Analytical Review of Experience in the Development of Sustainable Finance and Prospects for Implementation in Kazakhstan

The development of “sustainable” finance, that is, financial instruments operating in the context of the implementation by companies of a set of environmental, social and governance principles (ESG principles), is gaining momentum in the main world markets. According to the Global Alliance for Sustainable Investments, these strategies already account for 35.9% of the total amount of invested assets. This trend is driven by a new global reality since the long-term development of the country and the company cannot be possible without resolving deepening environmental and social contradictions. In this regard, the purpose of this article is to develop recommendations acceptable to the practice of Kazakhstan based on the generalization of contemporary international experience in the development of various instruments of sustainable finance, as well as on studying institutional support measures for this process at the macroeconomic level.A review of the experience of several countries leading in the field of environmentally and socially responsible investment demonstrates both general and specific features that can be successfully implemented in Kazakhstan, which is at the initial stage of this process. The research methodology is based on a comparative analysis of public policy, regulatory framework, and national specifics of the models of the six selected countries and regions. The obtained results have corresponding practical implications in terms of sustainable finance and ESG criteria-based investing regulation advancement in Kazakhstan by foreign practices adaptation.

1. Balp, G., Strampelli, G. (2022). Institutional Investor ESG Engagement: The European Experience. European Business Organization Law Review, 23(4), 869–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-022-00266-y

2. Bloomberg (2023) (cited 20 September 2023) Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/climate-change-data-green/?leadSource=uverify%20wall

3. Cheba, K., Bąk, I. D. (2019). The Application of Multi Criteria Taxonomy to Comparative Analysis of Structures of Sustainable Development. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Oeconomica, 5(344), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6018.344.03

4. China-briefing (2023) (cited 6 September, 2023) Available at: https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-new-rules-for-private-funds-implicationsfor-chinese-and-foreign-fund-managers/

5. Chinasif (2023) (cited 17 September, 2023) Available at: https://www.chinasif.org/pages/2023chinasif

6. Chiappini, H., Vento, G., De Palma, L. (2021). The impact of covid-19 lockdowns on sustainable indexes. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041846

7. Collier, D. (1991). The comparative method: two decade change. In Comparative political dynamics: global research perspectives pp. 7–27.

8. Common Assessment Framework on Green Sustainable Banking, Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), 2020 (Hong Kong).

9. Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (report on the social and environmental impacts), January 2023 (European Union).

10. Corporate Governance Roadmap for 2018-2020 in Taiwan, 24 April 2018 (Taiwan).

11. European Union Sustainable finance strategy, 2021 (European Union).

12. Gai, L., Bellucci, M., Biggeri, M., Ferrone, L., & Ielasi, F. (2023). Banks’ ESG disclosure: A new scoring model. Finance Research Letters, 57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104199

13. GISA. (2021). Global sustainable investment review 2020. www.robeco.com

14. Green Investment Guidelines by the Asset Management Association of China (AMAC), 2018 (China).

15. Green and sustainable finance strategy of Hong Kong, 2020 (Hong Kong).

16. Guo, M., Nowakowska-Grunt, J., Gorbanyov, V., Egorova, M. (2020). Green technology and sustainable development: Assessment and green growth frameworks. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166571

17. Guidelines on Environmental Risk Management, Monetary Authority of Singapore, 2020 (Singapore).

18. Ibanet (2023) (cited 17 September, 2023) Available at: https://www.ibanet.org/article/1EAC98FE-52DA-41B4-9268-9CAD3C2B135A

19. Lee, E., Kim, G. (2022). Analysis of Domestic and International Green Infrastructure Research Trends from the ESG Perspective in South Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (12). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127099

20. Li, R., Li, B., Zhu, X., Zhao, J., Pu, R., Song, L. (2022). Modularity clustering of economic development and ESG attributes in prefabricated building research. In Frontiers in Environmental Science, Vol. 10. Frontiers Media S.A. https://doi.org/10.3389/fen-vs.2022.977887

21. Mandas, M., Lahmar, O., Piras, L., De Lisa, R. (2023). ESG in the financial industry: What matters for rating analysts? Research in International Business and Finance, 66, 102045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2023.102045

22. Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2 (MiFID II), 3 January 2018 (European Union).

23. Misorimaligayo, B. W., Ochieng, E. G., Osiolo, H. H. (2023). ESG risks integration, management, reporting and competitive opportunities in commercial banks – a systematic literature review. 13th International Scientific Conference “Business and Management 2023.” https://doi.org/10.3846/bm.2023.1021

24. Sec (2023) (cited 1 September, 2023) Available at: https://www.sec.gov/rules/rulemaking-activity?aId=&search=&rulemaking_status=178151&division_office=All&regulation_year=

25. Shirazi, N. S., Kuanova, L. A., Zhuparova, A. S. (2021). Islamic Social Finance and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Economy: Strategy and Practice, 16(1), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.51176/JESP/vol_16_issue_1_T11

26. The European Union Sustainable Finance Action Plan, 2018. Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (European Union).

27. The European Union Taxonomy Regulation, 12 July 2020 (European Union).

28. The Executive Order on Climate-Related Financial Risk, 2021 (the United States of America).

29. The Green Credit Guidelines by the China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC), 2012 (China).

30. The Guidelines for Establishing the Green Financial System (2016) in China

31. The Guiding Opinions on Promoting Investment and Financing to Address Climate Change, 2020 (China).

32. Ussif (2023) cited 9 September, 2023) Available at: https://www.ussif.org/sribasics

33. Wiener, B. (2021). The framing of sustainable finance in charitable foundations—findings from a qualitative study. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(18). https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810319

34. Ya, S., Sjarkowi, F., Emirzon, J., Meutia, I. (2018) Sustainable Financing for Biogas Fuel from Palm Oil Industry Waste. Recent Adv Petrochem Sci, 5(1). https://doi.org10.19080/RAPSCI.2018.05.555652

35. Zioło, M., Bąk, I., Cheba, K., Filipiak, B. Z., Spoz, A. (2023). Environmental, social, governance risk versus cooperation models between financial institutions and businesses. Sectoral approach and ESG risk analysis. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1077947