or all of the following are likely to be evident:

• Cost of capital for investment decisions generally excludes social and environmental risks.
• Asset valuations exclude or seriously underweight impacts on climate, and inequality.
• Externalities are absent or seriously downplayed in company reporting and scenario planning.
• The cost of capital for high-carbon debt  is relatively low, often making it a more commercially attractive option than alternatives.
• Central banks’ policies and actions create conditions that implicitly or explicitly support the perpetuation of a high-carbon economy.
• Financial policy effectively makes high-carbon assets and assets that exacerbate or perpetuate inequality  more financially attractive for investors than low-carbon, equity-enhancing assets.

Pension funds and other institutional investors tend not to include Paris-aligned or equity-enhancing assets   (e.g., gender-lens investments) in their default options.

Unconducive

The financial sector has made only minor progress in realigning the system so that it enables, conditions and rewards climate-positive and equitable practices,  and disincentivises climate-negative practices and practices that exacerbate or fail to address marginalisation and inequality, particularly for the most vulnerable.

Some or all of the following are likely to be evident:

• Cost of capital for very few investment decisions (progressive frontrunners only) fully internalises social and environmental risks.
• Most asset valuations do not reflect long-term net zero business planning and production, nor long-term impacts on equality.
• The integration of externalities into company reporting and scenario planning is not yet required and is not common.
• The cost of capital for high-carbon debt  is still commercially viable for most.
• Central banks’ policies and actions provide only weak support for decarbonisation.
• Financial policy still leaves as attractive many investments in high carbon assets and assets  that exacerbate or perpetuate inequality.

Major pension funds and other institutional investors include very few Paris-aligned and non-aligned assets  within their default options.

Partly conducive

The financial sector has made significant progress in realigning the system so that it enables, conditions and rewards climate-positive and equitable practices; it is also starting to disincentivise climate-negative practices and practices that exacerbate or fail to address marginalisation and inequality, particularly for the most vulnerable.

All or most of the following are evident:

• Cost of capital for some investment decisions fully internalises social and environmental risks.
• Many (not yet most) asset valuations reflect long-term net zero business planning and production as well as long-term impacts on equality.
• The integration of externalities into company reporting and scenario planning is mandated in some jurisdictions and has been adopted by several leading frontrunners.
• The cost of capital for high-carbon debt  is steadily rising, although still commercially viable for many.
• Central banks’ policies and actions increasingly support decarbonisation and a just transition to a low-carbon economy.
• Financial policy has made both high carbon assets and assets that exacerbate or perpetuate inequality  increasingly unattractive for investors.
• Major pension funds and other institutional investors include several Paris-aligned and equality-contributing assets  within their default options.

Conducive & Supportive

The financial sector is becoming increasingly accountable and has created a strong and increasingly coherent system that enables, conditions and rewards climate-positive and equitable practices, and there is evidence of increasing diversity within institutions; it also disincentivises climate-negative practices and practices that exacerbate or fail to address marginalisation and inequality, particularly for the most vulnerable.

All or most of the following are evident:

• Cost of capital for most investment decisions fully internalises social and environmental risks.
• Most asset valuations now reflect long-term net zero business planning and production as well as long-term impacts on equality.
• The integration of externalities into company reporting and scenario planning is mandated in most jurisdictions and is increasingly becoming standard practice.
• The cost of capital for high-carbon debt  is high and is close to being no longer commercially viable.
• Central banks’ policies and actions increasingly support decarbonisation and a just transition to a low-carbon economy.
• Financial policy has made both high carbon assets and assets that exacerbate or perpetuate inequality  extremely unattractive for investors.

Major pension funds and other institutional investors almost exclusively include Paris-aligned and equality-contributing assets  within their default options.

Harmful

The vast majority of major businesses in the relevant sector(s) and region(s) are engaged in climate-negative practices  and/or practices that aggravate or perpetuate marginalisation and inequality for workers, producers and communities, particularly the most vulnerable.

