Continuous education is an important part of any professional investor’s career, particularly as times change so rapidly. Investing is changing fast, as seen with the rapid adoption of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This has put some financial professionals at a disadvantage in being able to explain the concept to clients and prospects. This module bridges that gap.
Those participating in this course are invited to digest the information and then take the test at the end. To enhance the learning experience, the module is delivered using clear language, charts, videos and case studies. Each of the six chapters takes up to 15 minutes to read.
A score of at least 10 out of 12 correct answers (80%) for the test will count as one and a half hours towards your professional CPD requirements. The educational module is already accredited by CII, CISI, FPA and lBF with more to follow.
CFA Institute allows its members the ability to self-determine and self-report professional learning credits earned from external sources. CFA Institute members are encouraged to self-document such credits in their online PL tracker.
The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals are taking sustainable investing to the next level, focusing on clearly defined objectives to transform our world, while also offering returns for investors.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are 17 objectives for improving human society, ecological sustainability and the quality of life published by the United Nations in 2015. They cover a broad spectrum of sustainability topics, ranging from eliminating hunger and combating climate change to promoting responsible consumption and making cities more sustainable.
All countries – no matter how rich or poor – have agreed to work towards achieving the 17 SDGs by 2030, thereby establishing a 15-year timeframe for progress. The goals are part of ‘Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ and are branded by the UN as "a blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all.”
Millennium Development Goals
The SDGs succeed the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), eight objectives launched in 2000. They included a commitment to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education, and combat HIV/AIDS. Developed from 2012 using a global consultation period in which more than one million people gave their inputs, the SDGs are much broader in scope – and they apply to all countries, not just those earmarked as ‘developing’.
Find out more about each goal by clicking on the UN’s interactive chart below.
The 17 goals have 169 underlying targets and 232 approved indicators, which are used to track progress towards achieving them. For example, the targets for SDG 3 (good health and well-being) aim to end premature mortality, halt the spread of communicable diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS, and promote the attainment of affordable universal health coverage. The indicators measure such factors as a country’s child mortality rate, the number of new malarial or HIV infections, and the number of people covered by health insurance.
In terms of tangible investing, health care companies can contribute to SDG 3 by developing drugs that combat certain diseases, or by improving people’s access to affordable medicines. Conversely, some companies may negatively contribute to the SDGs, by producing harmful products such as tobacco or firearms.
All 193 UN member states adopted the SDGs, and are expected to track their progress in achieving these objectives. The UN Statistics Division (UNSTATS) has primary responsibility for collecting countries’ metrics on the SDGs. These can be accessed via ‘SDG Indicators’, the UN’s Global SDG Database.1
Other initiatives are helping to monitor progress. The online publication SDG Tracker was launched in June 2018 and backed by Our World in Data – a joint project between the University of Oxford and the non-governmental organization Global Change Data Lab.2 It collects data on all indicators relevant to the SDGs.
Another project is the Global SDG Index and Dashboards Report. The SDG Index does more than track performance with respect to all 17 goals; it also ranks countries in terms of their achievements, thereby facilitating comparisons. This annual publication is co-produced by Bertelsmann Stiftung, a foundation run by the German Bertelsmann media group, and the UN’s Sustainable Development Solutions Network.3
Check out how your region is performing on any one of the 17 goals by clicking on the interactive chart below.
The sheer scale and diversity of the indicators makes tracking progress a difficult task. Statisticians struggle with obtaining data as numerous indicators are not compiled regularly. Others have problems creating methodologies for indicators that are not mainstream. Even the richest countries have shown significant gaps in their ability to track progress.4
Companies also face challenges in measuring their contributions to the SDGs. The investment process of asset managers including Robeco, offers a solution in this regard as it has strategies to target these objectives. This is discussed more fully in Chapter 3. However, a lot more needs to happen in order to achieve the SDGs, including the core issue of funding.
