Photo by Alan Stark via Flickr

Public and private investments continue to support activities incompatible with a sustainable future — the development of new fossil fuel reserves, overfishing, land-degrading agricultural practices and more. These financial flows must stop and be redirected to support a sustainable, decarbonized economy.

Governments and financial institutions continue to enable practices that harm society and the environment, misuse valuable financial resources, distort the market and expose those institutions to financial risks. Such investments need to be redirected to more sustainable activities.

Capital flows will shift as governments and the private sector invest in the green economy, creating goods and services that cut demand for high-carbon technologies. Public and private financial institutions should also be challenged to constrain the availability of financing for harmful activities by setting clear engagement policies and stringent criteria for screening and divestment. These measures should raise the cost of capital for harmful activities — the expected risk and return to investors and lenders — and, over time, reduce the amount of capital available for them.

While subsidies explicitly use government resources that are not otherwise commercially available, public financial institutions can also perpetuate harmful practices through the use of financing that is offered on commercial terms. Harmful public investments do not happen in a vacuum: they are often the result of political lobbying. The world's largest corporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters and their industry associations use political spending to influence policies that preserve government support and impede climate policy. Therefore, political spending that props up harmful industries and delays climate action needs to be highlighted and phased out.

Ultimately, financial decisions to undertake unsustainable activities are made at the corporate level. This includes, for instance, capital investments to build a coal plant (capital expenditures or “capex”) or to maintain that plant and buy more coal to operate it (operating expenditures or “opex”). Investors in these companies can influence those decisions. Achieving a sustainable future will require changing company-wide capex decisions in the most climate-relevant sectors.

Eliminating harmful financing by disinvesting or changing the behavior of investee companies not only reduces societal harm, but also presents opportunities for public and private financial institutions to eliminate their exposure to climate-related risks and expands the availability of resources to scale public and private investments for more sustainable activities.

Tracking progress on global outcomes

2208: Public fossil fuel finance

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Total numbers were calculated by summing production and consumption subsidies, capital expenditures and financing for projects from multilateral development banks, export credit agencies and development finance institutions for each year. The 2023 figure for financing for projects was estimated by averaging the values from the three previous years. This figure will be revised as new data becomes available.

Target Methodology:

The IEA’s net-zero roadmap to achieve 1.5 degrees C found that, beyond projects already committed to in 2021, no new investment in new fossil fuel supply is required to meet global energy needs, a finding echoed by the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report.

Both the G20 and G7 have made long-standing commitments to phase out “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies,” with the former stating in 2009 that it would do so “over the medium term,” and the latter in 2016 setting a deadline for doing so by 2025. At COP26, Parties to the UNFCCC likewise called for the “phase-out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies,” which they reiterated in the Global Stocktake outcome decision at COP28. The year 2030 will be 21 years after the G20 commitment was made, stretching the limit of the definition of “medium term.”

In addition, at COP26, 34 countries and five financial institutions committed to ending international public finance for unabated fossil fuels by the end of 2022. Therefore, our target is for public finance for fossil fuels to be phased out globally by 2030, with G7 countries and international financial institutions achieving this by 2025, in line with their commitments.

Public finance, whether on concessional or commercial terms, plays a critical role in propping up fossil fuel industries, especially coal. It materializes via production and consumption subsidies, financing from development finance institutions and export credit agencies, and capital expenditures and project financing from state-owned enterprises. It is estimated that 93% of coal power plants are well insulated from market forces and benefit from public support through long-term supply contracts, tariffs and other means.

In order to meet Paris Agreement goals, public funders need to act swiftly to remove public concessionary support for fossil fuels, eliminate finance for coal power generation and phase out oil and gas investment. Public policy should redirect investment and job growth toward clean energy and support the economic transition for affected communities. Leaders of the G20 countries, comprising the world’s 20 largest economies, pledged to stop public financing for new coal power plants overseas by 2021, and a coalition of 25 countries and the European Union aims to end new unabated coal power in their domestic electricity systems. However, the G7 countries have not been able to agree on fully ending public finance for fossil fuel energy.