More specifically, one or more of the following harmful situations are evident:

• Businesses have very high carbon emissions and/or are engaging in other practices that are seriously detrimental to the environment.
• Businesses are paying workers and producers seriously inadequate compensation relative to living costs^[1]; at times, they may not be paid at all.
• Businesses seize, exploit and/or damage community resources such as land, water and air/the atmosphere, without permission, compensation or attempts to repair the effects of any damage.
• Even when under only mild financial pressure, businesses are quick to fire employees and/or cancel contracts, forcing workers and producers, particularly the most vulnerable among them, to bear the bulk of the risk from economic and other shocks.
• Working conditions within businesses endanger health and/or safety, including accidents, injuries, and/or loss of health or quality of life.
• Businesses typically impose few or no consequences on perpetrators and there is little or no access to justice for survivors. Forced and child labour are clearly evident and, in some cases, rife.
• Union representation is typically blocked; there is no safe way for many workers to speak up and raise issues that concern them.

Unconducive

A clear majority of major businesses in the relevant sector(s) and region(s) are engaging in climate-negative practices  and/or practices that perpetuate marginalisation and inequality for workers, producers and communities, particularly the most vulnerable among them.

More specifically, one or more of the following harmful situations are typical:

• Businesses have made very small reductions in their carbon emissions but are still emitting at a level that is far from making a difference in climate change. There might be some climate-positive practices, but they are very inefficient and completely insufficient to offset their carbon emissions.
• Businesses are paying workers and producers so poorly that most earn a living that is inadequate relative to living costs^[1], although non-payment is very rare.
• Women and other historically disadvantaged groups, particularly the most vulnerable, face discriminatory barriers that prevent them from accessing employment and other economic relationships.
• When businesses are granted access to communities’ land, water, air/the atmosphere and other resources, they do so with permission, but such resources are often exploited and/or damaged, with little or no compensation or restoration of damage.
• Businesses do not support social protection to workers, producers and communities; only a small proportion of the risks from economic and other shocks are shouldered by businesses, leaving workers, producers and communities to bear a disproportionate share of such risks; workers' hours and/or producers' contracts are often cut first, rather than as a last resort, when businesses are under financial pressure.
• Working conditions within businesses are harsh, especially for members of historically marginalised groups. Examples include unrealistic performance targets, excessively punitive penalties for underperformance, inadequate tools or equipment, very long working hours, insufficient breaks, and/or uncomfortable working environments.
• The businesses work environment may be toxic, hostile, and/or exploitative for one or more subgroups of workers. However, cases of extreme human rights violations such as forced or child labour are rare.

Union representation is typically weak; businesses make it often unsafe for workers to speak up and raise issues that concern them.

Partly conducive

In the relevant sector(s) and region(s), while a few major businesses are climate-positive and several are climate-neutral, some are still considered climate-negative.

Several of those businesses are somewhat successful in working collaboratively with workers, producers and communities to make demonstrable and measurable progress toward equitable outcomes for those stakeholders, particularly the most vulnerable among them.

More specifically, one or more of the following less positive situations are evident:

• Businesses have reduced their carbon emissions but not yet to a low enough level and/or the other climate-positive practices  they may be engaged in are not quite sufficient to offset their carbon emissions.
• Businesses uphold most but not all workers’ rights – particularly rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining; union representation is available but somewhat weak; there may be some very preliminary social dialogue involving workers, employers, governments and other key players to improve working conditions, although this may occur only at some levels.
• Businesses are starting to provide more equitable access to employment and other economic relationships in their own practices by removing at least some discriminatory barriers to the participation of women and other historically disadvantaged groups, particularly the most vulnerable.
• Businesses are paying workers and producers enough that they earn a living that is at least minimally adequate relative to living costs^[1].
• When businesses are granted access to communities’ land, water, air/the atmosphere and other resources, they do so with permission (not always with prior, free and informed consent), and fair compensation in several cases, but usually not with proper care to preserve them for current and future generations.
• Even though businesses shoulder some of the risks from economic and other shocks, workers, producers and communities bear a somewhat disproportionate share of them; workers' hours and/or producers' contracts may be cut first, rather than as a last resort, when businesses are under financial pressure.

Working conditions within businesses are reasonable but need some improvement in order to foster the dignity of every person and their physical and emotional safety

• Businesses’ work environments may be unconducive for one or more subgroups of workers. However, there are no cases of extreme human rights violations such as forced or child labour.

