Scotiabank

InfluenceMap Score
C-
Performance Band
59%
Organisation Score
46%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Financials
Head​quarters:
Toronto, Canada
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

The Bank of Nova Scotia (Scotiabank) appears to have had limited engagement on sustainable finance policy, and, where it has engaged, it has taken mixed positions. Scotiabank has acknowledged the risks climate change poses to the financial sector but its communications focus on institution-wide action rather than systemic reform to combat climate risk. Scotiabank has stated support for the Paris Agreement and the goal to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, however, in a 2020 press release it stated support for a continued role for oil and gas in energy and economic systems. In October 2021, Scotiabank joined the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero's banking arm, the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, signaling a commitment to the goal of net zero emissions by 2050.

In its 2020 CDP response Scotiabank appeared to be broadly supportive of Canada’s agenda on sustainable finance. In December 2020, Scotiabank announced its partnership with the Institute for Sustainable Finance, which is working to implement the recommendations of the Canadian government’s Expert Panel on Sustainable Finance. In its 2021 ESG Report and 2021 Public Policy Activities page, Scotiabank mentioned engagement with regulators and policymakers on sustainable finance policy, but the details of this engagement are unclear. An insights article from 2021 suggests support for regulatory action on sustainable finance in the EU and Canada.

In its 2020 CDP response Scotiabank appeared to be broadly supportive of Canada implementing the recommendations of the TCFD. In February 2022, both Scotiabank and Scotia Global Asset Management submitted comments to the Canadian Securities Authorities on its proposal for climate disclosures. Scotia Global Asset Management took a mixed position on the proposal, supporting some aspects while advocating for a longer time for phase-in and increased flexibility in the final rulemaking. Scotiabank’s comments were consistent with the proposal, supporting the Authorities’ decisions to not require scenario analysis, require Scope 3 disclosure on a “comply or explain” basis, and phase in requirements.

Scotiabank has repeatedly taken the position that Canada needs a transition-focused taxonomy, but what exactly “transition-focused” entails is still unclear. In 2019, Scotiabank Director of Social and Environmental Risk told media sources that it would be difficult for Canada to adopt a taxonomy like the EU taxonomy, and any Canadian taxonomy should have more leniency for transitional activities. In a 2020 insights paper, Scotiabank supported the idea of a voluntary taxonomy and in its 2022 Net Zero Pathways report Scotiabank supported a taxonomy that would direct capital toward a “smooth and just energy transition.” In its 2020 ESG report, Scotiabank lists its involvement in an initiative to create a taxonomy for transition finance, led by the Canadian Standards Association Group.

Scotiabank and one of its main asset manager subsidiaries, Jarislowsky Fraser (JFL), have been cautiously supportive of the need for policy on ESG labels and standards. A 2020 JFL insights paper suggests support for policy on ESG and transition bond labels. A 2021 Scotiabank market insights paper states support for harmonization of definitions of sustainable activities via frameworks like the EU Taxonomy and EU Green Bond Standard, but cautions against overly strict requirements.

In its 2021 CDP response Scotiabank states support (with minor exceptions) for the Canadian Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions’ efforts to incorporate climate risk into prudential regulation and risk management.

Scotiabank has disclosed policy positions for some relevant sustainable finance policies with some detail of activities to influence these policies. Scotiabank has given a non-exhaustive list of its industry association memberships and has not disclosed further details of governance of its indirect influence.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
0NS0NSNSNSNS
11NSNSNS2NS
011NSNSNSNS
0NS10NSNSNS
0NSNSNS0NSNS
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
1NSNSNSNSNSNS
0NS0NSNSNSNS
0NANANANANANA
0NANANANANANA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
37%
 
37%
 
48%
 
48%
 
55%
 
55%
 
52%
 
52%
 
41%
 
41%
 
48%
 
48%

How to Read our Relationship Score Map

In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party. In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.