In 2023, public finance for fossil fuels fell 26% from the previous year, driven by a reduction in consumption subsidies in line with falling international oil and gas prices. However, it was still higher than historical averages  — totaling over $1.5 trillion, with $1.1 trillion directed to subsidies, $47 billion to financing of projects and $369 billion to capital expenditures. As a result, progress toward phasing out public finance of fossil fuels globally by 2030 was moving in the wrong direction as of 2023. It will need to fall by an average of $215 billion per year between 2023 and 2030 to meet the 2030 phase-out target.

2209: Private lending and underwriting for fossil fuels

Status: Right Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Values are for total fossil fuel financing from the Banking on Climate Chaos report.

Private funding will need to be redirected from fossil fuels to clean energy for the world to be able to reach net-zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by mid-century.

According to several analyses, coal power generation needs to be phased out in advanced economies by 2030 and globally by 2040, while fossil gas power generation needs to fall to very low levels globally by 2040. 

Large-scale oil-fired power generation must also follow a phaseout schedule by 2040. The sale of new passenger cars with internal combustion engines needs to be phased out by 2035. Finally, investments in new fossil fuel supply need to be stopped — and not simply shifted to other countries. This is especially important for the private sector in advanced economies, which fund the majority of overseas coal finance.

Phasing out fossil fuels globally will require private finance to shift away from investing in fossil fuels toward clean energy, and instead support transition planning in high-carbon sectors. While there have been encouraging signs of investment shifts in the private sector, actions have lagged far behind the pace and scale necessary, and additional transparency will be crucial to catalyze change. 

Phasing out fossil fuels makes sound investment sense. It’s estimated that investors risk losing $1.4 trillion from fossil fuel assets becoming “stranded” (devalued and unable to generate economic return), underscoring the need for the market to incorporate climate risks. 

Although there is no comprehensive source of information on private financing that includes all types of financial flows, the Banking of Climate Chaos database tracks bank lending and underwriting supporting fossil fuels.

In 2022, fossil fuel support from the world’s 60 largest banks reached $673 billion, with $43 billion related to coal and $630 billion related to oil and gas. Private financing will need to decrease in line with the decline of capital investments in fossil fuels required to reach net zero. This indicator will include other types of private financing for fossil fuels once data becomes available.

2207: Cost of capital for fossil fuel production

Status: Right Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Data was gathered from Oxford and Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs data is currently behind a paywall.

We derived the WACC for each category of fossil fuel by combining cost of debt and equity from the Oxford dataset with sector-specific capital structures and effective tax rates sourced from Aswath Damodaran's dataset. Afterward, we computed the overall average WACC for fossil fuels by averaging these figures. The detailed breakdown of the cost of debt and equity for each category of fossil fuel can be found in the ‘Disaggregate’ chart view.

The data in the timeline view is the average WACC for fossil fuel. 

Private investment in a company or project is a combination of investors providing equity that bear more risk but expect higher returns, and lenders providing debt that expect lower risk but lower returns. The combination of the two determines the cost of capital for that company or project.

Higher cost of capital for fossil fuel can reduce new investments in fossil fuel infrastructure and ultimately lower supply. It is therefore a crucial finance indicator, revealing whether financial conditions for fossil fuels and investments are becoming economically unfeasible.

The cost of capital for fossil fuel companies has remained between 10% and 14% over the past decade. Fossil fuel companies have been able to rely on access to consistently low-cost debt financing, while the cost of equity has been more volatile.

The cost of capital for project financing has also been volatile, and has even shown signs of increasing. Offshore oil project cost of capital reached as high as 22% in 2019. Various factors may contribute to this: increasing recognition of climate transition risks, such as demand destruction from technologies like electric vehicles; public policies signaling a future with reduced fossil fuel demand and supply; investor engagement on decarbonization; and a smaller pool of capital willing to invest in the industry due to climate concerns or recent investment losses in energy.