Conducive & Supportive

In the relevant sector(s) and region(s), while some major businesses are demonstrably climate-positive and several are climate-neutral, a few are still considered climate-negative.

Most of those major businesses have had good success in working collaboratively with workers, producers and communities to make demonstrable and measurable progress toward equitable outcomes for those stakeholders, particularly the most vulnerable among them.

More specifically, virtually all of the following are evident:

• Businesses have low carbon emissions and are engaged in other effective climate-positive practices, such as carbon sequestration initiatives.
• Businesses make sure workers’ rights – particularly rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining – are largely upheld; worker representatives, employers, governments and other key players engage in some social dialogue to continuously improve working conditions, although this may not happen at some levels.
• Businesses provide increasingly equitable access to employment and other economic relationships in their own practices by continuing to remove discriminatory barriers to the participation of women and other historically disadvantaged groups, particularly the most vulnerable.
• Businesses are paying workers and producers, including the most vulnerable, enough that they have reasonably viable livelihoods^[1]; and communities are compensated for access to their resources, which are used in a mostly carbon-positive and regenerative way.
• When businesses are granted access to communities’ land, water, air/the atmosphere and other resources, they do a reasonably good job caring for such resources in ways that preserve them for current and future generations; prior, free and informed consent is obtained, and fair compensation is given in most cases.
• Businesses shoulder most of the risk from economic and other shocks and during the transition to more climate-positive practices.
• Working conditions within businesses, on the whole, foster the dignity of every person and their physical and emotional safety; workplace dangers or issues are managed proactively to prevent harm; businesses provide good support and compensation for those who have been harmed; and any areas for improvement are minor.

Harmful

At a global level or in the specific regions or industries where system shift is being evaluated, workers, producers and communities are being excluded or sidelined by other key system actors who are shaping, enforcing and protecting laws, policies, financial sector and industry standards, and business policies and practices relating to climate, and equity.

The needs and concerns of relevant workers, producers and communities are almost entirely unaddressed in the resulting policies, standards and actions.

Workers, producers and communities are frequently or routinely subjected to seriously unfair and inequitable treatment and compensation, and their natural environments (locally and globally) are often damaged. More specifically, one or more of the following harmful situations are evident:

• Workers and producers earn a living that is seriously inadequate  relative to living costs^[1]; at times, they may not be paid at all.
• Discriminatory laws and practices inhibit the access of vulnerable and marginalised groups  to employment and/or markets.
• Community resources such as land, water and air/the atmosphere  are seized, exploited and/or damaged, with little or no compensation.
• Workers, producers and communities bear the bulk of the risk  from economic and other shocks; they are fired, or their contracts cancelled when businesses are under financial pressure.
• Working conditions endanger health and/or safety, including accidents, injuries, and/or loss of health or quality of life. There are typically few or no consequences for perpetrators and/or little or no access to justice for survivors. Forced and child labour are clearly evident and, in some cases, rife.

Union representation is blocked or corrupt. As a result, there is no safe way for many workers, especially the most vulnerable or marginalised, to speak up and raise issues that concern them.

Unconducive

At a global level or in the specific regions or industries where system shift is being evaluated, workers, producers and communities have only weak influence in shaping, enforcing and protecting laws, policies, financial sector and industry standards, and business policies and practices relating to climate, and equity.

The needs and concerns of relevant workers, producers and communities are only very partially addressed in the resulting policies, standards and actions.

Workers, producers and communities experience quite unfair and inequitable treatment and compensation, and their natural environments (locally and globally) are often damaged. More specifically, one or more of the following harmful situations are evident:

• Workers and producers earn a living that is inadequate  relative to living costs^[1], although non-payment is rare.
• Some groups, particularly those who are vulnerable or have experienced marginalisation, face discriminatory barriers in accessing employment or markets.
• Community resources such as land, water and air/the atmosphere  are used with permission, but are often exploited and/or damaged, with little or no compensation or restoration of damage.
• Workers, producers and communities lack social protection; they bear a disproportionate share of the risk  from economic and other shocks; their hours or contracts are often cut when businesses are under financial pressure.
• Working conditions are harsh, especially for members of historically marginalised and most vulnerable groups. Examples include unrealistic performance targets, excessively punitive penalties for underperformance, inadequate tools or equipment, very long working hours, insufficient breaks, and/or uncomfortable working environments.
• The work environment may be toxic, hostile, and/or exploitative for one or more subgroups of workers, particularly the most vulnerable. However, cases of extreme human rights violations such as forced or child labour are rare.

