Ken Pucker’s piece questions whether impact accounting can truly deliver on its promise to “redefine success” by quantifying social and environmental value alongside profit. While leading firms such as BlackRock, Target, and Kering are experimenting with methodologies developed at Harvard or in-house, Pucker highlights fundamental flaws. For example, the International Foundation for Valuing Impacts (IFVI) assigns Mauritania—an extremely water-scarce nation—the world’s lowest social cost of water, while wealthy countries like Sweden face valuations nearly 25 times higher, effectively incentivizing companies to relocate resource-intensive operations to fragile regions. Beyond such distortions, impact accounting relies on staggering complexity, sweeping assumptions, and “shadow prices” that can blur company-level effects with system-level outcomes. For sustainable finance professionals, the takeaway is clear: while impact accounting frameworks are gaining traction, they carry methodological risks that could misallocate capital, misprice environmental harm, and undermine the credibility of ESG disclosures if adopted uncritically.
Best of August 2025: Sustainable Finance Reads
A curated roundup of August 2025’s best articles on sustainability, climate, and market trends from leading industry voices.
Each month, we gather standout articles from our favourite writers—insightful, thought-provoking, and worth your time. This curated selection brings together the most engaging ideas, timely analyses, and fresh perspectives published over the past month, so you can catch up on what mattered most.
Photo by American Public Power Association on Unsplash
Bow Wave of Disaster. A Few Thoughts on Sustainability…
By Simon Rebbechi
In this roundup, Simon Rebbechi argues that the energy transition remains structurally on track: if clean energy keeps growing even modestly faster than total demand, fossil fuels are mathematically squeezed out over coming decades (à la Michael Liebreich’s “Pragmatic Climate Reset”). He spotlights water risk as a fast-materializing systemic issue, citing WMO/GRACE data and new research showing groundwater depletion now drives most terrestrial freshwater loss and is even outpacing glacier melt in sea-level rise—an urgent lens for physical-risk and biodiversity screens. Policy momentum also favors decarbonisation economics: CBAM “virality” is pushing wider carbon pricing (UK ETS expansion; World Bank’s 2025 tally and China’s planned scale-up), strengthening transition-risk pricing and revenue opportunities. For private markets, PRI’s framework is slated to add quantified performance links by 2028, raising the bar on evidence for ESG financial materiality amid tighter U.S. legal scrutiny. On the opportunity side, grid-scale storage is accelerating (New York’s 3 GW bid; Australia underwriting large new generation and storage), while agricultural productivity gains and biotech (AI-designed plant immunity) offer adaptation and growth theses. U.S. efficiency policy may get a reprieve (potentially saving Energy Star), which supports consumer savings, grid stability and federal procurement standards. Net-net: expect rising carbon and water-related risk premia, but also investable tailwinds in clean power, storage, efficiency, and climate-smart ag tech.
Terence Jeyaretnam, January 202
Top 10 Sustainability Markers – August 2025
By Terence Jeyaretnam
Terence Jeyaretnam’s August 2025 Sustainability Markers highlights a convergence of policy, legal, and physical climate risks with direct implications for capital allocation and governance. In Australia, the Federal Court cleared Woodside’s Scarborough gas plan even as ministers prepare a 2035 emissions target and sectoral net-zero pathways—key scenario inputs for investors. Globally, litigation risk is rising: Italy’s top court allowed a landmark climate case against ENI, Germany restricted “carbon-neutral” marketing, and New Jersey secured a multibillion-dollar PFAS settlement, underscoring exposure across industries. China’s move to absolute emissions caps and ETS expansion from 2027 will reshape global carbon pricing and competitiveness, while the EU’s Circular Economy Act consultation sets new rules on product design and market access. Meanwhile, Sydney’s record deluges and Hurricane Erin’s explosive intensification reinforce that physical risks are immediate, with material costs even absent direct landfall. For sustainable finance professionals, the key takeaway is that policy signals, litigation outcomes, and climate impacts are tightening disclosure demands, reshaping liability landscapes, and accelerating the need for robust transition and adaptation strategies.
Relevant library resources
Clean Energy Council's clean energy Australia reports
Water risks and financial market: Overview and analysis
Internal carbon pricing for low-carbon finance: A briefing paper on linking climate-related opportunities and risks to financing decisions for investors and banks
Estimating and reporting the comparative emissions impacts of products
A legal framework for impact: Sustainability impact in investor decision-making
