ACR → On first thinking, we might want to start with a Metric Library that’s heavy in the Environmental metrics and maybe has some % female social metrics, and then slowly work in more social + governance metrics. For the IRI, this might look like a tiered system?
Thinking on first glance that most of the companies I’ve interacted with in the UAE are ready for environmental reporting and women reporting, but including some of the more contentious ones might take some time to get used to the system
Or, including Social and Governance Metrics as optional in IRI system initially?
Theres a lot of diversification in the region, but even when I researched most of it is in the gulf, and more specifically between the UAE and Saudi, they have a 2030 vision which is something we can use as a base for a criteria
ACR → I agree with this - Gulf seems like the smartest place to start in terms of entry strategy as they already yeah have some goals, and are working on developing a strategy towards reaching them
Something we need to consider - greenwashing is a HUGE issue in the Gulf region right now - we need to consider the chance of companies lying or manipulating metric values for saving or improving reputation
I think we might want to therefore lead with some of the metrics they’ve already identified as palatable, and emphasize the importance of truthful reporting @Mohamad Nesr thoughts on this?
Yeah I agree, thats a really smart point. I think we should emphasize the importance of accurate and honest reporting. That you know not only is it ethically right, but in the long run, it also benefits companies by building trust and credibility with their stakeholders.
As for the metrics, I think leading with those already identified as manageable is a very good starting point, particularly throughout that region alot of the metrics we discussed will feel like a big change this could make it easier for these companies to provide accurate reports without feeling the need to manipulate data. I think that over time we should also expand and encourage them to continually improve and add to their sustainability efforts and reporting.
I think that'll also require direct communication or checking any ESG ratings they've already got. What are some of the metrics they've already identified as palatable? or where can we find their criteria? especially for the number of companies we've got.
Moreover, we could consider providing guidance and support to partners in this area. For example, we could share best practices for environmental reporting and help them understand the long-term benefits of being genuinely environmentally responsible.
How do you think we would ensure truthful reporting? Maybe proof incorporates third-party audits or use other verification methods to ensure the accuracy of the data we receive.
I think that most of the greenwashing will be only specific to the Gulf region. We wouldn't have to worry as much in the Levant.
I remember one of the things she asked as for was “Pull together recommended content to educate partners on value of ESG & impact data intelligence, specifically the use of Proof platform, while keeping in mind any cultural nuances that may be relevant in that region [for example: what metrics are most relevant to the MENA region? How best to engage with key stakeholders?”
Im gonna make a report and include this as well as talk about the honest reporting let me know what you think!
@Addison Carmel Reznar
Perfect I think that’s a great idea- we can pull from the Knowledge Hub too for some of those points on the value - I think also angling from a “these metrics optimize financial returns AND environmental impact” is going to be key here - I think that will encourage truthful reporting too a little bit
Additionally I think we should market this as a risk management/financial optimization tool, and not really as an environmental/pr tool? might help with the greenwashing problem @Mohamad Nesr
Yeah I agree, thats a more compelling argument. Im gonna change up with my work a bit to fit that then.
@Mohamad Nesr while I’m doing these metric mappings I’m thinking a good way to combat greenwashing might be to really dial in on the quantitative metrics - the yes/no metrics might offer a little bit more wiggle room that we’re trying to get rid of → something to think about in our narrowing down/debate phase
Also thinking that it might be a good idea to structure similarly to SFDR → they have a list of 14 Mandatory Metrics and then you have to choose 2 from a list of (I think) 17 optional metrics to report on → this could give some autonomy to companies that don’t want to report on a certain topic, and will let us get some of the metrics in that we know some companies will love and some will hate
We can also make a methodology for the narrowing down phase → make a list of the things we want our final list to have and then try to keep that in mind when we narrow them down (you know I love my methodologies)
Off the top of my head, I’m thinking
ALSO when it is time for us to debate/narrow down things we might just want to schedule a meeting the two of us and go metric by metric? will be tedious but I think we need a real-time debate to vet them properly
Yeah, I think that would be a smart idea. We could establish a clear set of criteria and objectives for the metrics, then we can evaluate and prioritize them. So basically to avoid greenwashing we want to give them the choice to report metrics of their needs and wants. By introducing this sort of comfort and trust at the beginning coupled with metrics that are quantitative we can combat any greenwashing?
I’m thinking so. I think we’re still going to have issues with it, but at least taking this proactive approach we’ll hopefully be able to cut down on it a little bit. I’m gonna make a challenges page so we can kind of summarize everything we talked about here in a more succinct way.
I added some descriptions to some of the bullet points on the list, let me know what you think of those.