Union representation is weak and/or provides inadequate representation of the interests of vulnerable and historically marginalised groups. As a result, it is often unsafe for workers to speak up and raise issues that concern them.

Partly conducive

At a global level or in the specific regions or industries where system shift is being evaluated, workers, producers and communities have moderate influence in shaping, enforcing and protecting laws, policies, financial sector and industry standards, and business policies and practices relating to climate and equity.

The needs and concerns of relevant workers, producers and communities are meaningfully addressed in some of the resulting policies, standards and actions.

Workers, producers and communities receive mostly adequate but somewhat inequitable treatment and compensation; their work environments may be unsafe; and their natural environments (locally and globally) are often degraded or damaged. More specifically, the following are likely to be evident:

• Workers and producers earn a living that is at least minimally adequate  relative to living costs.^[1]
• Some but not all groups have equitable access to markets and employment opportunities and meaningful protections against discrimination particularly the most vulnerable.
• Community resources such as land, water and air/the atmosphere  are only sometimes used with permission, compensated, and generally with care. Restoration of natural environments is patchy and regeneration rare.
• Workers, producers and communities bear a somewhat disproportionate share of the risks from economic and other shocks; for example, their hours or contracts are sometimes among the early cost cutting measures when businesses are under financial pressure.
• Working conditions are reasonable but need some improvement in order to foster the dignity of every person and their physical and emotional safety.
• The work environment may be somewhat unwelcoming for one or more subgroups of workers, but efforts are being made to improve this and there are no cases of serious human rights violations such as forced or child labour.

Workers’ rights are mostly upheld. Union representation is available but may not equitably represent the interests of all groups, particularly those who are vulnerable and/or have historically experienced marginalisation. There may be some very preliminary social dialogue involving workers, employers, governments and other key players to continuously improve working conditions, although there is likely little traction to date.

Conducive & Supportive

At a global level or in the specific regions or industries where system shift is being evaluated, workers, producers and communities are increasingly influential partners, alongside other key system actors, in shaping, enforcing and protecting laws, policies, financial sector and industry standards, and business policies and practices relating to climate and equity.

Input from relevant workers, producers and communities are usually sought out, but not always before decisions are made; their needs and concerns are mostly well addressed in the resulting policies, standards and actions.

Workers, producers and communities enjoy reasonable social protections; they receive mostly fair and equitable treatment and compensation, and their natural environments (locally and globally) are increasingly protected and restored. More specifically, virtually all of the following are evident:

• Workers and producers, including members of historically marginalised and most vulnerable groups, enjoy reasonably equitable opportunities to access markets and employment and meaningful protections against discrimination, and they earn reasonably viable livelihoods.^[1]
• Communities’ land, water, air/the atmosphere and other resources  are managed with reasonable care and usually restored to preserve them for current and future generations, with permission obtained and reasonably fair compensation given when government or business is granted access to the community’s resources.
• Workers, producers and communities enjoy some social protections, which shield them from most of the risk from economic and other shocks and during the transition to more climate-positive practices.
• Working conditions, on the whole, foster the dignity of every person and their physical and emotional safety; workplace dangers or issues are managed proactively to prevent harm; there is good support and compensation for those who have been harmed; and any areas for improvement are minor.
• Workers’ rights are consistently upheld. They are fully engaged in regular social dialogue at every level with employers, governments and other key players to continuously improve working conditions.

Workers’ rights are largely upheld. Worker representatives promote the interests of their members reasonably equitably; there may be room for improvement in representing the interests of those who are vulnerable and/or have historically experienced marginalisation. They are engaged in some social dialogue with employers, governments and other key players to improve working conditions, although this may not be addressing the most important concerns.