Taxonomies, Standardization, and Disclosure

A variety of frameworks have been developed to track the net zero response of private financial institutions, with an increasing emphasis on Transition Plan Frameworks, as key tools to move from commitments and target setting towards, action. A comparison of different frameworks is available here- https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Using-the-NZFT-to-Assess-FI-Transition-Plans.pdf

National taxonomies have become a popular method to mobilize climate finance, but not all have the same level of ambition.

Standardization and harmonization remain ongoing issues. There are conflicts between taxonomies with different categorizations. Conflicts and lack of interoperability hinder decisions to allocate capital to EMDEs.

Despite a collective agreement on the need for a standardized corporate climate disclosure approach, the implementation of the ISSB recommendations is lagging. As of July 2025, a total of 16 jurisdictions have adopted the standards on a voluntary or mandatory basis, with 20 other jurisdictions planning to adopt them in the future.

Some regional taxonomies are making progress. For example, despite the voluntary application of the ASEAN taxonomy, progress is happening; Indonesia and Singapore-Asia taxonomies are now principally aligned with ASEAN taxonomy.

WWF reports that Green taxonomies continue to expand, yet their impact on capital allocation remains constrained without mandatory, decision-useful disclosures at both product and institution level.