Just Share accuses Standard Bank of evasion in climate reporting, calls for comprehensive accountability
At Standard Bank's 2022 annual general meeting, shareholders overwhelmingly voted in favour of a climate resolution calling for greater transparency and emission reduction commitments.
Co-filed by Aeon Investment Management and shareholder activism organisation Just Share, the advisory resolution passed, backed by 99.74% of shareholders.
It laid out the following roadmap:
31 March 2023: Report progress on calculating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from oil and gas exposure.
31 March 2024: Disclose a baseline of these emissions.
31 March 2025: Publish short-, medium- and long-term reduction targets aligned with the Paris Agreement.
Now Just Share is accusing Standard Bank of delivering an 'incomplete picture' of its fossil fuel involvement by adjusting the metric tools by which it holds itself accountable.
What you should know about the Paris Agreement, the APS and financial institutions
Click on each block in the infographic for a pop-up explanation.
Changing the metric or the mission?
According to Standard Bank, it has ticked the baseline disclosure box.
The bank's 2024 Climate Related Financial Disclosures Report states that its baseline disclosure has been 'completed for oil and gas'.
What the bank has actually disclosed, Just Share argues, covers just 19% of its total oil and gas exposure and only 82% of on-balance sheet upstream oil and gas loans.
'It has not provided a timeline for setting targets for mid and downstream exposure,' said Karishma Bhoolia, a senior climate risk analyst at Just Share.
'This incomplete picture of Standard Bank's oil and gas exposure allows the bank to downplay the significant impact that its involvement in midstream projects such as the East African Crude Oil Pipeline will have on its oil and gas exposure and financed emissions.'
Oil and gas value chain explained
Upstream: Exploration and extraction of oil and gas
Midstream: Transportation and storage thereof
Downstream: Refining oil and gas and selling it to customers
Moving the goalposts
Standard Bank's 2022 Climate Policy committed the bank to reducing upstream oil and gas exposure by 5% by 2030.
This target is nowhere to be found in the bank's 2025 Climate Policy.
Now Standard Bank commits to ensuring that oil and gas lending remains under 3% of its total loans and advances by 2030.
According to Just Share, this new figure is both weaker and more ambiguous. The updated policy is based around physical intensity metrics (a measure of emissions per barrel of oil) without accompanying absolute targets or timelines, a report by Just Share states.
'The targets are weaker than those contained in the bank's 2022 Climate Policy and allow the bank to significantly increase its exposure to oil and gas,' Boohlia said.
Boitumelo Sethlatswe, the head of sustainability at Standard Bank, said that their updated targets and disclosures balanced climate ambition with the realities of sub-Saharan Africa's development needs.
'We have set robust, measurable targets that directly address our material oil and gas financed emissions,' he said. 'These include a 10% reduction in physical intensity for upstream oil and gas, limiting upstream exposure to 3% of total loans, and ensuring we finance at least three times more renewable energy than non-renewable power.'
These targets are grounded in the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Announced Pledges Scenario (APS), which is compatible with the Paris Agreement's objectives, Sethlatswe said.
What is a baseline emission?
An article by global consulting firm McKinsey describes baseline emissions as a 'footprint', meaning a measure of emissions recorded during a specific period, like a year. This measure is then taken as a starting point against which to measure change.
From Paris to pledges
The bank appears to have reoriented its climate ambition away from the Paris Agreement.
In its 2024 Climate Related Financial Disclosures Report, the bank states that it is 'committed to the goals of the Paris Agreement'.
While the 2022 policy referenced targets aligned with the Paris Agreement, the updated 2025 version uses the IEA's Announced Pledges Scenario (APS) as a pathway, which is a model that assumes countries will meet their net zero targets, probably leading to a 1.7℃ temperature rise by 2100.
While the IEA's Net Zero by 2050 scenario (which aligns with 1.5℃ ) is mentioned, the only reference to the Paris Agreement in the 2025 Climate Policy is to its principle of 'common but differentiated responsibilities'.
No explanation is offered for the change.
Standard Bank maintains that its current actions deliver on the requirements of the 2022 shareholder resolution.
The East African Crude Oil Pipeline elephant
One of the blind spots in Standard Bank's climate reporting, according to Just Share, is midstream oil and gas, which includes its potential financing of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).
Just Share says that the 2030 limit the bank touts applies only to upstream investments and that there is no restriction on midstream and downstream exposure.
'EACOP funding is a midstream oil and gas asset,' Boohlia explained. 'The 2030 limit has no impact on this funding. Thus, Standard Bank could continue to fund EACOP and other projects like it without limit.'
