Hej Max,

jag känner stor deltagande med beslutsfattares dilemma om AP-fonderna investeringar. Å enna sidan vill människor ha sin pension trygg å andra sida inte såga planeten vi hänger på. 

Faktum är dock att miljardbelopp investeringar i företag som bidrar till skövling av regnskog, stora klimatbovar och verksamheter som bidrar till kränkningar av de mänskliga rättigheterna.

Det verkar för mig som dagens interna Etikråd har inte lyckats förhindra problematiska och kränkande investeringar. Om så är fallet, bör inte ett oberoende råd inrättas som ska bistå vid granskning av investeringar och utvärdering av måluppfyllelse, där från civilsamhället, finanssektorn och den akademiska världen bör ingå?

Mitt backgrund för detta förslag är det som framförs i denna utdrag hur António Guterres remarks to the Economist Sustainability Summit den 21 March 2022

”You have kindly invited me to speak on the topic of “Keeping 1.5 Alive”. 

Well, there is no kind way to put it: The 1.5-degree goal is on life support. It is in intensive care. And we must tell it like it is. 

Yes, we saw at COP 26 Commitments To encourage International Financial Institutions to consider climate vulnerabilities in their support, including Special Drawing Rights.  

Just two weeks ago, the IPCC confirmed that half of humanity is already living in the danger zone.

Small island nations, least developed countries and poor and vulnerable people everywhere, are one climate shock away from doomsday.  

In our globally connected world, no country and no corporation, can insulate itself from these levels of chaos. 

Ladies and gentlemen,

If we continue with more of the same, we can kiss 1.5 goodbye. Even 2 degrees may be out of reach. And that would be catastrophe. So what do we do about it?

Those in the private sector still financing coal must be held to account. Their support for coal not only could cost the world its climate goals. It’s a stupid investment – leading to billions in stranded assets. And it’s time to end fossil fuel subsidies and stop the expansion of oil and gas exploration. 

But even the most ambitious action will not erase the fact that the situation is already bad. In many cases, and many places, it is irreversibly bad. That is why adaptation and mitigation must be pursued with equal force and urgency.  

This means bankable, ready-to-go projects that protect people and communities that are most vulnerable to extreme weather events – and ensuring the finance is available and accessible to deliver them. 

I have called on all donors and technical partners to work with the governments of these countries and the United Nations to identify projects and programmes and fund them. 

All of this puts the focus on finance. 

We need enormous increases to realize this transition and to invest in adaptation and resilience. That means public finance, blended finance and private finance.

On the public finance side, wealthier countries must finally make good on the $100 billion climate finance commitment – in 2022 -- to developing countries. International financial institutions must give greater priority to this. 

On blended finance, those institutions must partner with private finance for joint investments or give guarantees that will attract much greater volumes of private investment. More creative risk-taking and innovation is needed to unlock the trillions the transition desperately needs. 

On the private side, we need to see far more investment in the net-zero and climate-resilient transition of emerging economies. It is the right thing to do – and the profitable thing to do. 

Ladies and gentlemen,  

Finally, let me say that all this is happening in the context of a cauldron of challenges, especially for the most vulnerable. 

Recovery from COVID is scandalously uneven. 

Developing countries are getting slammed with record inflation, interest rate hikes and looming debt burdens. 

And the fallout from Russia’s war in Ukraine risks upending global food and energy markets -- with major implications for the global climate agenda. 

As major economies pursue an “all-of-the-above” strategy to replace Russian fossil fuels, short-term measures might create long-term fossil fuel dependence and close the window to 1.5 degrees. 

Countries could become so consumed by the immediate fossil fuel supply gap that they neglect or knee-cap policies to cut fossil fuel use. This is madness. Addiction to fossil fuels is mutually assured destruction. 

Dear friends, 

So how do we keep 1.5 alive? 

By driving a swift and transformative increase in climate finance with multilateral development banks leading on unlocking the trillions that we know are needed.”

Mot denna backgrund, är det inte nödvändig att införa hållbarhetskrav för Sjätte och Sjunde AP-fonden?

Processen med skarpa och tydliga regelverk även för Sjätte och Sjunde AP-fonderna har avstannat och behöver skyndas på.

José Almeida
Garpenberg