SDG IMPACT STANDARDS

Bond Issuers
Integrating impact management into Bond Issuers’
decision-making to optimize their contribution to
sustainable development and the SDGs

Version 1.0
March 2021
About UNDP
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the UN’s global development network.
It advocates for change and connects countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help
people build a better life. UNDP aims to see our world radically changed for good and is the
integrator of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). UNDP is active in over 170
countries and territories, working with governments and people on their own solutions to global and
national development challenges and supporting country-level programs to achieve the SDGs.

About SDG Impact

SDG Impact is a global UNDP initiative, catalyzing investment to achieve the SDGs by 2030:

• SDG Impact Management: Providing a means to better decisions that drive investment capital
to where it is needed, comprising SDG Impact Standards, an SDG Impact Seal and impact
management education.
• SDG Impact Intelligence: Producing data and insights needed for increasing financial flows to the
SDGs, offering SDG investor maps of investable business models via a searchable desktop platform.
• SDG Impact Facilitation: Fostering matchmaking and collaboration to realize SDG investment
opportunities, focusing on investor and policy dialogues drawing on UN DP’s presence in over
170 countries, deep sustainable development expertise and relationships with governments and
other influencers.

Acknowledgements
UNDP thanks the SDG Impact team – SDG Impact Director Elizabeth Boggs-Davidsen, Sebnem Sener,
Sara-Lisa Orstavik and Violeta Maximova – and the expert advisers who have led and contributed
to these Standards: Fabienne Michaux (lead author for the standards development), Carol Adams,
Rosemary Addis, Susan De Witt, Ellen Maginnis, Liza Murphy, Maria Laura Tinelli, Amanda Feldman,
Belissa Rojas, Jennifer Flynn (editing) and Maja Bialon (graphic design). UNDP also thanks the
many organizations who have contributed time and valuable input through the development
process including The Impact Management Project Team, IMP Structured Network Members and
all who contributed feedback.

The SDG Impact Steering Group, chaired by the UNDP Administrator, Achim Steiner, comprises
global champions and thought leaders from finance and industry from around the world. UNDP
thanks these sustainability leaders for their critical role in authenticating SDG-enabling investment,
signaling markets and driving adoption of these Standards: John Denton (Secretary-General,
International Chamber of Commerce), Cheo Hock Kuan (Executive Director and CEO, Temasek
Trust), Anna Ryott (Chair of Board, Summa Equity), Amy Jadesimi (CEO, Ladol), Ma Weihua
(Chairman, China Alliance of Social Value Investment), Lisa Genasci (Founder and CEO, ADM Capital
Foundation (ADMCF)), Daniel Hanna (Global Head of Sustainable Finance, Standard Chartered),
Rajiv Lall (Chairman, IDFC First Bank), Ronald Cohen (Philanthropist and Chairman of the Global
Steering Group for Impact Investment), Ken Shibusawa (CEO, Shibusawa and Company, Inc.) and
Gavin Power (Chief of Sustainable Development and International Affairs, PIMCO). Thanks also to
UNDP colleagues, and other UN bodies for their insights and support in developing these Standards.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 2

Such leadership in embracing the SDGs and recognizing our collective responsibility is instrumental
in realizing the SDGs by 2030.

Copyright and Creative Commons Attribution

© United Nations Development Programme, 2021
This document is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence.
Licence conditions are on the Creative Commons website along with the legal code
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 3

Foreword
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
are the world’s blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. They address the
global challenges we face including poverty, inequality, climate change, environmental degradation,
and peace and justice. The SDGs are deeply interconnected, integrating economic, social and
environmental targets. So, a lack of progress on one goal hinders progress on others.

On the ground in 170 countries, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) assists the
UN Resident Coordinator and UN Country Teams to facilitate more integrated analyses, planning
and implementation – to accelerate progress towards achieving the SDGs. A key part of this role
is to engage actively with governments, enterprises and investors and help them fully integrate
the SDGs into their business and investment decision-making and drive more capital to where it is
needed most.