Standard Bank's oil and gas portfolio accounts for nearly 80% of its operational emissions, according to Sethlatswe.
'We continue to work on improving data availability for midstream and downstream activities, which will inform future target setting,' he said.
How does Standard Bank stack up?
An assessment of South Africa's 13 largest banks by non-profit group Bank Green paints a bleak picture. Not one received a 'great' rating when it came to climate responsibility.
According to the group's findings, one third of the banks assessed failed to provide transparency regarding lending to the fossil fuels and renewable energy sectors, and only five out of the 13 reported any financed emissions.
Transparency, continuous improvement, and supporting a just energy transition remained a commitment to Standard Bank, Sethlatswe said.
Investor pressure mounting
As a shareholder itself, Just Share says it will continue to hold Standard Bank accountable.
It recommends that investors hold Standard Bank accountable to update its 2025 Climate Policy to:
Include emission reduction targets aligned with the Paris 1.5℃ pathway.
Provide a strategy of how these targets will be met.
Set targets across the full oil and gas value chain.
'Banks can either exacerbate the climate emergency or play a constructive role in urgently reducing greenhouse gas emissions and financing the transition to a low-carbon, inclusive economy,' Boohlia said. DM
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
3 days ago
- Daily Maverick
A small UNFCCC budget fight signals a big climate justice crisis
Last month, I sat in a small room in Bonn as negotiators at the UN's midyear climate talks (SB62) haggled for days over something that rarely makes headlines: the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change's (UNFCCC's) core budget. At the 11th hour, while the closing plenary had already begun and mild panic had set in, negotiators eked out an agreement to a meagre 10% increase for 2026-2027 — well below what the Secretariat says is needed to deliver the promises of the Paris Agreement. The UNFCCC had proposed a budget increase of 24.4%, which would have allowed it to cover 84% of essential activities. But instead, it will only have enough for 74% of its core work. To many, this sounds like technical bureaucracy. And judging by chats I've had with friends and colleagues, most people don't think about where the budget for the UNFCCC comes from at all. But this budget fight cuts to the heart of climate justice — especially for developing countries in Africa, which rely most on a functioning, well-resourced UN climate system to secure fair support for climate finance and a just transition. Since the Paris Agreement, the UNFCCC's mandate and workload has ballooned — from the Global Stocktake to the New Quantified Goal on Climate Finance, the Global Goal on Adaptation, and Article 6 on carbon markets. A growing agenda is not necessarily a negative. If anything, it's partially a sign of success. Climate change is a multi-faceted crisis and countries most affected have continuously pushed for ambitious action. The UNFCCC may not have delivered the scale of finance and action needed, but securing expansive agenda items on finance, adaptation, and loss and damage has been key. It is currently the only platform where countries that are home to the major polluters and majority of the world's wealth have to stand toe-to-toe with the countries that are home to 80% of the world's population and those most affected by climate impacts. However Party-mandated activities have increased to around 500 events aimed at keeping negotiations moving forward. The core budget that keeps the Secretariat's doors open, and pays for services, supports national delegations and funds capacity-building, hasn't kept pace. How the UNFCCC funds its work Countries fund the core work of the UNFCCC just like in other UN bodies, although other actors can donate additional funds for supplementary activities. The UNFCCC uses the UN scale of assessments, adjusted to its membership, to calculate each Party's fair share of the agreed budget, meaning each Party pays roughly according to their GNI. Parties approve each new budget, and therefore how much they will have to pay. At SB62, the UNFCCC requested a 24.4% increase to cover new mandates and inflation. Instead, Parties settled for less than half that, and the budget shortfall now has to be made up by voluntary donations. This tension is not new. UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell has increasingly warned Parties about the crisis – that chronic underfunding weakens the mechanisms that ensure countries deliver on climate commitments. The impact is beginning to show, including cancellations of regional climate weeks. But the direction of travel is now particularly concerning. The last UNFCCC budget approved a 19% increase, or roughly two-thirds of the increase requested. A 10% budget increase at SB62 is only half of what was requested and represents a dramatically widening budget shortfall. From core budgets to voluntary contributions It's difficult to accept that Parties cannot afford the additional increase when the money the UNFCCC is requesting is essentially pocket change. The Secretariat requested roughly €46-million, or R947-million, per annum. Those sound like big numbers, but the entire UNFCCC annual budget is only 1.6% of South Africa's modest defence budget. Or less than half of our R2.3-billion VIP protection budget. Or approximately 0.034% of South Africa's annual R2.59-trillion budget. The amount is so small South Africa could cover it in entirety — even without contributions from all 197 countries. But our actual contribution is €110,000, approximately 0.00004% of our annual budget. Wealthier countries pay slightly more — the largest share ($9.6-million) goes to the US — but that's still only 0.0001% of their $7-trillion annual budget. It's surreal that the wealthiest countries sit around a table telling each other they 'just can't afford' to spend another 0.00001% on the functioning of a platform they all say is 'essential' to climate action. As negotiators from small