AN INTRODUCTORY ON SUSTAINABLE FINANCE

Why is sustainable finance important?Sustainable finance is crucial because it

integrates environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors into financial
decision-making, aiming not just for profit but for positive societal and environmental
impact. It helps direct investments toward projects that reduce carbon emissions,
foster social equity, and promote responsible governance. This approach is
increasingly demanded by investors and regulators, as it supports long-term economic
resilience and addresses urgent challenges like climate change, biodiversity loss, and
social inequality. How is sustainable finance different from green finance, renewable
finance, and climate finance? Sustainable finance is an umbrella term that covers a
broad range of financial activities and instruments aligned with ESG principles. Green
finance is a subset focused specifically on environmental objectives, such as reducing
pollution or supporting renewable energy projects. Renewable finance targets funding
for renewable energy sources like wind and solar. Climate finance, meanwhile, is
dedicated to projects that mitigate or adapt to climate change, often in the context of
international commitments like the Paris Agreement. In summary, while green,
renewable, and climate finance each address specific aspects, sustainable finance
encompasses all these and adds social and governance considerations. How is energy
financing related to the current global situation? Energy financing is at the heart of the
global transition to a low-carbon economy. Recent years have seen a surge in
investments in renewable energy, driven by policy incentives and private sector
commitments. However, challenges remain: while funding for renewables like wind
and solar is growing rapidly, investment in energy storage and grid infrastructure lags
behind, risking market bottlenecks and grid instability. Additionally, stricter financing
terms for fossil fuels, especially coal, are pushing capital toward cleaner alternatives,
reflecting both regulatory pressure and shifting investor priorities. This dynamic is
shaping the energy landscape and influencing how quickly the world can achieve
climate goals. What other key questions are relevant to sustainable finance today?
How does sustainable finance impact corporate behavior? It incentivizes companies to
adopt sustainable practices, improve transparency, and manage risks related to ESG
factors, often resulting in better long-term financial performance What role do
investors play? Investors are increasingly demanding ESG integration, driving
companies to align with sustainability objectives and influencing capital flows at a
global scale. How does sustainable finance support sustainable development goals
(SDGs)? By channeling funds into projects that address environmental and social
challenges, sustainable finance is instrumental in achieving the United Nations SDGs,
such as poverty reduction, gender equality, and climate action. Q: What are the main
components of sustainable finance, and how do they guide investment decisions?
A: Sustainable finance is fundamentally built on the integration of environmental,
social, and governance (ESG) criteria into financial decision-making. Environmental
considerations address issues like climate change, resource conservation, pollution,
and biodiversity, guiding investments toward projects that minimize ecological harm
and support sustainability. Social factors focus on human rights, labor standards,
community well-being, and social justice, encouraging investments in businesses and
initiatives with positive social impacts. Governance involves promoting ethical
corporate conduct, transparency, and accountability, ensuring that organizations are
managed responsibly. By embedding ESG criteria into risk assessments, lending, and
investment strategies, sustainable finance aims to align economic growth with broader
societal and environmental goals, promoting long-term value over short-term gains.
How does sustainable finance differ from traditional finance? Unlike traditional
finance, which primarily targets financial returns, sustainable finance seeks to balance
profitability with positive environmental and social outcomes. This approach
challenges the conventional focus on short-term profits by prioritizing long-term
sustainability and resilience. Sustainable finance encompasses a range of activities—
including green bonds, social impact investing, ESG asset management, and
sustainable banking—that actively support projects like renewable energy, affordable
housing, and healthcare. The overarching goal is to create a financial system that
incentivizes responsible practices and contributes to a more inclusive, equitable, and
sustainable economy.

Why is sustainable finance important in today’s global context? Sustainable finance is

