12:30 Noon Lunch Box Keywords

NOON: Lunch Box

ESG keywords to ponder during a short lunch break.

97 articles

International Sustainability Standards Board

The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), established in November 2021, is an independent body that sets global standards for the disclosure of corporate sustainability information. Founded under the IFRS Foundation, it develops standards centered on financial materiality from an investor perspective.[ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board) Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]The ISSB was born as the impact of climate change and ESG response on corporate value grew. Previously, companies faced duplicate reporting burdens under various disclosure frameworks such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), while investors found cross-company comparison difficult. Thus, the IFRS Foundation established the ISSB to resolve this confusion and integrate financial reporting with sustainability reporting.In June 2023, the ISSB published its first international standards: IFRS S1 (General Sustainability Disclosures) and IFRS S2 (Climate-related Disclosures). S1 addresses the overall impact of sustainability-related risks and opportunities on a company’s finances, while S2 contains specific climate change-related disclosure requirements. IFRS S1 and S2, which began application from January 2024, have started to be adopted as standards by major countries including the UK, Australia, and Japan.Domestically, the Financial Services Commission has announced that it will phase in mandatory sustainability disclosure starting from 2025 for KOSPI-listed companies with assets of KRW 2 trillion or more. The Korea Accounting Standards Board is developing the Korean Sustainability Disclosure Standards (KSDS) with reference to ISSB standards. A draft was released in 2024, and the scope of disclosure entities is scheduled to expand from KOSPI-listed companies starting in 2026.The ISSB plays the role of guiding capital flows toward a sustainable direction by enhancing the credibility and comparability of corporate ESG information. With the application of disclosure standards as rigorous as those for financial reporting, companies are in a situation where they must build more sophisticated data management systems. For Korean companies participating in global supply chains, understanding and responding to ISSB standards has become an essential task. by Editor O

01/22/2026

KEYWORD 02

Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures

Alongside climate change, the impact of changes in the natural environment — such as biodiversity loss, water shortages, and land degradation — on corporate activities is becoming increasingly apparent. As these factors become linked to supply chain stability, production costs, and business sustainability, a trend is spreading of viewing the natural environment not as a mere external factor but as an important asset that companies must manage. It is in this context that the TNFD (Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures) has emerged. The TNFD presents a framework that enables companies to analyze how dependent they are on nature, what impact they have on it, and how financial risks and opportunities are connected. Since the TNFD was formed in 2021, its final recommendations were published in 2023, and it is establishing itself as the global standard for nature-related disclosure. [TNFD (Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures) Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]The TNFD recommendations are composed of the same four core areas as the TCFD (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) — Governance, Strategy, Risk and Impact Management, and Metrics and Targets — so companies with TCFD disclosure experience can apply the TNFD relatively quickly. However, unlike the TCFD, which is measured through the single indicator of carbon emissions, the TNFD must handle composite indicators such as biodiversity, water resources, soil, and ecosystem services, requiring greater preparation in data collection and evaluation methodology.As of May 2025, Japan has 165 companies and institutions that have adopted the TNFD, far ahead of the UK with 70, Taiwan with 30, and the U.S. with 22, while South Korea has only eight. According to Korea Exchange data, among the 178 companies that disclosed sustainability reports in 2024, only 32 mentioned the TNFD, and a mere 24 companies actually utilized the LEAP approach. Domestically, Woori Financial Group, Shinhan Financial Group, KB Financial Group, POSCO, and KT&G have joined the TNFD Forum, and recently, the Gyeongsangbuk-do Development Corporation became the first public institution to adopt the TNFD.A notable change is the growing likelihood that nature-related disclosure will transition from voluntary recommendations to mandatory regulation. The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) is developing nature-related disclosure standards based on the TNFD framework, with completion targeted for 2026, which could lead to mandatory global disclosure. Domestically, the Financial Services Commission is reviewing the inclusion of nature and biodiversity items in the ESG disclosure mandate roadmap, while the Ministry of Climate and Energy and Environment is conducting research on building an ecological information evaluation system for TNFD application, indicating that institutional preparations are underway.Companies that have established a nature risk management system before TNFD disclosure becomes mandatory will be able to respond flexibly to future regulatory changes. In addition, they will be able to secure a competitive advantage in terms of sustainability. by Editor O