Across the globe, the private sector is increasingly seeking new opportunities to make a positive
impact, mitigate longer-term and systemic risks – and to make meaningful contributions to
achieving the SDGs. However, concrete guidance on how to translate that intent to action remains
a missing link. These UNDP SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers are a practical contribution,
providing a common language and a clear system to fully integrate the SDGs into all business and
investment decision-making processes.

The Standards emanate from the important work being undertaken by SDG Impact – a ground-
breaking UNDP initiative to empower investors and businesses with the clarity, insights, and tools
required to support and authenticate their contributions to achieving the SDGs. We are pleased to be
supported by a Steering Group of global sustainability leaders.

The COVID-19 pandemic illustrates what we can achieve when different actors work together.
The private sector was a critical first responder as a provider of technology, innovation, skills,
services, and employment. As some countries start to recover from the pandemic’s devastating
socio-economic impacts, all sectors have a role in helping the world not only to recover but to
build forward better. I believe these UNDP SDG Impact Standards will serve as a practical tool to
drive investment towards critical areas from taking decisive action on climate change to tackling
widening inequalities.

Crucially, the Standards are helping us to reimagine the role of enterprises and investments in our
society. No longer can the world be driven by a zero-sum game of economy versus environment, or
health versus economy, for instance. The Standards create the guide rails to a future where impact
is at the core of every consumption, employment, business, and investment decision. I am delighted
that, once again, the United Nations and UNDP are at the forefront of propelling this shift in thinking
and doing.

[signature]

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 4

Contents

Foreword 4

Introduction 6

How the Standards work 6

Who can use the Standards 7

How the Standards are organized 8

Ways to use the Standards 9

About the Standards 9

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 12

I. The Standards at a glance 12

II. Standards and practice indicators 13

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 5

Introduction
UNDP SDG Impact is delighted to present version 1.0 of the SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers
(the Standards).

“The business and investment communities are increasingly recognizing that the health of the planet
and the wellbeing of humanity impact their long-term prospects of success and that the SDGs offer
a focus of collaborative efforts to address them.” 1 With long term trends – such as climate change,
accelerating biodiversity loss and population growth – social, environmental and economic
outcomes are becoming increasingly interdependent. This makes impact management and
advancing sustainable development in line with the SDGs even more important and urgent. Failing
to maintain the global commons for all, and collectively failing to achieve the SDGs, will ultimately
also reduce the sustainability, resilience and economic or financial performance of governments,
financial institutions, enterprises, investment portfolios, societies, communities and households
over the longer term. Conversely, contributing positively to sustainable development and the
SDGs presents opportunities to collectively chart a different course to a fairer, more resilient and
prosperous future.

The Standards are provided as a public good for all Bond Issuers who want to contribute positively
to sustainable development and the SDGs. They are voluntary and freely available for all to
use as a best practice guide and self-assessment tool to help Bond Issuers integrate impact
management into decision-making. They are part of what will be a harmonized suite of Standards
and complementary tools, including a glossary, guidance, assurance protocols and training for
different actors across the capital and investment spectrum.

How the Standards work

The Standards promote an approach that links core business purpose and practice to contributing
positively to sustainable development and the SDGs. Broader adoption of the Standards will
encourage decisions that increasingly direct capital to activities and projects that will deliver the
SDGs by 2030.

The Standards are founded on contributing positively to sustainable development and the
SDGs. This cannot be achieved without demonstrating respect for human rights in line with
the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), planetary boundaries and
other responsible business practices, and is realized through effective impact management and
decision-making (see Figure 1).

The Standards are grounded in human rights in line with the UNGPs and focus as much on
reducing negative impacts as on increasing positive impacts, recognizing that avoiding or
significantly reducing negative impacts is a positive contribution to sustainable development.

1 Adams, CA, with Druckman, PB, Picot, RC (2020), Sustainable Development Goal Disclosure (SDGD) Recommendations, published by
ACCA, Chartered Accountants ANZ, ICAS, IFAC, IIRC and WBA. ISBN: 978-1-909883-62-8.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 6

“Business strategies to contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals are no substitute for human
rights due diligence. On the contrary, robust human rights due diligence enables and contributes to
sustainable development. For businesses, the most powerful contribution to sustainable development
is to embed respect for human rights in their activities and across their value chains, addressing harm
done to people and focusing on the potential and actual impacts – as opposed to starting at the other
end, where there are the greatest opportunities for positive contributions. In other words, businesses
need to realize and accept that not having negative impacts is a minimum expectation and a positive
contribution to the Goals.” 2

Who can use the Standards

The Standards are provided for all Bond Issuers – regardless of size, geography or sector – who
want to contribute positively to sustainable development and the SDGs. This includes sovereigns
(and sub-sovereigns such as states, provinces, cities, towns or municipalities), supra-nationals
and government entities, as well as companies, financial institutions and special purpose entities
backed by activities, assets or projects (e.g. securitizations, infrastructure transactions).