increasingly vital as the world faces urgent challenges such as climate change,
environmental degradation, and social inequality. By channeling private and public
investment into sustainable activities, it supports the transition to a low-carbon,
resource-efficient, and fair economy. Policymakers, investors, and consumers are
demanding greater accountability and responsibility from financial institutions,
making sustainable finance a key driver for achieving international commitments like
the Paris Agreement and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Its importance is
further underscored by its role in building economic resilience, ensuring that financial
systems can withstand environmental and social shocks, and supporting a sustainable
recovery from crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. What are some practical tools
and instruments of sustainable finance? Key instruments include green bonds, which
finance environmentally beneficial projects like renewable energy and clean
transportation; impact investing, which targets measurable social or environmental
outcomes alongside financial returns; and ESG-focused asset management, where
portfolios are constructed with explicit consideration of ESG risks and opportunities.
Additionally, sustainability reporting and disclosure requirements are increasingly
mandated, enhancing transparency and allowing stakeholders to assess the
sustainability performance of companies and financial products. How are regulatory
and policy frameworks supporting the growth of sustainable finance? Governments
and regulators worldwide are introducing policies such as tax incentives, mandatory
ESG disclosures, and clear guidelines for responsible investment to encourage
sustainable finance. These measures help create an enabling environment, promote
data transparency, and align financial flows with sustainable development objectives.
International initiatives, such as the UN Principles for Responsible Banking and the
Net-Zero Banking Alliance, further reinforce the commitment of financial institutions
to align their strategies and operations with global sustainability goals.

What is the future outlook for sustainable finance? The momentum behind sustainable
finance is expected to continue growing, driven by increasing stakeholder demand,
regulatory support, and the recognition that sustainable practices are essential for
long-term economic stability. As more financial institutions integrate ESG
considerations into their core strategies, sustainable finance will play a central role in
addressing global challenges, fostering innovation, and building a resilient and
inclusive financial system. Q: Why do some institutions prefer using the term "green
finance" over "sustainable finance"?
A: Some institutions prefer the term green finance over sustainable finance because
green finance offers a clearer and more narrowly defined focus on environmental
objectives, such as funding projects that reduce carbon emissions, promote renewable
energy, or improve energy efficiency, making it easier for institutions to communicate
their environmental commitments, design targeted financial products like green bonds
or loans, and measure environmental impact, especially when their primary goal is to
address climate change or environmental degradation
((https://www.bankofbaroda.in/banking-mantra/others/articles/sustainable-green-
financing), (https://online.jwu.edu/blog/green-finance-investing-with-sustainability-
in-mind/), (https://appian.com/blog/acp/finance/green-finance-vs-esg)). In contrast,
sustainable finance encompasses not only environmental but also social and
governance (ESG) criteria, introducing additional complexity and requiring
institutions to consider a broader range of factors such as social equity and corporate
governance ((https://www.persefoni.com/blog/sustainable-finance),
(https://appian.com/blog/acp/finance/green-finance-vs-esg),
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/679081/EPRS_BRI(202
1)679081_EN.pdf)). For institutions whose mandates, stakeholder expectations, or
regulatory requirements are primarily centered on environmental outcomes, the use of
"green finance" provides greater clarity and market appeal, helping to attract investors
and partners who are specifically interested in environmental impact and allowing for
more transparent reporting and accountability in environmental performance
((https://www.bankofbaroda.in/banking-mantra/others/articles/sustainable-green-
financing), (https://www.ey.com/en_in/insights/climate-change-sustainability-
services/green-finance-is-gaining-traction-for-net-zero-transition-in-india),
(https://www.businessbecause.com/news/insights/9325/green-finance-companies?
sponsored=iese-business-school)). This preference reflects a strategic choice to align
institutional branding, product development, and stakeholder engagement with the
increasingly urgent global focus on environmental sustainability. In what ways do
regulatory frameworks shape the implementation of green and climate finance
strategies? Regulatory frameworks profoundly shape green and climate finance
strategies by establishing clear taxonomies and standards that define which activities,
assets, and projects qualify as "green" or "climate" finance, thereby reducing
ambiguity and the risk of greenwashing (e.g., EU and India’s climate finance
taxonomies). They mandate disclosure and transparency through requirements such as
climate-related risk reporting and sustainability impact assessments, as seen in
frameworks like the TCFD and EU SFDR, which build investor trust and curb
misleading claims. Regulators also require financial institutions to integrate climate
risks into their risk management and capital adequacy processes, ensuring financial
stability and encouraging the shift of capital away from high-carbon sectors.
Incentives, such as preferential capital treatment for green loans, and penalties for
non-compliance or misreporting, further drive the adoption of sustainable practices.
Regulatory support for new financial products—like green bonds and sustainability-
linked loans—fosters market development and innovation, while efforts to harmonize
international standards facilitate cross-border investments and reduce compliance
complexity. At the same time, frameworks are increasingly attentive to the risk of
financial exclusion, encouraging analytical approaches that ensure vulnerable groups
are not left behind. In sum, regulatory frameworks are not merely compliance
mechanisms; they set the rules, provide incentives, and promote transparency, thereby
enhancing the credibility, effectiveness, and inclusiveness of green and climate
finance strategies.