Even with the recent surge in fossil fuel prices, Goldman Sachs estimates a 15% divergence between the cost of capital for certain oil and gas projects relative to renewable energy projects, as the cost of capital for renewable energy has declined.

The cost of capital for other high-carbon activities, including heavy industry, shipping and aviation, should rise as competing technologies enter the market and economic, social and political pressure encourages substitutions for low-carbon alternatives.

2206: Capital investment in fossil fuel production and power generation

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Fossil fuel investments were calculated by combining coal, oil and natural gas investments.

Target Methodology:

The IEA’s net-zero roadmap to achieve 1.5 degrees C found that, beyond projects already committed to in 2021, no new investment in new fossil fuel supply is required to meet global energy needs. This finding was echoed by the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report. Timelines for the phaseout of fossil fuels vary across regions and types of fossil fuels. Over the next decades, investments in fossil fuels are required to decrease significantly, with the remaining investments mostly allocated to the maintenance and operations of existing fossil fuel fields and assets. According to IEA’s Net Zero 2050 scenario, investments in fossil fuels need to be reduced to about $480 billion by 2030. 

When companies and governments make capital investments, they create or maintain the physical fixed assets (plants, properties and equipment) that drive emissions. This is the physical capital stock that produces emissions directly, demands energy or other resource and greenhouse gas (GHG)-intensive inputs, or creates products that emit, making capital investment the pivotal financial decision that drives the growth of GHG emissions or decarbonization of the energy system. Capital investments in fixed assets that produce or demand fossil fuel effectively lock in higher future carbon emissions.

According to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Net Zero by 2050 scenario, global energy demand and net-zero carbon emissions can both be met by mid-century.

This will require funding for the development of new fossil fuel supply to be eliminated and major sources of demand for fossil fuels — such as fossil fuel-based power generation and transportation — to be phased out. Corporations need to take the critical step of aligning their capital plans with net-zero pathways by eliminating capital investments in new fossil fuel production and coal power generation and phasing out capital investments in assets that emit GHGs or produce goods that emit. Instead, they must scale up sustainable, clean alternatives.

Capital investment in fossil fuel production and fossil fuel-based power generation is expected to total about $1 trillion in 2023, up 5% from the previous year. Capital investments for oil and gas supply (up-, mid- and downstream) are expected to reach $805 billion in 2023 (up 6% from 2022), and investments in coal supply are projected at $148 billion (9% higher than 2022). Investments are expected to rise in 2023 as tight supply and high prices attract new projects, although at a slower pace than the previous year.

Capital investment in fossil fuel power generation is expected to reach $98 billion in 2023, an 8% decrease from the previous year. Not all capital investments are intended for expansion of new supply; a portion is allocated toward maintenance. According to IEA estimates, capital investments in fossil fuel production and power generation need to reverse course and fall by an average of $80 billion each year to meet the 2030 target.

Capital investment in emissions-intensive transportation and industrial assets is not yet tracked alongside low-emissions substitutes but it should be.

2212: World's corporations most responsible for forest loss implementing their deforestation commitments

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

The share of corporations was calculated by dividing the total of both companies and financial institutions from the Forest 500 list that report progress on the implementation of deforestation commitments by the 500 companies in the Forest 500 list. Different Forest 500 indicators were used for companies and financial institutions each year:

