{"id":54592,"date":"2026-08-22T17:30:29","date_gmt":"2026-08-22T15:30:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.turner.nl\/uncategorized\/three-perspectives-on-esg-guidance-or-mandate\/"},"modified":"2026-08-22T17:30:44","modified_gmt":"2026-08-22T15:30:44","slug":"three-perspectives-on-esg-guidance-or-mandate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.turner.nl\/en\/financial-services\/three-perspectives-on-esg-guidance-or-mandate\/","title":{"rendered":"Three Perspectives on \u201cESG: Guidance or Mandate\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\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
\n\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\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

Three Perspectives on \u201cESG: Guidance or Mandate\u201d<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Signing the Climate Commitment was a significant step forward for the financial sector in 2019, but it cannot stop there if we want to contribute to substantial change in our world. Under the theme \u201cEnvironmental, Social, and Governance (ESG): Relief or Obligation?\u201d, Turner FD invited three speakers: Rens van Tilburg, director of the Sustainable Finance Lab; Piet Sprengers, sustainability manager at ASN Bank; and Sandra Schoonhoven, Lead Climate Risk Initiative at ING. Each of them, from their own unique perspective, inspires our clients to take further action in this area.

\u201cThe Marker Wadden project came about by thinking differently, but also by collaborating with unexpected partners.\u201d When Roel Posthoorn, the initiator and project director of the Marker Wadden, takes the floor, the line of thinking is clear: thinking differently, letting go of the old and familiar\u2014the energy transition demands a lot, especially from the financial sector. Drawing on its own expertise, Turner FD is keenly aware of the importance of the associated ESG criteria and looks forward to exploring the opportunities this presents together with the invited guests. In the hold of the stately three-masted schooner Willem Barentsz\u2014built in 1931 as a cargo ship that sailed the Baltic Sea, among other places\u2014leading figures from the financial sector are discussing how the sector will contribute to the energy transition.

Rens van Tilburg: \u201cIt\u2019s no longer business as usual\u201d<\/strong>
As director of the Sustainable Finance Lab (SLB), which was founded 12 years ago by Herman Wijffels, Rens van Tilburg aims to bridge the gap between academia and decision-makers. With the SLB, he wants above all to look ahead to the energy transition and initiate the conversation. <\/em>

\u201cDoes the financial sector really matter? That\u2019s a crucial question today,\u201d Van Tilburg begins. Traditionally, the prevailing view was that it did not. His goal is to \u201cshare a few thoughts with the audience, without offering any clear-cut answers.\u201d \u201cI\u2019m not a politician or an NGO; I don\u2019t know anything about sustainability,\u201d he was often told by the sector in the past. But that has changed significantly in recent years. \u201cIt\u2019s the place where decisions are made about who does or doesn\u2019t get the money to make their dream a reality,\u201d he explains. \u201cSo you are, in fact, steering the direction the world is heading.\u201d

In this context, he refers to an in-depth study by economist Carlota Perez. She discovered that whenever a major new technology emerges, a certain pattern emerges. \u201cThe financial sector plays a crucial role in this. A new technology emerges, but existing companies have no interest in using it. They\u2019re making plenty of money with the existing technology. But then it\u2019s precisely the financial sector that recognizes that this new technology offers new opportunities.\u201d

Van Tilburg believes the sector can take the lead now as well. \u201cOne thing we know for sure: the world isn\u2019t going to stay the way it is. Either something drastic will change and we\u2019ll face physical risks, or\u2014let\u2019s hope\u2014it will begin the transition. But if you invest in the wrong direction, you\u2019re going to lose a lot of money. There\u2019s no such thing as business as usual. You can\u2019t keep doing things the way you\u2019ve been doing them. You have to think about how to do things differently.\u201d

And that\u2019s also what the legislature is calling for, he emphasizes. The CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) and SFDR (Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation)\u2014these are the regulations coming from Europe that I know many of you are already dreading. My prediction is: you haven\u2019t seen anything yet<\/em>. There\u2019s much more on the way from Europe.\u201d In this context, he points out the great importance of double materiality: examining sustainability issues from two perspectives under the CSRD. \u201cHow will these transitions affect me as a bank or insurer? That\u2019s when you see the conversation shifting. How will your actions ultimately impact those transitions\u2014and, by extension, systemic risk? That\u2019s something regulators are going to be looking at more and more.\u201d

Piet Sprengers: \u201cChoices, choices, choices\u201d<\/strong>
As a \u201csustainability advocate\u201d at ASN Bank, Piet Sprengers is committed to ensuring that money has a positive impact on sustainability. As far as he\u2019s concerned, the focus of sustainability efforts should be not on feasibility, but on what is necessary. <\/em>

\u201cThe Marker Wadden is the metaphor for this day,\u201d argues Piet Sprengers. As a biologist by training, he observes that with the construction of the Afsluitdijk, we once \u201cdestroyed a gigantic ecosystem, but that thanks to the creation of the Marker Wadden, we have at least made amends in some way.\u201d That restoration of nature has everything to do with values and principles. In this context, he points to the 1987 <\/em>report *A Common Future* <\/em>by Gro Harlem Brundtland, which first introduced the concept of sustainability as we use it today. \u201cBrundtland\u2019s definition is: \u2018It\u2019s fine to ensure your own prosperity, but that must not come at the expense of others\u2019 prosperity.\u2019\u201d

