Sustainable investing and Australia’s First Nations peoples

The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) is committed to responsible investing and reconciliation with First Nations peoples. Its investment screening approach ensures positive impacts for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities while mitigating risks. Developed with input from First Nations representatives, government, and industry, this framework recognises the cultural significance of country and the CEFC’s broad investment footprint across urban, regional, and remote areas.

CEFC investment screening goals

All investment proposals are assessed for their impact on First Nations communities, in line with the CEFC’s Reconciliation Action Plan, investment policies, and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) commitments. For land-related investments, the key objectives are:

• Identifying and assessing potential impacts on First Nations peoples.
• Generating positive outcomes for First Nations communities.
• Avoiding or mitigating negative effects.

Sharing our approach with investors

The CEFC works with investors, businesses, and developers to support decarbonisation while improving First Nations participation in the clean energy sector. By sharing its investment screening approach, the CEFC seeks to raise investment standards, identify opportunities for First Nations businesses, and remove barriers to participation.

About the CEFC: How we operate

The CEFC drives Australia’s transition to net zero by working with financiers and investors to fund clean energy projects. It upholds values of integrity, collaboration, and innovation, reflected in its policies, ESG principles, and Reconciliation Action Plan.

CEFC reconciliation action plan (RAP)

The CEFC’s reconciliation efforts began with its Reflect RAP, which helped build relationships with First Nations stakeholders. Its current Innovate RAP enhances understanding of First Nations cultures and history, particularly the intergenerational trauma of the Stolen Generations. The First Nations investment screening approach is a key part of the CEFC’s commitment to reconciliation.

Understanding potential impacts: Country, culture, people

Investments affecting First Nations peoples require careful consideration of land tenure, residency, and cultural heritage. The CEFC acknowledges that:

• First Nations land ownership extends beyond native title.
• Most Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples live in urban areas.
• Cultural heritage protections apply nationwide, including in metropolitan regions.

The National Indigenous Estate

This estate includes various legally recognised First Nations landholdings. The CEFC considers these in investment assessments, using maps of native title determinations.

Indigenous land use agreements

ILUAs are voluntary agreements between native title holders and other parties on land and water use. These legally binding agreements are factored into CEFC investment decisions.

Cultural heritage protection

First Nations cultures have existed for over 60,000 years. The CEFC recognises national and state cultural heritage protections and integrates them into its investment processes.

Practical steps for investment screening

The CEFC’s approach involves:

• Identification: Reviewing native title, cultural heritage, and statutory obligations.
• Assessment: Conducting due diligence and seeking external expertise if needed.
• Engagement: Ensuring ongoing dialogue, obtaining approvals, and creating economic opportunities for First Nations peoples.

Key actions for investors include:

• Securing free, prior, and informed consent from First Nations stakeholders.
• Supporting employment, training, and procurement opportunities for First Nations businesses.
• Recognising First Nations peoples in project announcements and events.
• Ensuring long-term engagement and site access in line with cultural traditions.

Questions to consider in developing investment screening processes

Investors should assess:

• Whether land is subject to native title, ILUAs, or cultural heritage considerations.
• The adequacy of engagement plans and reporting obligations.
• Whether First Nations stakeholders have been properly consulted and informed.
• The potential economic benefits for First Nations communities, including financial returns, employment, and procurement opportunities.
• The counterparty’s governance measures for First Nations issues.