  • For 2018-2020, we selected financial institutions that scored at least 2.5/5 for indicator 4.4. (The financial institution reports the number or proportion of portfolio companies compliant with their time-bound plans or the number or proportion of companies in compliance with the financial institution policy.)
  • For 2018-2021, companies that responded “Yes” to indicator 4.1 (Does the company report progress on the implementation of the commitment?) were selected.
  • For 2021, we selected financial institutions that scored at least 2/6 for indicator 4.7 (The financial institution annually reports the number or proportion of portfolio companies to which this policy applies, proportion which are compliant with their time-bound plans/in compliance with the financial institution's policy, and the number of companies/clients which have been engaged on deforestation-risk).
  • For 2022, we selected companies that met at least 50% of the assessment criteria in indicator 4.01 (Does the company report progress on the commitment implementation by disclosing the proportion of its total commodity volume which is compliant with either the deforestation or traceability commitment?).
  • For 2022, we selected financial institutions that responded “Reports number/proportion of portfolio companies compliant with the deforestation policy or their own time-bound plans” to indicator 4.06 (Does the financial institution annually report the number or proportion of portfolio clients/holdings to which this policy applies, proportion which are compliant with their time-bound plans/in compliance with the financial institution’s policy, and the number of companies/clients which have been engaged on deforestation-risk?). 
Target Methodology:

Corporations play a critical role in reducing and stopping deforestation related to their operations, supply chain and financing decisions. This benchmark targets a complete phaseout of these practices across Forest 500 corporations — the most influential corporations linked to deforestation — in order to reduce GHG emissions, protect nature and Indigenous communities, promote adaptation and food security and protect biodiversity.

Deforestation leads to the loss of biodiversity and critical ecosystem services and contributes to climate change.

While there is little data on the impact most companies have on deforestation, many have acknowledged its harmful effects and pledged to enact new deforestation commitments.

Today, we can observe how many corporations that are most responsible for deforestation are implementing strategies to reduce deforestation while publicly and transparently reporting on their progress. With more data available, civil society and regulators can demand greater action. We expect new frameworks like the Task Force on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures to help inform future data on corporate impact on deforestation.

Forest 500 tracks the 350 non-financial corporations and 150 financial institutions that are most influential in causing tropical deforestation. Out of the 500 firms, only about 30% have reported material progress toward implementing their deforestation commitments for at least one of the high-risk commodities identified (beef, leather, palm oil, pulp and paper, soy and timber). The decrease in 2022 compared to prior years is mostly due to methodological changes. 45 new firms will need to implement deforestation commitments every year until 2030 in order to reach 100% coverage by 2030.

Key enablers and barriers to change

2102: Institutional investor commitments to divest from fossil fuels

Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Data was determined by counting the number of institutions in the Global Divestment Commitments database.

Investors and financial institutions have been reducing their exposure to the fossil fuel industry to manage financial risks and lower their contributions to rising global GHG emissions.

According to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario, no new investment in fossil fuel development is necessary to meet global energy demand. Instead, it is essential to eliminate these investments to reach net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050.

Financial institutions and investors across different sectors (including, for instance, university endowments, government pension funds and foundations) are increasingly aligning their financing and investment decisions with this new reality and committing to phase out and divest from fossil fuel investments. In theory, as more financial institutions foreclose financing to the sector, the cost of capital for companies seeking to develop new fossil fuel resources will increase, making it more difficult to do so. In addition to divestment, financial institutions can also implement engagement and stewardship strategies to incentivize their portfolio companies to transition away from fossil fuels.

Activists and smaller institutions have been at the forefront of reducing financing for fossil fuel expansion. Now, larger firms are joining the movement to transition away from fossil fuel toward clean energy. As of 2023, according to the Global Fossil Fuel Divestment Commitments database, 1,612 institutional investors (faith-based organizations, education institutions, philanthropic foundations, governments and non-governmental organizations) have committed to divesting approximately $40.6 trillion in assets under management from the fossil fuel industry. These commitments vary in terms of scope, processes and timelines. However, the rapid financial migration away from oil, gas and coal activities is a critical step in the transition to net-zero. Financial institutions committed to stop funding new fossil fuel supply will be tracked once data is available.

2097: Countries and development finance institutions with plans to phase out fossil fuel projects and financing

Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Data includes countries and MDBs with plans to phase out coal power and financing by 2030. Data on countries was collected from Our World in Data. Data on MDBs was collected individually from these sources: European Investment Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, African Development Bank and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

Fossil fuels are the dirtiest and most polluting sources of energy and contribute a majority of the GHG emissions that drive climate change. To reach net-zero emissions around mid-century, national governments and development finance institutions need to stop financing fossil fuels. 