Because this is normative, Sprenger argues, it is not self-evident. \u201cIt\u2019s a choice that\u2019s been made. Sustainability is a definition of prosperity. Every form of prosperity we create comes with a negative impact. The fact that we\u2019re sitting here on this boat\u2014with pen and paper, sandwiches\u2014all of that has a negative impact on the biosphere. The crux of the matter is: can nature bear that negative impact? Is it flexible enough to absorb it? We know that nature can indeed absorb that negative impact, but only within certain limits: the planetary boundaries.\u201d

\u201cIt would therefore be great if we knew exactly when all economic activities fall within those limits,\u201d says Sprengers. \u201cThat\u2019s the challenge: to use methods to measure and calculate whether we, as financial institutions\u2014with all the activities we finance\u2014are staying within those limits.\u201d He believes the financial sector has a major role to play in achieving this. \u201cThat sector holds the keys to how we could structure our society. I would like to see us\u2014as banks, pension funds, and insurers\u2014make those choices.\u201d In my view, it\u2019s first and foremost about making choices we\u2019re not making right now. We\u2019re profiting from things we know are bad for that normative framework. We really need to move away from that.\u201d

To operate within that normative framework, we will need to set objectives. The question is whether we should aim for achievable or necessary objectives, Sprengers notes. \u201cWe really can\u2019t say with certainty right now that we\u2019ll actually achieve an objective we set for 2040 or 2050. But that\u2019s not the point! Is it about achieving the objectives that are necessary to reach that normative framework of sustainable development, or is it about achieving objectives that are attainable? As in: we tried everything. The world has come to an end, but at least we achieved our attainable objectives.\u201d

As far as he\u2019s concerned, it\u2019s not a dilemma at all\u2014a term he doesn\u2019t understand anyway. \u201cA dilemma is nothing more than a choice that hasn\u2019t been made. It remains a dilemma as long as you cling to two alternatives. I hear that word far too often. It illustrates that we aren\u2019t making the choices. Choices, choices, choices<\/em>\u2014that will be the mantra of the future. And adapt, adapt, adapt<\/em>. Because nature is getting tired of constantly adapting to us. It\u2019s not going to do that, so we\u2019ll have to adapt to nature. And to do that, we\u2019ll have to make choices.\u201d

Sandra Schoonhoven: \u201cEnlightenment Through Obligation\u201d<\/strong>
As head of sustainability and lead of the climate risk initiative, Sandra Schoonhoven works strategically at ING to help both employees and customers increase the impact of sustainability.<\/em>

\u201cOur theme is \u2018Enlightenment or Obligation,\u2019 but I see it differently,\u201d says Sandra Schoonhoven, who, as the final speaker, wants to make the story \u201cmore relatable and pragmatic.\u201d \u201cI actually think it\u2019s enlightenment through obligation. That the obligation imposed on the financial sector\u2014but really on the whole world\u2014will truly pave the way for that next step: enlightenment.\u201d \u201cBut we still have to get through a crisis, one that is partly caused by that obligation,\u201d she warns. \u201cOnce we\u2019ve done that, we\u2019ll understand much better what we need to do and how we can get there. I\u2019m convinced that we\u2019ll end up in a better world\u2014both ecologically and socially.\u201d

That obligation may be enshrined in law, which means everyone will be affected by ESG. \u201cBut also the transition itself\u2014what you need to do to achieve it. How you can go from a \u2018G\u2019-rated home to an \u2018A\u2019-rated home. Or the carbon tax. But also the physical risks, such as the flooding in Limburg that we experienced firsthand two years ago. Those will have an increasingly significant impact on our lives.\u201d Legislation, the transition itself, and physical risks\u2014according to Schoonhoven, these are three elements that banks are already grappling with on a large scale.

A robust model for looking into the future and predicting what will happen to your risk profile does not yet exist, she explains. \u201cThat requires a massive effort on the part of the customers you work with as a bank. Because we don\u2019t have that data, but the customers do. CSRD, which many companies must comply with, has quite a few criteria. The obligation under that framework is the transition plan. It\u2019s not just the banks that have to do this; we depend on our clients\u2019 transition plans. One of the most important criteria we\u2019ll include in those plans is: are you at risk<\/em> or not? Nevertheless, ING has decided to start with a model based on available data, some of which was purchased. \u201cIn every sector we operate in, we\u2019ve been looking at what we can find and how they\u2019re exposed to transition and physical risks. We\u2019ve developed a model based on that with 27 different risk drivers. Consider a physical risk like water scarcity, for example\u2014that\u2019s going to hit us very hard in the Netherlands.\u201d The result is a massive heat map that shows where high- and medium-risk areas are located.

\u201cWe\u2019ve come quite a long way in bringing the organization along on this transition,\u201d Schoonhoven concludes. \u201cIn 2018, ING said: We want to measure our portfolio against the Paris Agreement goals. What methods are we going to develop for that, how should we go about it, and where do we need to go? We issued our first sustainability loan in 2017, so we\u2019re truly pioneers in this area. In that regard, the mindset is already well established. I\u2019ve noticed that, due to the obligations looming ahead of us, the process has really gained momentum. But it\u2019s now a major focus not only in our sustainability department but across many other departments as well. It is my hope and ambition to one day make the sustainability department redundant and eventually dissolve it.\u201d <\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\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

News<\/a><\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\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
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"AI