Estimates vary widely for how much funding is needed to meet all 17 goals by 2030. The UN’s own estimates are between USD 5 trillion and USD 7 trillion a year. This represents 7-10% of global GDP and 25-40% of annual global investment at 2014 levels. However, only about half of that amount is currently being invested by public and private organizations. The UN estimates the funding gap to currently be between USD 2.5 trillion and USD 3 trillion per year.5
While some progress has been made, the road ahead remains challenging. Things have been made increasingly difficult by the 2020 coronavirus crisis that saw much economic activity come to a standstill. Aside from damaging normal economic progress, it has made less money available for investing in initiatives such as the SDGs.6
Still, the SDGs have captured the world’s imagination. They have started a movement that began with the optimism that this new millennium brought for the future. As this learning module will demonstrate, there are many opportunities for investing in one or more of the goals.
And we all have a role to play, as this ‘We the People’ video, featuring some very famous faces, suggests. It’s not just governments, companies, investors or special interest groups that should be involved – it’s everyone!
In summary, you should now know how and why the 17 SDGs were created, how they became the all-embracing successor to the MDGs, the methods for measuring their success (and the challenges that this brings), and how much funding is still required to achieve these objectives.
2. https://sdg-tracker.org/; https://ourworldindata.org/about
Why then should investors place their clients’ cash into an arena that essentially targets social or development projects, rather than more established means of generating returns?
The ‘call to action’ that lies at the heart of the SDGs is that unlike most UN initiatives, the 17 goals are not just aimed at governments or NGOs, but the whole of society. It presents both a challenge and an opportunity, aimed equally at businesses and investors, who are seen as key to achieving the goals. The SDGs are unique, as it is the first time in history that a global plan has been drawn up to promote social well-being, economic development and ecological sustainability. What is more, this plan applies to all countries and involves everyone.
Subsequently, contributing to the SDGs presents a business opportunity for companies, although opinions will differ on the preferred goals to invest in. A survey by the United Nations Development Program identified the three most popular goals in Uganda as being SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG 13 (climate action) and SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities).7
All three involve infrastructure and therefore provide a physical means of measurably adding value, while also achieving clear returns. SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) was not considered very investible, but ultimately any SDG can be invested in by making the right selections. Building telecommunications equipment, for example, improves access to information – a target under SDG 16. It depends on how and where you look.
Research has shown that even though massive investment is still needed to meet the SDGs, it would also create new markets. For example, renewable energy or medicines could be sold to people who previously had no access to them. One estimate suggested this could mean as much as USD 12 trillion of market opportunities per year and that 380 million new jobs could be created, particularly in projects related to combatting climate change.8, 9
For companies and investors, the SDGs are therefore not a 'nice to have' aspect of investing, or a PR exercise, but a clear business opportunity. Indeed, the SDGs could provide companies with a future competitive advantage by being a source of innovation and by encouraging process improvements and operational efficiencies – in other words, improving returns.
Meanwhile, regulations are changing fast, and the public is increasingly demanding a more sustainable approach to business. Companies and investors that embed SDGs into their strategy will subsequently be more likely to align with present and future governmental policies and regulations. This means they would then avoid the risk of losing their license to operate, or encountering high costs resulting from structural change that is eventually forced upon them.
This in turn reduces the risks inherent in investment portfolios. At the same time, sustainably minded companies will have a positive impact on societies and the environment, ensuring a win-win scenario.
Targeting the SDGs is a form of impact investing, which is defined as "the process of intentionally making investments with the aim of creating a measurable beneficial impact on the environment or society, as well as earning a positive financial return”.10
The SDGs are a popular means of engaging in impact investing, since they provide a good framework for investors to determine the intended social and environmental impact of their chosen investment.
Intentionality, positive financial return, measurable
Impact investing has three components:
While such investment has captured the imagination of investors who want to engage in impact investing and assist progress with the SDGs, it has yet to enter the mainstream. Few of the world’s major professional investors such as pension funds currently allocate large sums to SDGs, viewing it as ‘niche’.
For example, a survey was held in 2019 by the Dutch Association of Investors for Sustainable Development, which represents about 95% of the Dutch pension savings market and has about EUR 1.36 billion in assets. It found that only 19% of its members had set targets to allocate investment cash towards the goals.11
As with the UN survey, the Dutch research showed that some SDGs were more popular investment targets than others. SDG 13 (climate action) was seen as the one offering the biggest investment opportunity, particularly as it has quantifiable targets in terms of things like CO2 emissions.