The International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Net Zero scenario outlines an energy transition that would meet global demand for energy, equitable energy access for developing countries, and climate objectives to eliminate carbon emissions by 2050. In order to reach net-zero, no new coal power generation, oil or gas supply should be developed. Simultaneously, demand for fossil fuels needs to fall drastically. 

Unabated coal plants (those without technologies such as carbon capture to reduce emissions) in advanced economies need to be phased out in advanced economies by 2030 and globally by 2040, and oil and gas power generation needs to fall to very low levels by 2040.

Countries and development finance institutions, including multilateral and national development banks, have made commitments to phase out coal and fossil fuel investment to varying degrees. G20 countries made a commitment in 2021 to stop financing coal-fired power plants overseas.

Multilateral development banks (MDBs), are international financial institutions like the regional development banks or World Bank, provide financing to assist economic development. With significant pools of capital and ties with national governments, they have the ability to support a just transition to a sustainable global economy. Most MDBs have continued to fund fossil fuel infrastructure in client countries, which could deepen dependence on fossil fuels and delay the transition to renewable energy. 

As of April 2022, 82 countries have energy systems that do not include coal, 18 additional countries have committed to phasing out coal by 2030, eight have promised to do so by 2040, and nine during the 2040s. Five MDBs have made commitments to not provide any more direct coal funding.

2100: Corporate spending on fossil fuel lobbying

Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

No comprehensive global and country level data.

The data for the U.S. was collected from OpenSecrets.

Companies in the fossil fuel and related industries spend significantly to influence policymakers to pass policies in favor of production and consumption of fossil fuels, or to delay climate policies that accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon economy. Lobbying, like campaign financing, is intended to drive political interests, but it takes a more direct approach by influencing decisions through written or oral communication. Lobbyists are industry representatives who influence government officials to align with their clients’ agendas.

A common anti-climate lobbying tactic is to acknowledge climate change while misleading the general public about the severity of the crisis and turning policymakers away from solutions.

In 2023, the fossil fuel industry spent $153 million on lobbying in the United States on a range of issues, many designed to prevent the passage of policies that are crucial to meet national climate targets. The bulk of this lobbying expenditure, amounting to $129 million, was directed toward oil & gas interests, with substantial sums also dedicated to natural gas transmission and distribution ($21 million) and coal mining (about $4 million). The European Union’s oil and gas industry spent $27 million in 2018 on lobbying. With continued pressure from fossil fuel lobbyists, the coal and oil & gas sectors exert an enormous influence on political systems and obstruct critical climate policies.

2101: Campaign finance contributions by the fossil fuel industry

Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Data only identified for the US.

For decades, major fossil fuel companies have leveraged their political influence through campaign donations, lobbying associations and close relationships with policymakers. This has undermined efforts to decarbonize the economy and stall climate policy. By channeling millions of dollars toward political candidates in countries like the U.S., where this is allowed, companies expect decision-makers to create favorable fossil fuel policies and vote in favor of their interests.

According to Open Secrets, the oil and gas industry contributed $219 million to the U.S. presidential and congressional election cycle in 2024, a 47% increase from the previous general election in 2020. The coal mining industry contributed about $9.7 million in 2024, 11% more than in 2020.

A 2020 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences study found a positive relationship between members of the U.S. Congress voting against environmental policies and the campaign funding received from fossil fuel companies. As long as the fossil fuel industry continues to make major contributions to election campaigns, the transition away from fossil fuels will face significant political obstacles. Data on countries in addition to the U.S. will be added when available.

