12 de diciembre de 2024

11 de diciembre de 2024| Artículo

PorAna Granskog, Hemant Ahlawat, Sanjay Kalavar, y Vishal Agarwal. Después de la COP29, mientras todos miran hacia el año 2025, las perspectivas en materia de sostenibilidad y las inversiones relacionadas no son sencillas. Este artículo recoge las reflexiones que surgieron de nuestros debates en la COP29 y en torno a ella, así como algunas opiniones sobre el camino que hay que seguir.

Un tema que importa más que nunca y, sin embargo, se debate más que nunca

La sostenibilidad es hoy más importante que nunca: la necesidad cada vez mayor de intensificar urgentemente las acciones para alcanzar los objetivos climáticos clave fue un estribillo común en la COP29. Se citaron con frecuencia tres hechos ilustrativos:

Los conocimientos más populares

Este es el primer año que vamos camino de superar los 1,5 grados .
Los costes del cambio climático ya se están acumulando y las pérdidas mundiales de seguros por catástrofes naturales van camino de superar los 135.000 millones de dólares este año . Y más allá de los costes financieros, estos costes se están contabilizando ahora en vidas afectadas y perdidas. El presidente del Gobierno español habló de las trágicas inundaciones en Valencia, uno de los muchos ejemplos que se trataron en Bakú.
La mayoría de los países y empresas están atrasados en el cumplimiento de sus planes y objetivos fijados para 2030. Los países que están trabajando en sus contribuciones determinadas a nivel nacional (NDC) antes de la COP30 en Brasil deben analizar honestamente cómo pueden acelerar sus planes y de dónde provendrá el financiamiento para ello.

Existe una fuerte sensación de que es necesario tomar medidas urgentes y una preocupación cada vez mayor de que en los próximos años tendremos que hacer “demasiado, demasiado tarde”.

Sin embargo, hubo una sensación igualmente fuerte de que, 29 años después de la primera COP, estamos debatiendo algunos requisitos básicos más que nunca, especialmente la financiación. El sentimiento es que se necesitan medidas urgentes, pero esto no se está traduciendo en acciones sobre el terreno a gran escala. Una vez más, tres debates se destacan:CompartirBarra lateral

El papel del capital privado en la reducción de la brecha financiera climática

The late wrangling and final outcome on climate financing (one of the main objectives of this COP) underlined the challenge of reaching consensus in this complex system (see sidebar “Private capital’s role in bridging the climate finance gap”). Although it was triple the prior funding commitments, the final agreement of a $300 billion financing goal from the developed to the developing world is far lower than economists’ estimated need of around $1 trillion per annum. Extending the scope to all physical assets across the developed and developing world, our research suggests that up to $9 trillion per year will be required by 2050. We are a long way from that.
The rapidly changing geopolitical and macroeconomic environment—and its implications on sustainability—was a second topic of debate. Interest rates are higher; inflation has returned; energy supply shocks and nearshoring pressure have emerged. And while there are some technologies that have surprised on the upside, for many others, early cost estimates have turned out to be too optimistic. Reality has changed and will continue to evolve. It raises the question of how far companies can go beyond their “in the money” trajectory, especially as many consumers are unwilling to pay a premium for more sustainable products without an improvement in price or performance. For some companies, these considerations are a reason to act with even more urgency and commitment; for others, they raise questions about the feasibility (or attractiveness) of acting on commitments made not so long ago.
Finally, much debate surrounded the regulatory environment. Regulatory clarity and pathways have been critical instigators for many changes. Yet now, there is a sense of uncertainty that some regulations (see sidebar “Enhancing regulation as a means of boosting competitiveness”) may be delayed, rescinded, or much harder to meet. This led to some discussions on possible “first-mover disadvantage” in certain settings, if regulations get pushed back or if further down the road there is additional help announced for laggards.

Sidebar

Enhancing regulation as a means of boosting competitiveness

It is hard to reflect a majority or consensus view, but a lot of our discussions balanced a dual reality: an urgency to act that has never been clearer and a context loaded with more uncertainties than ever before. We do plan to build on our climate technology and innovation framework (CTIF) in the coming year, which can help to inform policy makers as they reassess their NDCs. However, this article focuses on companies.

