We evaluate project impacts and key project details against industry standards to identify the environmental and social benefits of bond-financed activities. We also assess the degree to which the issuer has made this information readily available in the public domain. Kestrel Data is 100% original and independently developed.
Our methodology describes how we arrive at our impact scores. It is informed by the following primary sources:
The United States of America nationally determined contribution (NDC) in line with Article 4 of the Paris Agreement1
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report2
Project Drawdown Framework for Climate Solutions
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
United Nations Environment Program Finance Initiative
Financial Stability Board’s Task-Force on Climate-related
Financial Disclosures
Science-based Targets Initiative
International Capital Market Association (ICMA) Green Bond
Principles and Social Bond Principles
Climate Bonds Initiative Standard and Certification Scheme
EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities
EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030
Envision sustainable design protocols established by the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Institute for Sustainable
Infrastructure at Harvard University
Kestrel has distilled five overarching sustainable finance goals from the broad principles established in these studies, plans, and initiatives.
In every sector, there are ways to decarbonize and best practices to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our data reveals the presence or absence of these best practices which indicate if financed activities are transition-aligned.
Infrastructure can be designed for resilience to diverse risks such as coastal inundation, flooding, severe weather events, drought, wildfire and biodiversity loss.
The UN has declared a biodiversity state of emergency. Depletion and lack of stewardship of water, soil, air, plants, and animals is widespread and intimately linked to the changing climate. Ecosystem services, food security, human health, and community well-being all hinge on sound and restorative management of natural resources.
Inequalities are present in many forms in the US and will continue to incite hardships without comprehensive changes to policies and activities prioritized for financing. Those with the fewest resources are most at-risk from climate change impacts. Large and small actions can improve social equity.
Transparency ensures accountability to constituents and investors alike. Without adequate disclosure regarding financed activities and intentionality of those activities against sustainability targets, it is impossible to collaboratively overcome society’s most pressing challenges. The long-term sustainability (durability) of the bond-financed infrastructure in the face of changing conditions, and the issuer’s efforts to plan for and mitigate those risks on the bond-financed activities are material for reasonable market participants to consider.
Kestrel evaluates the environmental and social characteristics of bond-financed activities for alignment with the five sustainable finance goals. Our research includes: a review of the offering documents, reviews of publicly available information from the issuer and other reputable sources, and our own independent research.
Our ESG evaluation framework is built around the concept of materiality. The sector- and sub-sector-specific material factors we consider are a result of deep understandings we’ve formed from over 20 years of consulting with state and local governments on sustainable infrastructure and best practices for multiple benefits, including social equity. Our methodology reflects the understanding that the potential for positive environmental and social impact can vary greatly depending on the sector and sub-sector.
We use a sector-specific evaluation path to assess bond-financed activities on each Series. For E and S Impact Scores, each sector or sub-sector has a baseline score which increases or decreases based on the presence of positive or negative material factors, respectively. Positive material factors represent sector-specific best practices.
The G score reflects the issuer’s transparency and disclosure when it comes to the bond-financed activities. Because the G score represents the availability and quality of relevant information about the bond-financed activities, it also reflects Kestrel’s degree of confidence on the E score and S score.
Kestrel ESG Impact Data is 100% original and independently developed, built on Kestrel Verifiers’ foundation as the market leader for external reviews and authority on Green and Social Bonds in US public finance. Our data is backed by the quality and integrity we have brought to our government clients for more than 20 years.
Please contact us for access to the complete Methodology document and for access to additional Criteria information.
Integrity is a core value of our company, and we strive for excellence. We adhere to a comprehensive set of best practices designed to remove bias, ensure checks and balances, and consistency in our ESG data. Our analysts follow strict procedures, guided by our proprietary software to ensure a consistent scoring methodology. Our robust quality assurance and quality control procedures employ both automated methods within our software as well as experienced auditors and committee reviews to ensure data integrity.
Criteria
Our criteria is developed by incorporating real-world best practices in sustainability, social equity and climate-action. These criteria are grouped into categories and align with our five overarching goals which underscore Kestrel’s evaluation approach to communicate what’s material in bond-financed activities.
Roads, Highways, Tunnels and Bridges K-12 Public Schools
Criteria below are available to data subscribers. Please contact us for a demo or to start a conversation.
Airports Power Sector
Charter Schools Public Transit
Drinking Water Stormwater
Healthcare Wastewater
Housing