island states and least developed countries raised in budget negotiations, current practice has increasingly become that countries agree at COPs to big decisions, signalling ambition and action to the world and solidarity with one another — only to convene six months later in a small, sparsely attended room in which countries say they can't afford the big decisions they agreed to when the world was watching. Yet, the same countries who argue UNFCCC increases are unaffordable often offer large voluntary donations. In 2024, Japan voluntarily gave an extra $11.8-million to the UNFCCC, 300% more than the $2.9-million Japan owed. Many countries have done the same. In 2023, Spain offered an extra $7.9-million and Germany gave an extra $6.9-million. In 2020, in the middle of a global pandemic and unprecedented global spending increases, wealthy countries still managed to volunteer an extra $10.6-million. Those voluntary contributions can be earmarked for specific activities, although this is not always made public. So effectively, wealthy countries are pushing back on the compulsory core budget and instead opting to provide budget that they can earmark. They may prefer to have this flexibility for their own political and administrative reasons. But this shift gives them increasingly more influence over which of the underfunded mandates they wish to save, and which should languish in obscurity — another form of soft power in an already unfairly stacked playing field. The UNFCCC's legitimacy — especially for Africa — depends on whether it works for those with the least capacity to influence powerful blocs behind closed doors. Meanwhile, underfunding slows implementation of decisions that matter most for climate-vulnerable nations. A symptom of a bigger multilateral malaise The UNFCCC's struggles echo what's happening throughout the UN system, where budget shortfalls are even more extreme — as much as 20% of the UN's budget and 7,000+ UN jobs could be cut. The Trump administration and its allies have certainly escalated this crisis, but it is not new. Increasingly, critical global public goods are left to the mercy of voluntary donations which can be shaped by donor priorities, not shared needs. To some degree, the reason the UNFCCC hasn't faced a much bigger crisis is the whim of one billionaire — Mike Bloomberg has offered to pick up the US's tab for 2025 despite Donald Trump's decision to exit the Paris Agreement. But should the integrity of the only global multilateral platform dedicated to the largest crisis facing our planet rest on wealthy individuals? It's impossible to separate this from the wider climate finance crisis. The world's wealthiest countries have long dodged or fudged their contributions to global climate finance goals, and haggled over peanuts while dedicating 20 times those amounts to military spending and fossil fuel subsidies. Even where funds do flow, they come with strings attached and often favour mitigation investments over the adaptation priorities of African countries. This tiny UNFCCC budget fight is the institutional side of that same coin. A quiet fight that deserves more noise If the UNFCCC weakens, African countries lose one of the few spaces where their collective voice can put pressure on big polluters, demand fair access to finance and highlight their adaptation priorities. Climate justice advocates cannot afford to only watch over the big-headline negotiations. The fight for the UNFCCC is also in the tiny line items buried in 60+ pages of budget proposals. The credibility of the institution — and the fairness it offers the most climate vulnerable — will be written between those lines. And the rooms discussing them shouldn't be so sparse. DM
Daily Maverick
3 days ago
- Daily Maverick
It's time to comment on South Africa's latest climate commitments
As climate disasters intensify and inequality deepens, South Africa's new draft Nationally Determined Contributions set out updated climate change mitigation targets and adaptation goals – but without real accountability and funding, it risks becoming another empty gesture. The public has just 30 days to speak up before this future-defining plan is finalised. South Africa has released its second draft of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), outlining updated climate change mitigation targets and adaptation goals for 2026-35, with greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and strategies for a just transition to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. As a signatory to the Paris Agreement (a legally binding international treaty on climate change), South Africa is required to routinely update its NDCs to reflect the country's 'highest possible ambition'. Environment Minister Dion George published the draft in the Government Gazette on 30 July 2025, inviting the public to submit comments within 30 days of that date. The second draft of the NDCs arrives amid accelerating impacts in South Africa, with thousands displaced because of flooding incidents, a hard-hit agricultural sector, recurring droughts and rising food and water insecurity, all while the country faces intense international scrutiny with the 1.5°C climate safety threshold becoming ever more elusive to maintain. 'Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our generation. Despite efforts in global mitigation, these fall short of what is needed to keep temperature increase below 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. Rising global emissions mean increasing impacts,' it states in the Gazette. South Africa, struggling with the triple challenge of poverty, unemployment and inequality, recognised that climate action cannot be decoupled from these development imperatives. The NDCs thus bring together mitigation (emissions reductions) and adaptation (building resilience against climate change impacts), with the goals of social inclusion, justice and economic transformation. George said this draft reflects South Africa's commitment to contribute fairly to the global efforts to limit temperature increase to well below 2°C, pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. South