In our discussions, we saw businesses generally take one of three different stances on sustainability, although nearly all of them signal shifts in their behaviors ahead. The first were companies that see sustainability as a core business opportunity—such as start-ups, private-capital investors, and incumbents pivoting to scale up new clean technology. They emphasized that many investors have become more discerning. A common investor theme was “deal origination,” the challenge of finding reliable businesses to invest in, rather than any funding shortage. For many, the business idea remains important, but they also want to see a near-term path to positive cash flow and derisked execution. Some notable recent failures were discussed not as a failure of the idea, but as a failure of execution—of not sweating the small stuff, or of not moving fast enough and then being caught out as competitors raced ahead or market conditions turned. Some startups are looking to a broader set of financing mechanisms, such as blended finance, to overcome the scarcity of capital available to them. Others hope for more mature carbon markets (see sidebar “The emergence of carbon as an investable asset”) to provide a bankable source of revenues for their ventures.Share

Sidebar

The emergence of carbon as an investable asset

As a contrast to the first category, companies in high-emitting industries such as oil, gas, and power, or hard-to-abate sectors, such as steel, cement, aviation, and shipping, are in principle well-placed to invest in decarbonizing their processes. Yet, many struggle to make business cases for deploying new climate technology, such as carbon capture or hydrogen, that meet their investment hurdle rates. They are faced with a need to rethink business models and partnership approaches to find solutions that continue reducing emissions.

Finally, there are companies committed to either meeting or exceeding their previous commitments. They often seek to be sustainability leaders to compete in their sector and to respond to customer or employee needs. Despite their high ambitions, many of these companies find themselves struggling to stay on track towards their commitments—be it due to geopolitical developments, regulatory changes, or because they haven’t moved fast enough. They may need to take an honest look not only at what they can achieve but also what can be done to accelerate their progress, for example through better execution or resourcing.

How companies can respond: Three ideas for 2025

Regardless of where they lie on the spectrum, the time is now for companies to reevaluate where they stand, rethink how they will get to their goals, and thoughtfully communicate this publicly. In doing so, there are tangible actions that businesses can take:

Take a reality check and refresh your sustainability strategy. Many companies and leaders created their sustainability strategies four to five years back. Some did it out of a sense of mission, others reacted to a mandate, while others saw a path for real competitive advantage. All those stances still hold, but it is time for companies to reevaluate their progress. While the end goal of meeting Paris-aligned climate targets remains more urgent than ever, many of the underlying assumptions have fundamentally shifted. And volatility and uncertainty are likely to increase rather than decrease.This is a fast-moving world. The market has shifted, and even a 5 percent deviation in some past assumptions is enough to throw some plans significantly off track. On many factors, deviation and future uncertainty are at a much higher amplitude. This isn’t the time to tweak plans made four to five years ago. It is time for a major refresh with a scenario-based strategy for the future. A sense of mission remains important, but wishful thinking will not get us to great delivery and execution.It is evident some companies are rethinking bullish commitments they made in the past, with some even explicitly resetting their targets. But to be clear, we don’t see this as reneging on commitments; rather we see it as a recognition that we have learned a lot. The market has shifted, and it is time for companies to have a detailed and specific conversation on where they want to go and what actions they need to take.For many, this may mean a commitment to act faster, invest more, and execute better to achieve their ambitious goals. For others, this could mean managing a more complex external ecosystem and thinking of partnering with others in a new way. Some may want to consider potential new business-building opportunities, which were previously not apparent and may provide new growth opportunities. Some others may realize their plans were too ambitious and they haven’t acted fast enough, so now they need to do much more to get back on track. Whereas others, whose plans are unfortunately based on assumptions that are not in the money now, face the reality that their plan will cost much more than they anticipated. Finally, there are companies that still lack full clarity around their own emissions footprint (especially scope 3) and run the risk of being caught out if the regulatory environment moves fast in their industries.This is the time for the classic “strategy under uncertainty” that requires each company to reexamine their assumptions, create scenarios for the future, and link them to possible options ahead. They can then accelerate on a committed, preferred plan while keeping other options viable long enough for more certainty to emerge. Whether the motivation is an enduring sense of mission, to fulfill mandates, to create competitive advantage, or a pragmatic look at what can yield a positive return on investment, businesses need an honest evaluation of where they are and how to move ahead—not mere tinkering.
Expedite the road to cost-competitive climate technologies. For a long time, it has been clear that, for some companies, identifying and scaling up new climate technologies that can also bring their costs down will be the perfect “good for us, good for the world” situation. While renewables and some other climate technologies have scaled up, many others are only starting to move from lab pilots to commercial scale. Now, more than ever, it is imperative to industrialize these technologies given their very attractive economics, and huge potential to accelerate the transition (see sidebar “Accelerating energy transition investment”). There are 12 known-and-developed climate technologies that will deliver 90 percent of required abatement. Solar and wind are already the lowest-cost sources of an incremental megawatt hour. The next frontier is accelerating the deployment of the new wave of technologies (including hydrogen, long-duration energy storage, precision fermentation, and smart microgrids and renewables). Our research shows that once technologies are at a “post-lab stage”—with the prototype demonstrated in an operational environment—unit costs can typically be reduced by more than 50 percent through scaling. Accelerating plans to achieve cost parity with fossil or traditional alternatives is powerful as it helps scale-ups attract financing and secure offtakes. Another possible accelerator is the development of carbon markets and blended finance.
Ejecutar tecnologías rentables con rigor operativo. Para las empresas que han avanzado a la fase de escalamiento, un desafío frecuente ha sido la ejecución operativa y comercial. Demasiadas empresas han ido más allá de las operaciones “primeras en su tipo”, pero no lograron reducir sus estructuras de costos al escalar. Se han subestimado el esfuerzo, la experiencia y la disciplina necesarios para la industrialización. Reducir el riesgo de ejecución requiere al menos tanto esfuerzo como reducir el riesgo del caso de negocios. Lo mejor es que lo hagan equipos y líderes que tengan una sólida experiencia previa con las tareas precisas en cuestión. Requiere la aplicación constante de las mejores prácticas en la cadena de suministro, el abastecimiento, la construcción, la puesta en marcha y las operaciones. Para las empresas que buscan escalar tecnologías climáticas, la velocidad de ejecución, la capacidad de reducir los costos unitarios y la fijación de acuerdos de compra son fundamentales.

¿Hacia dónde vamos desde aquí?

La COP29 puso claramente de relieve cambios drásticos en materia de sostenibilidad, financiación, regulación, mercados y geopolítica, pero sigue siendo imperativo acelerar los avances. Será una transición compleja. Las empresas deben tener cuidado con el rendimiento de las inversiones y adoptar un enfoque estratégico sólido para que las inversiones realizadas puedan hacer frente a la incertidumbre macroeconómica de un panorama en rápida transformación.CompartirBarra lateral

Aprovechar las tecnologías digitales para impulsar y reducir el riesgo de ejecución

Las reglas del juego han cambiado. Para cumplir sus ambiciones, las empresas deben acelerar la acción y no seguir esperando que sus suposiciones pasadas se hagan realidad. Deben evaluar honestamente dónde se encuentran, qué es posible, qué pueden acelerar y qué no pueden lograr. No deben esperar hasta el final de la década para darse cuenta de que no cumplirán sus ambiciones, sino que deben actuar ahora, con estrategias de sostenibilidad renovadas, modelos financieros claros y un liderazgo valiente.

Muchos supuestos que sustentaban los planes de sostenibilidad han cambiado. Con más volatilidad por delante, el camino es ciertamente complicado e incierto, pero también hay herramientas rentables para acelerar la acción. La verdadera colaboración dentro de los ecosistemas pertinentes, el compromiso con una ejecución de clase mundial y la adopción de todo el potencial de las herramientas digitales (véase el recuadro “Aprovechar las tecnologías digitales para impulsar y reducir el riesgo de la ejecución”) son algunos ejemplos de temas que deben explorarse si queremos volver a encaminarnos hacia los objetivos de descarbonización y, al mismo tiempo, crear valor comercial. Los verdaderos líderes avanzarán más rápido, crearán valor comercial y saldrán fortalecidos. El objetivo final sigue siendo importante, pero también lo es el ritmo real de progreso. El tiempo avanza.