Ultimately, achieving the SDGs is in everyone’s interest. If we reach them, our planet will be more stable and less likely to face natural and manmade hazards. And if such hazards do strike, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, then investments in our economies and in people’s basic needs will make us more resilient. In other words, the SDGs can create a world in which business can flourish.
9. Business & Sustainable Development Commission, 2017. "Valuing the SDG prize". London: Business & Sustainable Development Commission.
We have seen that the SDGs present a great business opportunity, but it is important to know which companies are able to contribute to these goals before deciding whether to invest in them.
Companies can contribute to achieving the SDGs by making products or offering services that help achieve one or more of the 17 goals. Moreover, companies can advance the SDGs by integrating them into their policies. Some companies will, by nature, be more attuned to making a contribution than others.
For example, there can be no doubt that a company producing solar energy is contributing to SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy). A business creating educational materials for schools is directly contributing to SDG 4 (quality education), while a firm that actively works to promote women in leadership roles is advancing SDG 5 (gender equality).
However, some companies have negative impacts on the SDGs. This might be obvious in some cases, where harmful products such as cigarettes are produced. But other companies may contribute both positively and negatively. How to categorize, for example, an energy utility that uses both wind power and thermal coal?
Even more complex challenges arise with the creation of products or services that advance SDGs but simultaneously generate negative externalities. For example, mining metals that are crucial for the manufacture of electric cars or wind turbines, also adversely impact ecosystems and emit greenhouse gases.
The Dutch pension funds APG and PGGM manage EUR 750 billion in assets, between them, for 8.7 million people. They joined forces to develop a common approach for analyzing contributions. Their Sustainable Development Investments (SDI) Asset Owner Platform allows institutional clients to see the extent to which their portfolio investments contribute to the SDGs.12
The data is supplied by Entis – a data analytics team that APG bought from Deloitte in 2018. It uses artificial intelligence for the more advanced number crunching. The analysis is based on an SDI taxonomy that explains each SDG, and crucially defines which of its sub-goals are investible. By the end of 2018, the Entis team had analyzed an investment universe of around 10,000 listed companies.
The team then measures how much of the company’s operations contribute to these investible subgoals. They do this by using financial or operational metrics such as the proportion of revenues derived from a certain SDG-friendly activity. External metrics include outcomes such as the number of people who have access to health care or financial services as a result of a company’s activities. The example below shows the platform’s views on the investibility of SDG 14 (life below water).
The Institutional Shareholder Services group (ISS) is the world’s largest proxy advisory firm and supplies voting facilities, corporate governance and responsible investment solutions to investors. It also takes a slightly different approach. Its SDG Solutions Assessment uses 15 of its own sustainability objectives that are broadly aligned with the 17 SDGs, but have a different emphasis.
Objectives such as ‘conserving water’, ‘optimizing materials’ and ‘safeguarding peace’ are not standalone SDGs, although they appear in some sub-targets. Other objectives such as ‘ensuring health’, ‘alleviating poverty’ and ‘mitigating climate change’ are more directly correlated.13
The SDG Solutions Assessment identifies a product or service category’s contribution towards the 15 sustainability objectives. This is done according to the proportion of revenue derived from each one to arrive at ‘objective scores’. An overall SDG Solutions Score is eventually allotted, taking into account a company’s most distinct objective impacts.
The score will then fall into one of five performance categories: Significant Obstruction (-10.0 to -5.1); Limited Obstruction (-5.0 to -0.2); No Net Impact (-0.1 to 0.1); Limited Contribution (0.2 to 5.0) and Significant Contribution (5.1 to 10.0). Once these results are known, ISS is able to advise its clients about the positive or negative contribution that their portfolio is making.
The methodology uses a three-step process to ascertain companies’ sustainability credentials:
Scores are then assigned to assess a company’s overall impact. These range from +3 (highly positive) to -3 (highly negative). Once the overall score is known, Robeco can use its SDG investment products to invest in those companies that advance the SDGs.
The animated video below describes this three-step process: watch the short film to see how it works:
Once an investor has decided to take the plunge and support the SDGs, a choice of investment vehicle needs to be made, using equities, bonds, or other forms of funding.