3078: Crop insurance

2107: Corporations most responsible for deforestation that have commitments to reduce deforestation

Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Share of corporations were calculated by dividing the total of both companies and financial institutions from the Forest500 list that report progress on the implementation of deforestation commitments by the 500 companies in the Forest500 list. Companies and financial institutions that met the criteria for the assessment number 1.1 (Does the financial institution have an overarching commitment to remove or reduce the amount of deforestation and/or conversion of all natural ecosystems caused by companies in their portfolio, or a clear statement of intent to tackle deforestation/conversion?; Does the company have a company-wide commitment to achieve deforestation-free and/or conversion-free production and/or procurement for all high risk commodity supply chains?) and have total points greater than 0 were selected.

Deforestation is harmful to ecosystems, biodiversity and local indigenous communities that rely on forests for their livelihoods. Moreover, it releases carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere. Ending deforestation is one of the most effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Corporations play a critical role in reducing and stopping deforestation related to their operations, supply chains and financing decisions. Establishing corporate deforestation commitments (such as zero-gross conversion, zero deforestation or deforestation-free) is an essential first step that corporations can take to build deforestation-free supply chains. After commitments are made, corporations need to take real action and report on progress transparently.

As part of reducing forest loss, deforestation commitments can result in more private sector investments toward biodiversity protection and nature-based solutions. While commitments alone do not guarantee action, they lay the groundwork for successful implementation.

Forest 500 tracks the 350 corporations and 150 financial institutions that are most influential in causing tropical deforestation. Out of the 500 firms, about 22% have company-wide deforestation commitments in place as of 2022, up from 20% in 2021. Progress on implementation is tracked in the indicator corporations implementing on commitments to reduce deforestation.

2108: Countries with substantial effective strategies to implement preventative anti-money laundering measures

Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Data was collected from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) assessment report by selecting countries with SE or HE ratings (substantial effectiveness, high effectiveness) within IO4 category (Financial institutions, DNFBPs and VASPs adequately apply AML/CFT preventive measures commensurate with their risks, and report suspicious transactions.). The earliest date in which the country is reported is used for historical data.

Natural and environmental crimes threaten the environment and undermine international security and the rule of law. Such crimes can include illicit logging, mining, fishing, wildlife trade or land conversion, all of which can be financial drivers for criminal organizations and terrorism.

Environmental crimes are costly, amounting to about $280 billion in criminal gains and costing governments $30 billion in lost tax revenue each year. The clandestine nature of these crimes means that it is often difficult for businesses or financial institutions to recognize the activities within their portfolios or supply chains without concentrated, investigative due-diligence policies.

Public and private institutions should implement Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer due-diligence regulatory frameworks to uncover and prevent unintended support of environmental crimes and activities. The Financial Action Task Force, an inter-governmental body, sets standards to prevent global money laundering and rates countries in terms of the effectiveness of their anti-money laundering systems.

According to the Task Force’s latest assessment ratings, out of 127 countries analyzed, only six have substantial levels of effectiveness (none for high levels) to ensure that financial institutions are implementing preventative AML measures and reporting suspicious activities. Although the rating doesn’t specifically address natural resource infractions, countries that have financial institutions effectively applying AML measures are best placed to track environmental crimes.

Other shift Other shifts needed to transform the system

Scale up public investment for climate and nature

Achieving climate and biodiversity goals requires strong government leadership, pressure for change from civil society, and coordinated monetary and fiscal policy to support large public investments.

Scale up private investment for climate and nature

Accounting for roughly two-thirds of economic activity, the private sector is integral in the transition to net-zero emissions. As the private sector perceives less risk and greater business opportunity in investments that protect climate and nature, climate finance flows will expand and the transition to net-zero emissions will accelerate.

Extend economic and financial inclusion to underserved and marginalized groups

A just transition will give underserved and marginalized groups new opportunities for high-quality employment, enable their participation in sustainable industries and ensure the extension of financial services to all people.

Ensure that the financial system accounts for climate- and nature-related risks

By integrating climate- and nature-related risks into decision-making, corporations and the financial system can accelerate the shift of capital toward investments that advance sustainable business transformation and support climate goals. Incorporating such risks also helps financial institutions and regulators monitor and manage risks at portfolio and systemic levels.