01/16/2026

KEYWORD 03

Plastic-Free Comprehensive Plan

The ‘Plastic-Free Comprehensive Plan’ refers to a cross-ministerial action implementation plan established by the South Korean government to fundamentally reduce the amount of plastic generated by managing the entire life cycle of plastics, including production, distribution, consumption, and recycling. This plan aims not only to reduce waste but also to transition toward a Circular Economy for the realization of carbon neutrality.As of January 2026, the announced policy presents a direction for structurally reducing plastic use by moving away from the past post-treatment-centered approach, including expanding the use of recycled raw materials at the production stage, reducing packaging materials in the distribution process, and strengthening upstream regulations. The government has set a target of a 30% reduction based on the projected 2030 waste plastic emission of 10.12 million tons, and accordingly has proposed policy tasks such as mandating the use of 10% recycled raw materials in PET bottle production and making plastic waste charges more realistic. [Plastic-Free Comprehensive Plan Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]The distribution and consumption stage includes the introduction of the recently trending ‘separate cup billing system.’ This is a measure to raise consumers’ cost awareness by separately indicating the price of disposable cups on receipts. As for plastic straws, which have frequently caused confusion, the plan is to maintain the 2023 policy of indefinitely extending the guidance period while inducing voluntary reduction through restrictions on permanent in-store placement and guidelines to provide them only upon request. The currently announced content is a policy direction containing the government’s mid- to long-term orientation, and it is expected that the implementation date and phased implementation schedule will be specified for each item after the final draft is confirmed. Accordingly, at the practical level, securing a preparation period in accordance with the detailed implementation roadmap to be announced in the future, as well as the timing of the system’s introduction, is expected to become an important variable. by Editor O

01/13/2026

KEYWORD 04

Carbon Disclosure Project

CDP, an abbreviation for ‘Carbon Disclosure Project,’ is an international non-profit organization founded in the United Kingdom in 2000 and the world’s only independent environmental information disclosure platform. Established jointly by global financial institutions, CDP currently has approximately 9,600 listed companies participating. Originating from the perspective that climate change can be both a risk and an opportunity for companies, CDP operates an information disclosure system that enables central and local governments, investors, and companies to manage their environmental impact. Initially, it focused on disclosing carbon emission information related to climate change, but has gradually expanded its scope to cover a range of environmental information including forest protection, plastics issues, biodiversity, and water resources.[CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]To this end, CDP requests major companies worldwide to transparently disclose information including carbon emission volumes, reduction efforts, and climate change response strategies. Companies wishing to respond to CDP’s information disclosure request and have their environmental management capabilities and performance evaluated must disclose to CDP the relevant management-related information and materials that can substantiate their performance. The companies subject to the information disclosure request are selected each year based on market capitalization, and CDP delivers a disclosure request letter to the selected company’s CEO and relevant personnel. Even companies that have not received a request may participate voluntarily. Companies that accept CDP’s disclosure request or wish to voluntarily receive a CDP rating evaluation may submit information through CDP’s proprietary online response system, ORS, by the response deadline. How much information and what kind of information the company discloses is also reflected in the evaluation results. The CDP rating is the result of evaluating how companies and cities disclose and manage their environmental impacts. Grades range from D- to A, and a certain score must be achieved at each of the four stages before evaluation proceeds to the next stage. - Disclosure (D- or D): Evaluates the extent of environmental data disclosure and completeness of reporting- Awareness (C- or C): Evaluates the company’s level of awareness of the impact of climate change on its business- Management (B- or B): Evaluates the company’s activities and management measures for responding to environmental issues- Leadership (A- or A): Evaluates exemplary environmental management practices and leadershipIf a sufficient score is not achieved at the Disclosure stage, the company is not given the qualification to be evaluated in the remaining three stages. With its rigorous evaluation method, CDP is recognized as one of the most reliable ESG evaluation indicators.For a CDP rating evaluation to proceed smoothly, companies need to systematically manage and transparently disclose their ESG data. Amid the trend toward mandatory ESG disclosure, CDP can serve as a strategic tool for companies seeking to attract investment. by Editor O

