{"id":2648,"date":"2020-08-24T09:12:59","date_gmt":"2020-08-24T09:12:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vana.storiesforimpact.com\/?p=2648"},"modified":"2021-07-19T14:51:09","modified_gmt":"2021-07-19T14:51:09","slug":"in-depth-comparison-of-the-impact-analysis-tools-for-corporations-and-banks-by-the-unep-fi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vana.storiesforimpact.com\/et\/in-depth-comparison-of-the-impact-analysis-tools-for-corporations-and-banks-by-the-unep-fi\/","title":{"rendered":"In-depth comparison of the Impact Analysis Tools for corporations and banks by the UNEP FI"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n

Would you like to save a few hours? We have mapped out the similarities and differences of the new Impact Analysis Tools for corporations and banks by the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative<\/a> (UNEP FI). These tools assist banks, investors and socially responsible companies with planning, managing and improving their impact on society and the environment.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

One of these tools helps assess banks\u00b4 and investors\u00b4 client and investee companies individually (the Corporate Tool<\/a>), another to analyse banks\u00b4 portfolios in their entirety (the Portfolio Tool<\/a>). We have created manuals for both of them: the manual of the Corporate Tool<\/a>, ja<\/em> the Manual of the Portfolio Tool<\/a>. The following figure displays the main strengths and weaknesses of the tools.<\/p>\n\n

\n
\"\"
Figure 1. The UNEP FI tools in a nutshell<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n\n

\u00a0<\/h3>\n

Similarities and differences<\/h3>\n\n

While the tools do have a similar structure and methodology, there are a number of differences . The main similarities and differences for each section of both tools are presented in the following table.<\/p>\n

Table 1. Comparison of the Corporate and the Portfolio tools<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Corporate Tool<\/strong><\/td>\nPortfolio Tool<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Main differences<\/strong>
1. Suitable for a for-profit company (especially large multinational corporations)
2. Includes information about impact management capabilities
3. Summarized by giving the company a single rating<\/td>\n		Main differences<\/strong>
1. Suitable for a bank
2. Information collection is separated by four different banking types
3. Summarized by presenting an overview of most significant impact areas and the bank\u2019s impact performance in those areas<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Company cartography<\/span>
\u2022 Asks about sectors, countries of operation, company\u2019s influence (i.e. whether it is among the market leaders)
\u2022 3 types of countries are separated: countries of sales, production, sourcing
– Does not ask about the types of customers<\/span><\/td>\n		Bank cartography<\/span>
\u2022 Asks about sectors, countries of operation, bank\u2019s influence (i.e. its rank in the league tables)
\u2022 4 types of banks are separated: consumer, business, corporate, investment banking
+ Asks about the types of customers<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Country impact needs<\/span>
\u2022 Asks about the societal needs of each country of operation<\/td>\n		Country impact needs<\/span>
\u2022 Asks about the societal needs of each country of operation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Corporate impact profiles<\/span>
Each sector separately & then all sectors summarized<\/em>

\u2022 Shows impact associations for sectors
– Does not show impact associations for customer types<\/span>
\u2022 Shows country needs
\u2022 Highlights the LDCs (i.e. the least developed countries)<\/td>\n		Portfolio impact profiles\u00a0<\/span>
Each bank type separately & then all bank types summarized\u00a0<\/em>

\u2022 Shows impact associations for sectors
+ Shows impact associations for customer types<\/span>
\u2022 Shows country needs
\u2022 Highlights the LDCs (i.e. the least developed countries)
\u2022 Highlights areas of high influence
\u2022 Highlights key sectors
+ Option to add open comments<\/span>
– No option to amend values<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Highlights areas of high influence<\/span>
\u2022 Highlights key sectors
+ Option to amend values<\/span>
– No option to add open comments<\/span><\/td>\n		Highlights areas of high influence<\/span>
\u2022 Highlights key sectors
+ Option to add open comments<\/span>
– No option to amend values<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Most significant impact areas<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to list the most significant impact areas based on earlier information\u00a0
\u2022 Asks to justify the choices<\/td>\n		Most significant impact areas<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to list the most significant impact areas based on earlier information\u00a0
\u2022 Asks to justify the choices<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Impact performance<\/span>
Each sector separately & then all sectors summarized<\/em>

\u2022 Asks about quantitative and qualitative impact performance data\u00a0
+ Asks about being in line with internal goals<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to compare performance with peers
\u2022 Asks to compare performance with wider policy goals
+ Asks about predictive models<\/span>
– Does not ask about significant controversies<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to assign a performance status<\/td>\n		Impact performance<\/span>
Each banking type separately without any summary<\/em>

\u2022 Asks about quantitative and qualitative impact performance data
– Doesn\u2019t ask about being in line with internal goals<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to compare performance with peers
\u2022 Asks to compare performance with wider policy goals
+ Asks about significant controversies<\/span>
– Does not ask about predictive models<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to assign a performance status<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
+Asks about impact management capabilities<\/span><\/td>\n– No impact management section<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Conclusions<\/span>
\u2022 Asks to choose a final rating for the company from one of three PI (Positive Impact) statuses: PI, PI transition, Not PI<\/span><\/td>\n		Priority impact areas<\/span>
\u2022 Shows the ranked list of most significant impact areas from earlier steps
\u2022 Shows the impact performance ratings from earlier<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
<\/figcaption>\nIn conclusion, both tools follow the same general logic while there are some significant methodological inconsistencies, like the Portfolio Tool skipping the impact management capabilities section and the Corporate Tool missing the possibility to analyze the user\u00b4s impact by customer types. There are also a few technical inconsistencies between the tools: in the Corporate Tool there is an option to amend values but not to add comments in the section of impact profiles, and vice versa.<\/figure>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

What has been automated in the tools?<\/h3>\n\n

One of the key attractions of the tools lies in automating some of the time-consuming elements of mapping the potential positive and negative impacts of banks, investment portfolios and corporations. The following figure shows the main elements that have been automated.<\/p>\n\n

\n
\"\"
Figure 2. The aspects that have been automated in the tools<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n\n

To enable running the algorithms and complete the analysis, the users still need to provide extensive manual inputs. Examples of the activities that have not been automated:<\/p>\n