There are many ways of investing in companies and sectors that have the potential to make a positive contribution to the SDGs. This can typically be done through equity or credit strategies that exclusively target the SDGs, or through more thematic strategies that target a theme related to the SDGs, such as renewable energy.
Relatively few investors offer strategies that target the SDGs. But, more asset managers are now considering launching such products, as demand for these kinds of bespoke strategies is growing rapidly. They do this by seeking equities or bonds of companies that are demonstrably making a positive contribution to achieving one or more of the 17 goals. As seen in Chapter 3, there are various means of identifying those companies.
Instead of taking a targeted SDG approach, some impact funds target a specific issue or theme, such as reducing plastic pollution. The investor is therefore contributing to its associated goals – in this case SDGs 11, 12, 14 and 15. This is a more focused method and therefore has different risk-adjusted return characteristics when compared to taking a broader approach.
Three examples of investment strategies that target an issue rather than a specific SDG, can be seen in themes that are gaining traction in environmental protection: renewable energy, the circular economy, and green bonds:
It is not always necessary, or even possible, to commit to an investment that would 100% contribute to an SDG. Renewable energy is a good example. Multiple solar and wind projects are operated by major energy companies, including Big Oil, as a form of diversification away from fossil fuels. Many investors therefore buy the equities or bonds of traditional oil companies as a means of contributing to their transition towards renewables.
Often, it is an issue of degree. Impact investors increasingly look at how much of a traditional company’s business is in renewables, while accepting that its core business is not compatible with this. If its renewable energy activities exceed a certain threshold, this is enough for some to consider the business as being sustainably investible. The main issue is to ensure that activities that cause ‘significant harm’ to sustainable development, are avoided.
Engaging with companies can be a powerful means of improving their ESG metrics. Not all asset managers have active ownership teams. An asset owner will often ask a potential manager if they have such a team during the procurement process, so as to ensure a voting and engagement capability for their assets.
It can be even more powerful when investors band together. In May 2020, Robeco played a role in getting a former wind power executive appointed to the board of the Italian energy company Enel, in collaboration with the Climate100+ investor initiative. He will contribute to moving Enel away from its exposure to fossil fuels and point it towards renewables, in an effort to make the company carbon neutral by 2050.
The SDGs have broadened the scope of impact investments from traditional and mostly private impact investing vehicles, such as microfinance funds or renewable energy projects, to listed equities and credits. The direct impact of investing in microfinance, which provides loans to lower income people in emerging markets, or in renewable energy, is much larger than the direct impact of investing in equity or credits.
One could argue that investing in an equity or bond does not really provide extra funding for specific impact projects, and therefore does not have ‘additionality’. On the other hand, liquidity and scalability are higher when investing in the listed space. It is possible to invest larger amounts in this arena, and if a large company moves only slightly towards sustainability, that can have a very large, direct impact too.
In short, different vehicles bring different opportunities, but also challenges for generating impact. It is up to investors to consider which investment strategy, and which combination of vehicles, will be most effective in contributing to the SDGs, while also meeting their fiduciary duty to clients.
In summary, you should now understand the different investment vehicles available for the SDGs. Some strategies target the equities and bonds of companies that can contribute to one or more of the SDGs. Others use sectoral themes such as renewable energy and the circular economy, or more subtle approaches such as green bonds and engagement. And then there is traditional investing in projects on the ground. Overall, impact investing means striking the right balance between generating an impact and achieving returns, so that impacts can be sustained in the long run.
We now know how to assess whether companies positively or negatively impact the SDGs, but measuring the impact at the sharp end of these business operations – the end users – can be much harder. Impact measurement is important, since it allows investors to know that their money is actually making a difference.
Inequality, ecosystems, climate change
The UN collects statistics from its member states to track progress in achieving each of the 17 SDGs. Five years after their adoption, these statistics paint a bleak picture: inequality is widening, hunger is on the rise, ecosystems are eroding at unprecedented rates, and climate change undermines the entire SDG Agenda.15
Despite these slow trends, there have also been more positive developments, including:
The fact that countries are progressing so slowly towards achieving the SDGs is an impetus for investors and companies to help step up the pace. And to do that, impact measurement is key.
