Your weekly guide to Sustainable Investment

Robert Rubinstein 

This is an adaptation from the upcoming book, "Radical Truth." Think your network needs to hear this? Share it. Let's start a real conversation.

You ever notice how rich people have invented an entirely new way to feel good about themselves while doing absolutely nothing? It’s called “impact investing.” Beautiful term, isn’t it? Two words that individually make sense but together create the perfect smokescreen for what’s really going on.

Imagine a room full of people wearing $5,000 suits and $20,000 watches, sipping champagne., The conversation centers on how they’re going to “save the world” with their money. Welcome to the Impact Mafia.

The Birth of a Beautiful Scam

Remember the good old days when rich people just admitted they were greedy bastards? “Yeah, I want more money because I like mansions and yachts.” At least there was some honesty there. But somewhere in the early 2000s, someone brilliant came up with a fantastic idea: “What if we could make even MORE money while convincing everyone—including ourselves—that we’re actually saints?”

And thus, impact investing was born. Call it what it is: lipstick on a leveraged grenade; or regular investing, but with a veneer of sanctimony.

The Impact Mafia didn’t just appear overnight. It evolved, like some kind of financial parasite that discovered it could live longer if it convinced its host it was actually beneficial. First, there was philanthropy—just giving money away. But that had a fatal flaw: you didn’t get the money back. Then came ESG investing—considering Environmental, Social, and Governance factors in investment decisions. But that was hardly a subject that would generate attention at cocktail parties.

So the final form emerged: impact investing. It’s the perfect win-win situation. What could be better than making investments that supposedly have a measurable positive impact on society or the environment, while increasing corporate value . You can feel like Mother Teresa while acting like Gordon Gekko.

The Networking Ballet

Here’s how the Impact Mafia works. First, you need a network. Not just any network—an EXCLUSIVE network. These networks have fancy names: “The Global Impact Alliance,” “Transformative Capital Coalition,” “Future Positive Investors, GIIN (Global Impact Investing Network), Nexus, The Impact Office, The Impact, Creo, Toniic, PYM, Twist, and many others. ” They sound like superhero teams, but they function more like country clubs. The first rule of Impact Club? Tell EVERYONE about Impact Club.

The networking events are something to behold. Picture this: a beautiful resort in some exotic location—Davos, perhaps, or a private island in the Caribbean. The carbon footprint just to get everyone there could heat a small town for winter, but don’t worry—they’ve “offset” it by paying someone not to cut down trees they weren’t going to cut down anyway.

At these events, the Impact Mafia members engage in an elaborate mating dance. They float around the room, dropping phrases like “catalytic capital,” “blended finance,” and “theory of change.” like they’re sprinkling holy water on the uninitiated. At the end of the festivities, they exchange business cards and promise to “circle back” about “synergistic opportunities.”

The Three Step Method: Talk, Talk, and More Talk

The Impact Mafia has perfected a three step process:

1. Talk about investing

2. Talk about investing some more

3. Talk about someone else investing first

They’ve created an entire industry around TALKING about impact investing. Conferences, white papers, podcasts, TED talks, books, consulting firms, university centers, awards ceremonies. They’ve built more infrastructure around talking about impact investing than actual infrastructure for the people they claim to be helping!

And the beauty of it? Talking feels like doing something. After a passionate panel discussion about “unlocking capital for climate solutions,” they genuinely believe they’ve moved the needle. “We raised awareness!” they’ll tell you, as if awareness pays the bills for people living without electricity.

The Catch-22: After You! No, After You!

But here’s where the true genius of the Impact Mafia reveals itself: the perfect Mexican standoff where nobody has to actually invest.

“I’d love to invest in your clean water project for rural communities! Have any of the other members invested yet?”

“Not yet, but they’re all very interested!”

“Great! Let me know when they commit, and I’ll definitely consider it seriously!”

Translation: “I’m not going first, sucker.”

It’s the ultimate game of financial chicken. Everyone wants the social credit for being an “impact investor,” but nobody wants to make the first move. Because what if—and here’s the terrifying thought that keeps the Impact Mafia up at night—what if they actually LOSE MONEY on a deal?