The main challenges in measuring social and governance impacts in sustainable

finance, and why do these challenges persist despite growing attention to ESG issues?
Measuring social and governance (S&G) impacts within the framework of sustainable
finance presents a complex set of challenges that persist due to both structural and
conceptual factors. First and foremost, there is a fundamental lack of standardized
ESG metrics and data across the global financial system. Unlike financial accounting,
which benefits from universally accepted standards such as IFRS or GAAP, ESG
reporting—especially for social and governance dimensions—remains fragmented,
with different organizations, countries, and industries adopting their own definitions
and frameworks. This lack of uniformity makes it extremely difficult for investors and
regulators to compare, aggregate, or benchmark S&G data across companies or
sectors, thereby reducing the effectiveness of sustainable finance as a tool for driving
positive change ((https://digitaldefynd.com/IQ/challenges-of-sustainable-finance/),
(https://aplanet.org/resources/facing-up-to-esg-key-challenges-for-sustainable-
finance/), (https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/691951/
ado2021bp-measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf)).

Secondly, the qualitative and context-dependent nature of social impacts—such as

community well-being, labor practices, human rights, and workplace diversity—adds
another layer of complexity. These impacts are often nuanced and influenced by local
culture, regulatory environments, and stakeholder expectations, making it challenging
to develop universal indicators or KPIs that accurately capture social value. For
example, what constitutes fair labor practices or meaningful community engagement
can vary widely between countries and industries, leading to inconsistent
measurement and reporting ((https://aplanet.org/resources/facing-up-to-esg-key-
challenges-for-sustainable-finance/), (https://bedfordconsulting.com/the-5-main-
challenges-of-esg-reporting-and-best-practice/),
(https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/691951/ado2021bp-
measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf)).

Governance factors—such as board diversity, anti-corruption policies, and

transparency—face similar issues. These are often reported inconsistently, with
different definitions and thresholds applied depending on jurisdiction and
organizational culture. For instance, the criteria for what constitutes a diverse board or
effective anti-corruption measures can differ significantly, making cross-company or
cross-border comparisons unreliable ((https://ecoactivetech.com/the-5-main-
challenges-of-esg-reporting-and-best-practices/),
(https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/691951/ado2021bp-
measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf)).

Another major challenge is data fragmentation. Relevant S&G data is often scattered
across multiple internal and external sources—such as supply chain partners, HR
systems, and community stakeholders—which leads to manual, error-prone data
collection and significant delays in reporting. This fragmentation not only increases
operational costs but also undermines the reliability of the data used for impact
measurement ((https://bedfordconsulting.com/the-5-main-challenges-of-esg-
reporting-and-best-practice/), (https://ecoactivetech.com/the-5-main-challenges-of-
esg-reporting-and-best-practices/)). Additionally, the prevalence of self-reported ESG
data without independent verification raises concerns about the credibility and
accuracy of reported impacts. Companies may be incentivized to present their social
and governance performance in the best possible light, leading to risks of
greenwashing or misrepresentation. Without robust third-party assurance or audit
mechanisms, stakeholders—including investors—may find it difficult to trust or act
on ESG disclosures ((https://ecoactivetech.com/the-5-main-challenges-of-esg-
reporting-and-best-practices/), (https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-
document/691951/ado2021bp-measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf)). The
absence of clear, quantifiable KPIs for social and governance aspects further
complicates efforts to track progress and demonstrate real-world impact. While
environmental metrics (such as carbon emissions or energy usage) can often be
measured quantitatively, social and governance outcomes are less tangible and more
difficult to quantify. This lack of clarity is compounded by frequent changes in
disclosure regulations and evolving stakeholder expectations, which can create
confusion and increase compliance burdens for organizations
((https://bedfordconsulting.com/the-5-main-challenges-of-esg-reporting-and-best-
practice/), (https://ecoactivetech.com/the-5-main-challenges-of-esg-reporting-and-
best-practices/),
(https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/691951/ado2021bp-
measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf)).

Finally, limited ESG expertise within organizations and insufficient collaboration

among key stakeholders—including companies, standard setters, assurance providers,
and regulators—add to the complexity and transaction costs of impact measurement.
Many organizations lack the internal capacity or knowledge to design effective S&G
measurement systems, interpret data meaningfully, or stay abreast of best practices
and regulatory changes. This skills gap, combined with the siloed nature of ESG
efforts, often results in fragmented or superficial reporting that fails to capture the true
social and governance impacts of financial activities
((https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/691951/ado2021bp-
measurement-mgt-sustainable-finance.pdf), (https://www.mdpi.com/2071-
1050/16/2/606)).