Africa is a significant emitter of greenhouse gases, especially in Africa, as seen in the graph below. Addressing these emissions is critical not only for global climate goals but also for South Africa's own sustainable development, given the pressing need to transition towards a low-carbon economy through renewable energy expansion and industrial transformation. Unpacking the latest NDCs The new NDCs are underpinned by the Climate Change Act, giving climate ambition the force and clarity of law. It assigns clearer responsibilities for every sphere of government and institutionalises the principle of a 'just transition', in an attempt to ensure that the pursuit of decarbonisation does not leave vulnerable communities behind. When it comes to mitigating greenhouse gases, the Gazette notes that annual greenhouse gas emissions should be in the range of 350 to 420 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO₂-eq) by 2030. Then the range drops to 320-380 Mt CO₂-eq by 2035, hopefully en route to net zero carbon emissions by 2050. These figures mean a continued decline from South Africa's peak emissions, aligning with Paris Agreement ambitions. But achieving these targets will demand massive political will and investment, and much of it remains contingent on increased international climate finance. 'South Africa considers the mitigation target ranges in this NDC to be an ambitious and equitable contribution to the global mitigation effort, given South Africa's current and historical emissions and its national circumstances (especially its development challenges),' states the Gazette. In response to the Paris Agreement, South Africa, along with other nations, has been encouraged to create long-term strategies for a just transition to net zero emissions. South Africa committed in its 2020 Long-Term Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions Development Strategy (LT-LEDS) to achieve net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050. The path to achieving this goal, which will involve a fundamental shift away from a fossil fuel-dependent economy, will be further detailed in the country's next LT-LEDS – which the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) is preparing. Unlike mitigation, which is measured in tons of carbon, adaptation is about tangible and necessary improvements in water security, disaster readiness, infrastructure and social safety nets. The updated NDCs introduce several adaptation goals for 2026-35, covering water and sanitation, disaster management, infrastructure, food security, climate services, biodiversity/ecosystem resilience and government capacity. This structure is designed to make adaptation measurable and monitorable, which is needed for South Africa's biennial adaptation synthesis reports, improved data systems and transparency protocols – this is to evaluate what's working and what needs rethinking. Importantly, the NDCs do not gloss over risks. They lay out uncertainties, from international finance, to domestic capacity and political stability needed to meet these goals. Without scaled support, the ambitions of the NDCs could remain aspirational. The document recognises the risk of inequitable impacts, the need for capacity and finance at every level of government and the challenge of translating strategy into action. In the 2021 update of the first NDCs, major uncertainties were highlighted, particularly concerning the impacts of Covid-19, including issues related to debt. The environment surrounding the second NDCs is now marked by significant geopolitical instability, particularly involving economic conflicts about tariffs and trade, ongoing military tensions in a number of countries with the potential for escalation, growing divisions both within societies and among nations and the possibility of reverting to regional power blocs, among other challenges. 'Recommitment by all countries to the multilateral rules-based approach to climate action and support is essential to address uncertainties,' the Gazette states. Call for stronger climate action James Reeler, WWF's senior technical specialist on climate action, urged all South Africans to raise their voices and call for stronger climate action and reduced greenhouse gas emissions at this critical stage. 'The impacts of climate change are devastating communities across the country, and failure to adequately address them will undermine economic development. We need to make it clear to both government and the international community that South Africa can and will step up to the challenge that climate change poses,' said Reeler. Reeler added that, despite strong lobbying efforts from some heavy emitters, there was a growing voice of concerned businesses calling for more ambition, with 95% of business leaders surveyed supporting a transition away from fossil fuels. As an example of this, Reeler said, the Alliance for Climate Action, a grouping of more than 50 South African companies and five major metropolitan municipalities, has issued a call for strong ambition in these NDCs. Reeler said that as the new NDCs cover the period to at least 2035, these must demonstrate how the country plans to address the risks to which a changing climate exposes agriculture, infrastructure and health. Journalist's comment This gazette isn't a bureaucratic formality, it's a direct call to action for every citizen and how we can hold our government accountable for the commitments it makes. We know that climate change disproportionately affects our most vulnerable communities and we've all seen the wreckage of seemingly increasing extreme weather events, water scarcity, and food insecurity on our friends and family. So scrutinise this plan, offer informed feedback, and ensure that the final document reflects the diverse needs and realities of all South Africans. Without active citizen engagement, this crucial blueprint for our future risks becoming just another document, rather than the living, breathing national commitment it needs to be. The public is invited to submit comments on the new draft NDCs within 30 days from the date of publication of the notice in the Government Gazette.
