Editor’s choice
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has influenced how investors categorize sustainable investments.
More precisely, an invasion has been used as an excuse to label investments in companies supplying weapons used in self-defense to fight against Russian aggression as socially sustainable since they are a tool helping democracy to repel the invasion of the non-democratic counterpart. Suddenly, the weapons industry started becoming an entirely acceptable sustainable investment asset. This demonstrated that weapons are not the cause but only the result of flawed sustainable investing thinking, which can sometimes be based on ideas that vary widely in terms of consistency and accuracy.
This paper discusses some of the reasons underlining systematic problems in the sustainable finance realm and lists why defensive weapons can never be classified as an acceptable asset to invest in.
Project / Stockholm Sustainable Finance Centre (SSFC) aimed to have a transformative impact on sustainable finance in Sweden and beyond.
Other publication / Mistra Geopolitics research shows if the EU proposal on due diligence were to be adopted, it would weaken recent human rights and environmental regulation.
Feature / Ukraine and Sweden collaborate on green transition, aligning policies for sustainability, EU accession and post-war economic resilience.
Project / This evaluation it's about measuring impact and shaping the future of conservation and sustainable development in one of the world’s most critical ecosystems