Let’s take a step back and consider how companies impact the world. The figure below introduces a helpful framework for understanding the chain through which companies generate impact. In academic and development communities, this is referred to as a ‘theory of change’.
This framework shows the complexity of measuring impacts. While inputs, activities, and outputs are relatively easy to quantify because they are within a company’s control, outcomes and the longer-term impacts are much harder to assess, since they happen within societies.
Different impact measurement methods are available. These include robust ‘randomized control trials’ that take a Nobel Prize-winning, experimental approach to investigating what happens when some communities receive an intervention, such as microfinance, and some don’t, as well as economic modelling, surveys and case studies.16
Professor Karen Maas, Academic Director of the Impact Centre at Erasmus University Rotterdam, explains that a good starting point is to select key indicators and measure these over time. Once these indicators have been measured, investors can take the next step and “put their money to work and really help solve issues.”
The Investment Impact Framework, developed by the Investment Leaders Group of the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, has identified impact indicators that can be measured by the investment sector.17
They first divided the 17 SDGs into six themes. Then, they identified ‘ideal metrics’ as well as ‘practical metrics’ that are readily available for a representative sample of companies in the universe, through data systems such as Bloomberg. The result can be seen in the graphic below which depicts the impact indicators, using a coloring scheme to compare the impacts per USD 1 million invested to the benchmark.
Robeco has developed a means of measuring the impacts of the companies’ invested in its strategies targeting the SDGs. One example of discernible impact measurement can be seen in its Smart Materials strategy, which aids SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure), and SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production).
Electric cars have different components to those powered by petrol, not least in terms of their batteries. This requires cadmium and lithium, among other new minerals now being mass mined. Transformation materials are also creating opportunities in lasers, 3D printing and more advanced recycling – not to mention biodegradable plastics, and even parts for the human body.
Companies in the Smart Materials fund have made a difference by recycling 5,481 metric tons of materials in 2019 – the equivalent to what 26,058 people would consume in a year. Some 32,060 tons of waste was avoided – equivalent to what is normally created by 65,780 people. And those involved in reducing energy consumption, prevented 465,095 tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere – the equivalent of taking 326,605 non-electric cars off the road.18
Note: additional investments into the fund do not necessarily lead to additional or improved impacts.
The metrics stem from the 2019 impact report. Source: Robeco
1. 2017 average CO2 emissions EU 118.5 g/km; 2015 annual distance driven by car EU 12.009 km; in t CO2-eq;1,423 (source:www.eea.europa.eu;www.odyssee-mure.eu)
2. 2014 Recycling rate EU 43.6% 487kg *43.6%=0.21 tonners waste recycled per capita (source www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat).
3. 2017 EU:487 kg = 0.487 tonners waste generated per capita; in tonners; 0.487 (source: www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat).
In summary, we can see how impact measurement is important, though some of the results collected since 2015 have been disappointing, as shown by the UN’s own progress report. While impact measurement can be challenging, there are various methods and frameworks that investors can consider. And only by measuring what matters, can we move towards accelerating impacts on the SDGs.
16. See e.g. Banerjee, A., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., and Kinnan, C., 2015. “The miracle of microfinance? Evidence from a randomized evaluation”. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 7(1), 22-53.
17. Investment Leaders Group (2020). “In search of impact. Measuring the full value of capital”. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership.
18. The figures are for 2017 average CO2 emissions EU 118.5 g/km; 2015 annual distance driven by car EU 12,009 km; in t CO2-eq; 1.423 (source: www.eea.europa.eu;www.odyssee-mure.eu); 2014 Recycling rate EU 43.6% 487kg *43.6%= 0.21 tons waste recycled per capita (source: www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat); 2017 EU: 487 kg = 0.487 tons waste generated per capita; in tons; 0.487 (source: www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat). The graphic displays the resulting for holdings at 30 June 2019.
Putting ideology into practice lies at the heart of sustainable and impact investing. Different investors have differing motivations for what they hope to achieve with their money.