IOL News
4 days ago
- IOL News
BRICS+ Series: Africa, Gulf and BRICS Partnerships Transform Emerging Markets
As global alliances realign, Africa is deepening its economic and diplomatic engagement with the Middle East, marking a new chapter in south–south cooperation. With financial institutions like Kenya's Equity Group Holdings set to establish a UAE base by late 2025, and major banks such as Absa, Standard Bank, and UBA expanding into the Gulf, African nations are no longer viewing the region solely as a funding source but as a key strategic partner in trade, infrastructure, and long-term investment. Image: / As global power structures evolve and traditional alliances shift, Africa is forging increasingly strategic ties with the Middle East, ushering in a new era of south–south cooperation, diversified partnerships, and multipolar diplomacy. A growing number of African financial institutions and governments are actively engaging with the Gulf, not merely as a funding source, but as a long-term partner in trade, logistics, and infrastructure development. Finance as the New Frontier of Cooperation Kenya's largest lender, Equity Group Holdings, is preparing to establish a base in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) by the end of 2025. The group is currently in the final stages of obtaining regulatory approval. According to CEO James Mwangi, the UAE presents a valuable gateway to capital and investment opportunities for African businesses. 'The Middle East holds deep capital reserves, robust trade logistics, and a well-established investment ecosystem,' Mwangi stated. Equity's move reflects a broader trend, as other major African banks such as Absa Group, Standard Bank, and the United Bank for Africa (UBA) also expand their operations into the Gulf to engage directly with investors eyeing Africa's fast-growing markets. Trade Deals and Infrastructure: Expanding the Scope One key example of deepening bilateral cooperation is the Kenya-UAE Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). The deal is expected to boost Kenyan food exports, enhance supply chain integration, and attract capital into priority sectors such as logistics, manufacturing, and agri-business. At the same time, Middle Eastern companies are looking to play a larger role in Africa's infrastructure upgrade. Notably, Etihad Rail has expressed interest in participating in the development of Africa's railway network—signalling the Gulf's growing involvement in Africa's physical and logistical transformation. According to the African Development Bank, the continent requires an estimated US$402 billion annually to meet its development targets. Areas such as energy, housing, education, water and sanitation, and digital infrastructure are all high-priority investment fields. Strategic collaboration with Gulf states will be key to bridging this financing gap. The Middle East as a 'Third Way' in a Multipolar Order What sets Gulf states apart, particularly for African nations, is their ability to offer a 'third way'—a development partnership that does not force alignment with either Western powers or China. As John Manners-Bell, CEO of Transport Intelligence Insight, notes, many African leaders view Gulf countries as balanced actors who offer pragmatic solutions, rather than politically charged aid or investment. This non-aligned approach resonates strongly in an increasingly multipolar world, where influence is no longer centralised in one or two global capitals. The Middle East, especially the UAE and Saudi Arabia, is becoming a vital diplomatic and economic partner, giving African governments more leverage and strategic choice. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ BRICS+ and the Rise of South–South Alliances The evolving BRICS+ framework offers a timely and powerful platform for formalising and deepening these relationships. With new entrants such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE joining existing members like South Africa and Egypt, the bloc is gradually becoming a more representative voice of the Global South. BRICS+ may serve as a vehicle to align African development goals with Gulf capital and logistical capacity, enabling joint responses to shared challenges such as climate adaptation, infrastructure development, youth unemployment, and industrialisation. What we are witnessing is more than just diplomatic engagement or bilateral deals. The Africa–Middle East partnership reflects a world that is becoming less binary and more plural—one where African nations are not simply reacting to global trends, but actively shaping them. In this emerging multipolar order, Africa is taking its place not as a passive recipient of influence, but as a co-architect of global transformation. Written by: *Dr Iqbal Survé Past chairman of the BRICS Business Council and co-chairman of the BRICS Media Forum and the BRNN *Chloe Maluleke Associate at BRICS+ Consulting Group Russian & Middle Eastern Specialist **The Views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Independent Media or IOL. ** MORE ARTICLES ON OUR WEBSITE ** Follow @brics_daily on X/Twitter & @brics_daily on Instagram for daily BRICS+ updates