The persistent challenges in measuring social and governance impacts in sustainable

finance are rooted in the absence of global standards, the qualitative and context-
specific nature of S&G outcomes, fragmented and unreliable data, lack of
independent verification, unclear KPIs, and insufficient expertise and collaboration.
Overcoming these barriers will require coordinated efforts to harmonize ESG
standards, invest in data infrastructure and third-party assurance, develop robust and
context-sensitive KPIs, and build organizational capacity for effective impact
measurement and reporting. Only then can sustainable finance fully realize its
potential to drive meaningful social and governance outcomes alongside financial and
environmental performance.

What are the fundamental obstacles to establishing universal ESG measurement

standards in sustainable finance? The quest for universal ESG (Environmental, Social,
and Governance) measurement standards in sustainable finance is hampered by a
complex interplay of regulatory, methodological, and practical barriers. Unlike
financial reporting, which benefits from globally recognized standards such as GAAP
or IFRS, ESG disclosures are currently governed by a fragmented landscape of
voluntary and mandatory frameworks—including GRI, SASB, TCFD, and CSRD—
each with unique priorities, sectoral focuses, and reporting requirements. This
patchwork approach results in inconsistent ESG metrics and reporting practices,
making it difficult for companies, investors, and regulators to reliably compare
sustainability performance across industries, regions, and time periods. Regulatory
complexity is further compounded by jurisdictional differences, as countries and
governing bodies impose varying ESG disclosure rules that reflect local priorities,
legal systems, and market maturity. These discrepancies make harmonization
resource-intensive and particularly challenging for multinational organizations
operating across borders.

Beyond regulatory fragmentation, data availability and quality present significant

obstacles. Many companies, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, lack the
resources, expertise, or incentives to collect and report comprehensive ESG data.
Even when data is available, it is often gathered using divergent methodologies,
which undermines reliability and comparability. Furthermore, the subjectivity and
lack of consensus on what to measure—particularly for social and governance factors
—lead to further fragmentation. While environmental metrics such as carbon
emissions are relatively quantifiable, social and governance outcomes are often
qualitative, context-specific, and influenced by cultural or industry nuances, making
the development of universally applicable indicators exceedingly difficult. The risk of
greenwashing and the absence of robust third-party verification further erode trust in
ESG disclosures, as companies may exaggerate or misrepresent their sustainability
performance without standardized metrics and independent assurance. Finally, the
rapid evolution of ESG regulations and frameworks creates a moving target for
companies striving to comply, necessitating constant updates to reporting systems and
ongoing investment in ESG expertise and technology. while initiatives like the
International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and the IFRS Foundation are
making strides toward greater standardization, the establishment of truly universal
ESG measurement standards remains elusive. These persistent obstacles limit the
effectiveness, comparability, and credibility of sustainable finance on a global scale,
underscoring the urgent need for coordinated international efforts and innovative
solutions.

How sustainable finance work in today’s India, and what are the key drivers,
frameworks, and challenges shaping its evolution? Sustainable finance in India has
rapidly evolved into a central pillar of the country’s economic and climate strategy,
driven by ambitious national targets—most notably, the commitment to achieve net-
zero emissions by 2070 and to significantly reduce the emissions intensity of GDP by
2030. The Indian government has played a pivotal role by introducing robust policy
frameworks, regulatory initiatives, and innovative financial instruments to mobilize
the vast capital required for this transition, estimated at over US$10 trillion by 2070.
A landmark development is the introduction of India’s Draft Climate Finance
Taxonomy, which provides a science-based, structured framework for classifying and
guiding investments into climate-relevant sectors such as clean energy, transport,
agriculture, and real estate. This taxonomy aims to prevent greenwashing, align
financial flows with national climate goals, and unlock investment opportunities for
both mitigation and adaptation, while supporting indigenous innovation and hard-to-
abate sectors.