There are many different motivations for making contributions to the SDGs, though all professional investors should have an underlying objective of wanting to make an impact, while still enjoying financial returns. As sustainable investing has developed over the years, there are now perhaps as many ways of going about it as there are SDGs. Here are some of them:
Let’s first look at the example of a dedicated impact investor, Vital Capital. Its principal mission is to invest in the rapidly developing markets in Sub-Saharan Africa to improve the well-being of previously underserved communities, while also generating risk-adjusted returns. To fulfil this mission, it mainly invests in urban communities, agriculture, healthcare, energy, water and education.
As a specialized impact investor, being able to accurately measure the impact of investments and report on them is essential. By working closely with its investees, Vital Capital is able to obtain relatively good insights into the outcomes and impacts it is supporting.
For example, its investments enabled 440,000 cubic meters of wastewater to be treated in 2019, allowed 50,000 liters of fresh milk to be processed every day, and provided 15,000 affordable housing units for lower-income families. Its achievements are show in the graphics below:20
Improving education is sometimes seen as being beyond the scope of generating returns, but it can be done with the right approach. LGT Impact Ventures is a Swiss private equity impact investor that targets market-rate returns, while also achieving measurable, positive social and environmental impacts. It has invested more than USD 80 million in scalable business models that help improve access to services and products in education, health and agriculture. Its investments reached 3.8 million disadvantaged people in 2015.
One of LGT’s investees, Bridge International Academies (BIA), runs public primary schools as a private operator, offering low-cost tuition to students in sub-Saharan Africa and India. At USD 5 per child per month, the firm provides a sustainable solution to increasing access to education. It ensures the quality of schools by regularly reviewing data on students’ progress.
With a mission of ‘knowledge for all’, BIA plans to educate 10 million children across a dozen countries by 2025, thereby directly contributing to SDG 4 (quality education).
It is possible for companies that were previously involved in unsustainable activities to have a ‘conversion on the road to Damascus’ and become big in areas that directly help the SDGs. The Danish energy company Ørsted used to be called Dong Energy, which was big in oil and gas exploration. Yet in 2017 it changed course, selling its oil and gas activities and reinventing itself as a leader in renewable energy.
To this end, Ørsted issued a EUR 750 million green bond and a EUR 500 million green hybrid issue, which investors were very happy to purchase. Ørsted will use these proceeds to help install up to 12 gigawatts of offshore wind energy by 2025 and to replace coal with the more sustainable alternative, biomass. Purchasing this green bond enables investors to finance the energy transition and to help mitigate climate change (SDGs 7 and 13).
This bond was selected a winner in the 2018 Environmental Finance Green Bond Awards. It has become a funding tool in helping Ørsted achieve its ambition of a 95% reduction in carbon emissions from power and heat generation by 2023. These types of companies are typically found in listed SDG strategies, along with bespoke green bond funds.21
An impact can be made indirectly through engagement, such as by raising food standards. Improving food security in emerging markets was a Robeco engagement theme in 2018 that focused on the role played by agrichemical, seed and fertilizer companies. These companies’ products and services have the potential to be well aligned with SDG 2 (zero hunger), as they can support farmers in food-insecure regions by closing the yield gaps that lead to food shortages.
This built on more specific work done in 2017, when Robeco took part in a campaign led by the research group Farm Animal Investment Risk and Return (FAIRR). The aim was to reduce the amounts of antibiotics used in farming. The overuse of these antibiotics to make farm animals such as cattle produce more meat, is making bacteria more resistant to them, creating a threat to humans.
Viral infections in livestock have proved to be a major stumbling block in achieving SDG 2, with knock-on effects for human health. Long before the coronavirus, the H1N1 ‘swine flu’ epidemic, first detected in pigs, killed around 150,000 people in 2009. The virus had become immune to existing vaccines and spread rapidly, before being declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization.
In summary, these case studies should give you a good understanding of how investing in the SDGs works in practice, from improving people’s lives in sub-Saharan Africa, to replacing fossil fuel production with renewable energy, and engaging with companies to raise food standards. Green bonds can make a significant difference as a funding tool, while providing an excellent return for their investors.
20. Vital Capital Fund, Impact Report. Crafting Impact. Presenting Vital Capital’s Approach to Impact Investing. https://www.vital-capital.com/images/upload/texts/48465097050528.pdf
Now that you are clear on all these points, you are ready to take the test.