So they’ve developed this brilliant system: only invest if someone else already has. But since everyone operates on this principle, almost nothing gets funded, and they can all blame each other for the lack of action.

“I was ready to write the check! But you know how it is, we needed to see some validation from the rest of the network…”

Meanwhile, the entrepreneurs with actual solutions? They’re doing endless roadshows, pitching the same impact investors over and over, caught in an endless loop of “very interesting, keep us updated.”

Read full article 

#PostGrowth #BeyondGrowth #RadicalTruth #EconomicTransformation #Degrowth #WellbeingEconomy #NewEconomy

👉 Follow Robert Rubinstein for more

This is an adaptation from the upcoming book, "Radical Truth." Think your network needs to hear this? Share it. Let's start a real conversation.

‘Fossil fuel giants finally in the crosshairs’: Cop30 avoids total failure with last-ditch deal

Cop30 president Andre Correa do Lago (C) as negotiations continue. Photograph: Pablo Porciúncula/AFP/Getty Images

ByFiona Harvey in Belem

Dawn was breaking over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, but in the windowless conference room it could have been day or night. They had been stuck there for more than 12 hours, dozens of ministers representing 17 groups of countries, from the poorest on the planet to the richest, urged by the Brazilian hosts to accept a settlement cooked up the day before.

Tempers were short, the air thick as the sweaty and exhausted delegates faced up to reality: there would not be a deal here in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference would end in abject failure.

The sticking point was fossil fuels. As science has told us for well over a century, the carbon dioxide that burning them produces is heating up the planet, now to dangerous levels.

But in more than 30 years of annual climate meetings, the need for that to halt has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago, at Cop28 in Dubai, to “transition away from fossil fuels”. Delegates from the Arab Group of 22 nations, from Russia, and from a sprinkling of others, were determined it would not happen again.

A growing number of countries, however, were equally determined that progress on this was urgently necessary. They had come up with a plan, which was gathering more and more support, and they made it clear they were prepared to dig in.

Meanwhile, developing countries desperately wanted to move forward on securing the money that would help them cope with the already disastrous impacts of extreme weather.

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were ready to walk out and force a collapse. “It was on the edge for us,” said Ed Miliband, the UK energy minister. “I was prepared to walk away.”

The breakthrough, when it came, was with Saudi Arabia. Soon after 6am, Miliband and the EU climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, split from the main group to hold a private conversation with the chief Saudi negotiator, Khalid Abuleif. They pressed on him wording that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to “transition away from fossil fuels” made two years ago in Dubai. Rather than explicitly namecheck fossil fuels, it would refer to “the UAE consensus”, the name given to the Cop28 deal.

Khalid agreed to take it away and reflect. Ministers around the room held out little hope – Saudi had been obdurate all night.

An hour later, he returned. To great surprise, the wording was accepted. The room collapsed into relief. Applause rang out. The deal was done.

With the “Belém political package”, the world took another small step towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a faltering, inadequate step, and one that will barely interrupt the climate’s steady march towards catastrophe. But a significant departure from total inaction nonetheless.

Alongside the oblique commitment in the legally agreed text of the deal, countries will begin work on a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels, but this will be largely a voluntary initiative, led by Brazil, that will report back next year. Addressing the cuts in greenhouse gas emissions needed in order for the world to stay within the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year. Developing countries secured a tripling to $120bn of annual finance to help them adapt to the impacts of extreme weather, but that sum will not be delivered in full until 2035. Workers will benefit from a “just transition mechanism” to help people working in high-carbon industries to shift to the clean economy, but commitments to include “critical minerals” – needed for renewable energy components, but whose extraction has been dogged by human rights abuses – were excised, at the behest of China and Russia.

As the world teeters on the brink of climate “tipping points” that could destroy ecosystems and plunge whole regions into chaos, it was not the “giant leap” needed. “Cop30 gave us some baby steps in the right direction, but considering the scale of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion,” warned Mohamed Adow, director of the Power Shift Africa thinktank.

