Ircantec has emphasized several shortcomings in its report :
Since 2015, Ircantec has solely measured the carbon footprint of its “Corporate” portfolio (equities and bonds). For the first time, this measure was extended in 2017 to cover sovereigns’ portfolios as well as infrastructure, private equities and impact investing funds. The goal is to have a more impactful portfolio on climate and climate risks.
A first shortcoming concerns the different methodologies used by Ircantec’s advisors. The implementation of new approaches requires a time of adaptation to understand and apprehend data meaning and usefulness. As any modelling work, it's important to mix caution, precision and determination for progressing. Besides, all these approaches try modelling a complex reality (energy transition) whose we don’t know every issues and implications.
Thus, the results of this first "global" analysis of climate and environmental performance must be taken with caution as the methodologies used are not completely stabilized.
A second one concerns the carbon footprint approach, which brings in interesting information to the debate but doesn’t fully comply with Ircantec’ view to accompany the transition towards a low-carbon economy (and not specifically low-carbon investments). It is also important to measure the decreasing emissions dynamic in its prospective dimension (broken down by economic sector attributions and objectives).
To complete this indicator and to have a more holistic and prospective vision, other indicators are being developed. For the first time in 2017, the positive impacts of the Ircantec portfolio on climate are also assessed. This extension in terms of indicators to positive impacts, as well as the change of scope (now the global portfolio is concerned), requiring complex work, this approach will be developed over three years (2017-2019).