01/06/2026

KEYWORD 05

Impact Investing

Impact Investing refers to investment in companies that have a positive impact on the environment and society, alongside the pursuit of financial profit. It is a term formed from the combination of ‘Social Impact,’ meaning social ripples and influence, and ‘Finance Investing’ in the financial market. While conventional investment primarily focused on economic performance, impact investing differs in that it invests over the long term in funds or companies that contribute to solving social issues while premised on economic returns.In the 1990s, Jed Emerson (Vice President of Impact Assets and Senior Fellow at the Heidelberg University Centre for Social Investment) proposed the blended value approach, arguing that a foundation’s donations and capital should be invested not as mere means of maximizing financial returns but in fields aligned with the purposes and values it pursues. In the 2000s, as attempts to measure the non-financial performance of companies gained momentum, concepts such as pollution prevention, corporate social responsibility, and the triple bottom line (economic profit, environmental sustainability, and social responsibility) emerged. Amid these trends, the term ‘impact investing’ appeared around 2007, with the intentional creation of tangible and intangible assets and the measurement of social and environmental performance as rigorously as financial performance establishing themselves as core elements. Domestically, in early 2013, the Seoul Metropolitan Government created an impact investment fund of KRW 100 billion, and in April of the same year, SIEN (Social Impact Evaluation Network), an impact investment institution, was launched. [Impact Investing Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]Before the concept of impact investing was established, the social responsibility activities or philanthropy of companies in the past generally focused on reducing negative impacts. Individual investors have applied ESG integrated investment strategies, which reflect ESG factors in the investment decision-making process, and negative screening, which excludes companies that fall short of ESG standards from investment targets, as their primary ESG investment strategies. However, as questions have been raised about whether such methods and strategies are truly investments aimed at improving corporate ESG, interest in impact investing is growing. Since the primary goal of impact investing is to draw out measurable positive effects, it can be said to be the most active form of ESG investment strategy. Having experienced climate change and the pandemic, public awareness of environmental and social issues has heightened, and ESG is now a concept unfamiliar neither to investors nor companies. This shift in awareness has driven demand across ESG investing overall and is also influencing the growth of the impact investing market. The global impact investing scale reached approximately USD 400 billion in 2022 and is projected to grow at an annual rate of about 17.8% through 2027.Impact investing is an investment approach that seeks to resolve environmental and social issues through the power of capital. As it is grounded in the capital market, there exists a demand for profitability, but at the same time, in that it pursues values, it pursues a benevolent goal. by Editor O

01/02/2026

KEYWORD 06

Care Farming

Care Farming is an activity and industry that utilizes the diverse resources of agriculture and rural areas to aid in the recovery of physical and mental health and social relationships. This includes not only crop cultivation and flower gardening but also animal care, forest experiences, and rural cultural activities. In South Korea, the Act on the Research, Development, and Promotion of Care Farming (Care Farming Act) was enacted and enforced on March 25, 2021.What distinguishes care farming from ordinary farming is that it aims not at the production of agricultural products per se, but at the recovery of body and mind. Programmed activities planned as care farming are provided for the purpose of health recovery and the promotion of happiness. Thus, care farming assists a broad range of people, from the general public needing daily health management to those requiring specialized treatment and care. Concretely, its target extends from those experiencing work stress or health problems to those in need of professional help for mental illness or depression, learning disabilities, addiction issues, and difficulties with social adjustment. Through agricultural activities, participants can gain diverse benefits such as health recovery, the formation of social relationships, and educational growth.[Care Farming Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]The primary resources of care farms include plants, animals, non-farming activities, and natural landscapes. Plant resources encompass all crops and horticultural plants, including grains, fruit trees, vegetables, and flowers directly cultivated by the farm operator. Utilizing these plant resources, creative activities such as topiary (the act or work of trimming and shaping naturally growing plants into various forms for aesthetic effect) and mini gardens are organized for therapeutic purposes. Animal resources broadly include dogs, horses, and livestock such as hamsters, rabbits, sheep, and goats, as well as fish, reptiles, birds, and insects. At domestic care farms, programs such as feeding sheep and cattle and food processing experiences are operated. Non-farming activities include cooking, crafts, tea ceremonies, creative activities, wellness food, rural cultural experiences, and agricultural product processing. Natural landscapes include village forests for forest experiences and walks, stone walls, roads, streams, scenic viewpoints, and seasonal landscapes.The core value of care farming is to utilize the functions of agriculture in diverse ways and to practice health management centered on local communities. All agriculture-related resources are utilized for the expansion of welfare services provided in rural areas, which include diverse services such as rehabilitation support, treatment programs, and lifelong education. For care farming to be effectively conducted, cooperation among farm operators, health and welfare institutions, and participants is essential. As a result of mutual cooperation, social burdens such as medical expenses can be reduced through the promotion of national health. Additionally, new sources of income can be created for rural areas, making the sustainable development of agriculture and rural communities possible. Furthermore, care farming is emerging as a solution to the challenges of modern society, in which aging is intensifying and mental health issues are gradually increasing. As it provides a new form of welfare services for the weary modern person, care farming is set to draw attention as an important alternative for the city and the countryside, for the individual and society, going forward. by Editor O