The growth of India’s sustainable finance market is further propelled by strong

investor demand, the rise of green bonds and sustainability-linked loans, and the
increasing participation of international investors and development banks. Public-
private partnerships have become instrumental in financing large-scale sustainable
infrastructure projects, including renewable energy, smart cities, and electric mobility,
with financial institutions expanding green finance offerings to support these
initiatives. Regulatory bodies such as the Securities and Exchange Board of India
(SEBI) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) have introduced mandatory ESG
disclosures, green deposit frameworks, and climate risk reporting, fostering
transparency and accountability in the financial sector. The government’s Viksit
Bharat initiative and the sovereign green bond framework further reinforce the
alignment of economic growth with climate commitments.

Despite these advances, India faces significant challenges in bridging its sustainable
finance gap. The scale of required investment far exceeds current flows, necessitating
further innovation in financial products, deeper market participation, and enhanced
policy support. Ensuring that capital reaches the ‘missing middle’—mid-sized
companies poised for growth but lacking adequate funding—remains a priority.
Additionally, the ongoing development of the climate finance taxonomy and sectoral
annexures is critical for providing clarity, preventing greenwashing, and ensuring that
financial resources are directed toward genuinely sustainable activities.

Sustainable finance in India operates through a dynamic interplay of government

policy, regulatory innovation, market development, and international collaboration. Its
effectiveness hinges on the continued evolution of taxonomies, the scaling of green
finance instruments, and the mobilization of both public and private capital to meet
the country’s climate and development goals.This is basically reshaping the financial
sector by embedding ESG criteria into investment decisions, distinguishing itself from
narrower concepts like green, renewable, and climate finance. Its growing importance
is reflected in its ability to drive systemic change, support global climate and
development goals, and respond to the evolving expectations of investors, regulators,
and society.

What role do government policies and regulations play in shaping India's green
finance landscape? Government policies and regulations are central to shaping India’s
green finance landscape, providing both the strategic direction and the operational
framework needed to mobilize capital for sustainable development. The Indian
government, through agencies like the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Securities
and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), has instituted a range of policies and regulatory
measures that have catalyzed the growth of green finance. These include the issuance
of green bond guidelines, priority sector lending norms for renewable energy, and
mandatory ESG disclosure requirements for top-listed companies under frameworks
such as Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR). The
government’s proactive stance is evident in initiatives like the PM Surya Ghar Muft
Bijli Yojana for solar rooftop adoption, the development of a national climate finance
taxonomy, and the introduction of tax incentives and dedicated funds for green bonds
and infrastructure.

Such policies not only signal India’s ambition and commitment to a low-carbon
economy but also build investor confidence, facilitate public-private partnerships, and
encourage innovation in financial products. Regulatory frameworks have also sought
to address risks such as greenwashing by tightening disclosure norms, requiring third-
party verification of sustainability claims, and imposing penalties for misleading
reporting.However, challenges persist, including fragmented regulations across
jurisdictions, high compliance costs, lack of standardization in ESG reporting, and the
need for greater alignment with international norms.

Overall, robust policy support and evolving regulations have been instrumental in
expanding India’s green finance ecosystem, driving investments into renewable
energy, clean transportation, and other sustainable sectors, while ongoing reforms and
stakeholder collaboration remain crucial for scaling up green finance and ensuring its
integrity and effectiveness.

India’s sustainable finance landscape in 2025 is marked by a dynamic convergence of

ambitious climate goals, regulatory innovation, and evolving market mechanisms,
positioning the country as a major player in the global transition to a low-carbon
economy. Central to this transformation is the rollout of India’s Draft Climate Finance
Taxonomy, a science-based framework developed by the Department of Economic
Affairs to classify and channel investments into climate-relevant sectors, such as clean
energy, transport, real estate, and agriculture. This taxonomy is designed to align
financial flows with India’s net zero target for 2070 and its updated Nationally
Determined Contributions (NDCs), including a 45% reduction in emissions intensity
of GDP by 2030 and sourcing half of its installed electric power capacity from non-
fossil fuel sources. The taxonomy aims to prevent greenwashing by providing clear
criteria for mitigation and adaptation activities, supporting indigenous innovation, and
guiding capital toward hard-to-abate sectors.