This flawed deal might have been all that was possible, given the geopolitical headwinds – a US president who shunned the talks and is wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

“The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were finally in the crosshairs at Cop30,” says Louise Hutchins, convener at the Make Polluters Pay coalition. “There is no turning back on that. The political space is open. Now we must turn it into a real fire escape to a safer world.”

But while nations were able to applaud the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also revealed deep fissures in the only global process for tackling the climate crisis. “Cops are consensus-based, and in a period of geopolitical divides, consensus is ever harder to reach,” said António Guterres, the UN secretary general. “I cannot pretend that Cop30 has delivered everything that is needed. The gap between where we are and what science demands remains dangerously wide.”

If the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate breakdown, the UN climate talks alone will not be nearly enough.

Read full article

Impact investors welcome COP30 finance accelerator to drive farmland restoration

 

Karolina Adamkiewicz 

Nine countries have backed the Brazil-led RAIZ accelerator that aims to galvanise public and private sector investment for the restoration of degraded farmland.

Last week, nine countries announced they would back the launch of the ‘Resilient Agriculture Investment for Net-Zero Land Degradation’ (RAIZ) accelerator that will assist participating governments to unlock and strategically allocate public and private investment for the restoration of degraded agricultural land at scale.

The announcement was made at a ministerial meeting at the COP30 climate summit in Belém, where the Brazil-led initiative received the support of the governments of Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, Norway, Peru and the UK.

The accelerator, which is modelled on the Green Way and Eco Invest initiative in Brazil, aims to address the widescale degradation of the world’s farmland to strengthen food security, tackle climate breakdown, and protect biodiversity.

It is designed as a technical assistance facility to help governments and financial partners co-design tailored financing solutions at national level and will be hosted by the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAPA) in partnership with several international organisations, including the Food and Land Use Coalition (FOLU).

Morgan Gillespy, executive director of FOLU, told Impact Investor that RAIZ will support countries that express interest in receiving the RAIZ service offering.

“We will continue to liaise with interested countries and directly engage those with significant rates of farmland degradation and potential for restoration to explore opportunities for collaboration,” he said, explaining that the objective is to support six countries, representing around 30% of degraded farmland, by 2030.

Asked by this publication whether the initiative was a positive signal for impact investors, Agustín Vitórica, co-founder and co-CEO of GAWA Capital, the Madrid-based impact investor, said: “An initiative like RAIZ sends a strong signal to the impact investing market that restoring degraded agricultural land is now a political priority and a compelling opportunity for impact investors, rather than a niche topic.”

Paul McMahon, managing partner at natural real assets investor SLM Partners, also welcomed the initiative but told Impact Investor that the challenge will be in seeing how this type of high-level, inter-governmental initiative translates into action on the ground.

“There is often a big gap between the noble aspirations of UN conventions and the realities of farming and land use across the world,” he said.

 

Read full article

Florida AG Sues Glass Lewis, ISS for Pushing “ESG Agenda” in Proxy Voting Recommendations

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced the filing of a new legal action against proxy advisory firms Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), claiming that the firms violated consumer protection and antitrust laws by jointly pushing an “ESG agenda” through their activities.

The new lawsuit forms the latest in a series of actions by anti-ESG politicians in the U.S., which has increasingly focused on the proxy advisory firms in the past few months. In September, for example, Texas AG Ken Paxton launched an investigation into the companies for allegedly “issuing voting recommendations that advance radical political agendas rather than sound financial principles,” and SEC Chair Paul Atkins recently warned of plans to examine and propose actions focused on the role of proxy advisory firms over the “weaponization of shareholder proposals by politicized shareholder activists.”

In a statement announcing new suit, the Florida AG alleges that the proxy firms “misled Florida consumers, abused their dominance over the shareholder-voting market, and weaponized their influence to impose an ideological agenda on American companies and Florida retirees.”

Uthmeier said:

“Florida is done allowing two unaccountable foreign-owned private corporations to manipulate shareholder votes behind closed doors. ISS and Glass Lewis claim to be neutral advisors, but they use their near-total control of the proxy-voting market to push divisive political mandates that threaten retiree savings, distort corporate governance, and undermine the rule of law. That ends today.”

Read full article