12/16/2025

KEYWORD 07

Shared Socioeconomic Pathways

Climate change scenarios refer to scenarios that analyze and predict how climate change will progress in the future. Their types broadly include RCP Scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways), SRES (Special Report on Emissions Scenarios), and the SSP to be introduced this time. SSP scenarios are an acronym for Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. In 2021, while preparing the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Sixth Assessment Report, the international community developed the SSP scenarios (Shared Socioeconomic Pathways), a new type of climate change scenario. The SSP scenarios improved upon the existing RCP scenario approach, which focused on calculating greenhouse gas concentrations, by considering the following two factors together. The first is radiative forcing — the amount of energy accumulating on Earth as of 2100 expressed in numerical terms — and the second is socioeconomic factors. [SSP Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]Here, socioeconomic factors specifically include how well greenhouse gas reduction policies are being implemented and whether climate change adaptation measures are being carried out. Based on this information, SSP scenarios predict and analyze how future socioeconomic structures will change. Rather than simply calculating the amount of greenhouse gases to be emitted to Earth, these are scenarios that show how society will change depending on how it responds to greenhouse gas reduction policies and adaptation measures. In the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (2021), SSP scenarios are broadly composed of four types — SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5 — and are commonly used in combination with RCP scenarios. Like the RCP scenario, the numbers following SSP1 refer to radiative forcing as of 2100. SSP1-2.6 assumes that fossil fuel use is minimized through the development of renewable energy technologies and that environmentally sustainable economic growth will be achieved. It projects carbon dioxide concentrations to reach 432 ppm by 2100. SSP2-4.5 envisions a case where climate change mitigation and socioeconomic development are at intermediate levels, forecasting carbon dioxide concentrations at 567 ppm.SSP3-7.0 envisions a case where climate change mitigation policies are passive and technological development is slow, leading to a social structure vulnerable to climate change, predicting carbon dioxide concentrations at 834 ppm. SSP5-8.5 focuses on rapid development of industrial technology and assumes reckless urban-centered expansion of development and high fossil fuel use. In this case, carbon dioxide concentrations are predicted at 1,089 ppm. The advantage of combining RCP scenarios with SSP scenarios for analysis is that climate change can be predicted based on specific greenhouse gas concentration pathways according to specific socioeconomic pathways. In this way, through climate change scenario analysis, the risks that climate change will bring in the future can be well understood, and on this basis, damage can be minimized. by Editor O

12/11/2025

KEYWORD 08

Special Report on Emissions Scenarios

SRES is one of the types of climate change scenarios for evaluating the impact of climate change on the future, and is an acronym for Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. The SRES is a climate change scenario introduced in the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Third Assessment Report (2000) and also used in the Fourth Assessment Report (2007). [SRES Ⓟ ESG.ONL/ESG Today]The SRES broadly covers factors that influence future greenhouse gas emissions, such as population, economy, and technological development. It is a method of first setting the types of social and economic factors and then determining greenhouse gas concentrations through the scenarios calculated accordingly. The SRES, which has thus evolved into a total of 40 scenarios, classifies all scenarios into six categories: A1F1, A1B, A1T, A2, B1, and B2.For example, the A1B scenario presented in the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report AR4 is a balanced scenario among the scenarios, evaluated as the most realistic, and its application cases are increasing. It is a scenario premised on a world that is integrated and undergoes rapid social and economic growth but uses fossil fuels and eco-friendly energy in balance. The SRES also has its limitations. While the annual average carbon dioxide emission growth rate in the 1990s was 1.1%, it increased to an annual average of 3% between 2000 and 2009, surpassing the values predicted by 35 of the 40 SRES scenarios. In 2010, greenhouse gas emissions increased by 6% from 2009, making the situation more severe than the worst-case SRES scenario had predicted.While the SRES was evaluated as having improved considerably over the previous IS92 scenarios, because it is impossible to perfectly account for all social, economic, and environmental aspects, uncertainties inevitably exist. Accordingly, it was replaced by the more sophisticated RCP Scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways) through the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report in 2014. by Editor O

12/04/2025

‹1…3 4 5…13 ›

Loading Data

Please wait a moment...