Government policy and regulatory support have been instrumental in accelerating

sustainable finance. The Union Budget and Ministry of Finance have prioritized the
development of the taxonomy and introduced sectoral annexures to specify climate-
supportive activities. Regulatory bodies such as SEBI and RBI have mandated ESG
disclosures, green credits reporting, and climate risk assessment frameworks, while
also encouraging green deposits and expanding the green bond market. India’s Viksit
Bharat initiative and sovereign green bond framework have further catalyzed
investments, making India the second-largest funding hub for climate-related
companies in 2024, surpassing China. The government’s approach combines policy
incentives, public-private collaboration, and international engagement, with dedicated
funds, tax reforms, and supportive schemes for renewable energy, e-mobility, and
sustainable agriculture. Despite these advances, India faces a significant sustainable
finance gap, with an estimated requirement of over US$10 trillion by 2070 to achieve
net zero, far exceeding current annual flows. Bridging this gap requires scaling up
innovative financial products, attracting more private and international capital, and
ensuring that resources reach the ‘missing middle’—mid-sized companies with high
growth potential but limited funding. The climate finance taxonomy is expected to
play a critical role in unlocking these investments by providing clarity, preventing
misallocation, and ensuring alignment with national priorities. Challenges remain,
including the need for further standardization, capacity building, and harmonization
with global ESG norms, as well as addressing data quality and verification issues in
ESG reporting.

In summary, sustainable finance in India operates through a sophisticated interplay of

policy direction, regulatory frameworks, market innovation, and stakeholder
collaboration. The evolving climate finance taxonomy, robust regulatory measures,
and government-led initiatives are collectively driving the mobilization of capital for
sustainable development, while ongoing reforms and stakeholder engagement are
essential for bridging the finance gap and ensuring the long-term credibility and
effectiveness of India’s green finance ecosystem.

 https://www.rydoo.com/cfo-corner/sustainable-finance/
 https://extension.harvard.edu/blog/what-is-sustainable-finance-and-why-is-it-
important/
 https://www.infosysbpm.com/blogs/financial-services/what-is-sustainable-
finance-and-why-is-it-important.html
 https://www.theaccountant-online.com/sponsored/the-importance-of-sustainable-
finance/
 https://il.boell.org/en/2024/03/09/sustainable-finance-explained-concepts-
advantages-and-practical-implementations
 https://appian.com/blog/acp/finance/green-finance-vs-esg
 https://www.icmagroup.org/assets/documents/Regulatory/Green-Bonds/
Sustainable-Finance-High-Level-Definitions-May-2020-051020.pdf
 https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-climate-finance-and-
where-will-it-come-from/
 https://ccsg.hku.hk/pslb/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Green-Sustainable-Finance-
Brief-Note_final-clean.pdf
 https://www.charteredbanker.com/resource_listing/cpdresources/what-is-green-
and-sustainable-finance.html
 https://www.spglobal.com/en/research-insights/special-reports/renewable-energy-
funding-in-2023-a-capital-transition-unleashed
 https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2020/energy-financing-
and-funding
 https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2019/financing-and-
funding-trends
 https://finance.ec.europa.eu/sustainable-finance/overview-sustainable-finance_en
 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090944325000420
 https://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/insights/green-finance.html
 https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/about/contact-us/faqs/why-is-sustainable-finance-
important
 https://www.yesbank.in/about-us/sustainability-at-yes-bank/sustainable-finance
 https://www.nowpublishers.com/article/OpenAccessDownload/RCF-0058
 https://www.wwf.org.uk/what-we-do/projects/why-sustainable-finance-important
 https://www.ey.com/en_in/insights/climate-change-sustainability-services/
bridging-india-s-sustainable-finance-gap
 https://www.india-briefing.com/news/overview-of-indias-climate-finance-
taxonomy-in-2025-37768.html/
 https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2127562
 https://dea.gov.in/sites/default/files/(F)%20Draft%20Framework%20of
%20Indias%20Climate%20Finance%20Taxonomy%20for%20publication
%206th%20May%202025%20(1).pdf
 https://www.imarcgroup.com/india-sustainable-finance-market
 https://www.india-briefing.com/news/overview-of-indias-climate-finance-
taxonomy-in-2025-37768.html/
 https://www.ey.com/en_in/insights/climate-change-sustainability-services/
bridging-india-s-sustainable-finance-gap
 https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2127562
 https://dea.gov.in/sites/default/files/(F)%20Draft%20Framework%20of
%20Indias%20Climate%20Finance%20Taxonomy%20for%20publication
%206th%20May%202025%20(1).pdf
 https://www.india-briefing.com/news/overview-of-indias-climate-finance-
taxonomy-in-2025-37768.html
 https://www.ey.com/content/dam/ey-unified-site/ey-com/en-in/insights/climate-
change-sustainability-services/documents/ey-financing-the-future-unleashing-
india-s-sustainable-finance-potential-v1.pdf