The Standards apply to different types of issuers. For sovereign issuers, for example, institutional
frameworks including advisory and governance bodies replace corporate governance and the
Board; links to national development plans and strategies including Voluntary National (or Local)
Reviews on SDGs and related policy priorities replace corporate strategy; and application of the
rule of law and related considerations replace responsible business practices.

The Standards apply equally to Issuers raising capital for their own use and those raising capital
for third party obligors, through both bond and loan programs.

The Standards are equally relevant for Bond Issuers seeking to avoid or reduce negative impacts
in their direct operations, supply chains, and value chains (e.g. those transitioning to a net zero
carbon future), as for those seeking to also benefit Stakeholders or contribute to SDG solutions
through their products and services.

The Standards are also a useful guide for other actors in the value chain to frame inquiry,
assessment and decision-making about a Bond Issuer’s impact management capacity and
strategies to advance sustainable development and the SDGs. This includes Investors, to frame
their investment mandates, guidelines and due diligence; Analysts, advisors and research houses,
to advise their clients or benchmark practice; and Government and policymakers to align policy and
regulations with the Standards or otherwise support their adoption in line with policy priorities to
promote sustainable development and support achievement of their SDG commitments.

2 UN General Assembly: The Report of the Working Group on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other
Business Enterprises A/73/163 2018, Paragraph 59. https://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/73/163.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 7

How the Standards are organized
The Standards are framed across four interconnected and interdependent themes familiar to all
private and public sector actors – strategy, management approach, transparency, and governance
(Figure 1). Each of the four Standards comprises one or more components (The Standards at a
glance), which are accompanied by Practice Indicators that demonstrate what achieving each
Standard (or the components of each Standard) looks like.

Figure 1: The SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers

The foundational elements of the Standards are:

• contributing positively to sustainable development and the SDGs
• which cannot be achieved without demonstrating respect for human rights in line with the
UNGPs, planetary boundaries and other responsible business practices
• and is realized through effective impact management and decision-making

Standard 1 (Strategy): Embedding foundational

Governance
elements into purpose and strategy
ment ap
nage pr Standard 2 (Management Approach):
a
Integrating foundational elements into operations
oa
M

ch

and management approach

Strategy Standard 3 (Transparency): Disclosing how

foundational elements are integrated into
purpose, strategy, management approach and
governance, and reporting on performance
Tr a
nsparency
Standard 4 (Governance): Reinforcing
commitment to foundational elements through
governance practices

A glossary supporting the suite of SDG Impact Standards is provided separately. Terms have
the meaning ascribed in the glossary when used in this document. Guidance material, including
guidance notes and resources to inform implementation of the Standards, is provided separately.
This will be maintained as a dynamic resource for users. Documents supporting the SDG Impact
Standards for Bond Issuers can be found here.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 8

Ways to use the Standards
Voluntary independent use
The Standards are provided to Bond Issuers as a ‘best practice’ guide to help them align their
internal processes to integrate impact management into decision-making. Bond Issuers are
encouraged to use the Standards in their entirety as a gap analysis and self-assessment tool, and
to fill gaps and improve practice over time. The Standards should be used in conjunction with the
glossary and guidance provided.

Assurance protocols and SDG Impact Seal

An external assurance framework and SDG Impact Seal are being developed in tandem with the
Standards. Bond Issuers are highly recommended to move from self-assessment to having their
impact management practices assured at regular intervals by an independent accredited assurer.

Complementary resources
UNDP is complementing the SDG Impact Standards with additional resources, including online
training on impact management being developed through CASE at Duke University, and assurer
training (being developed through Social Value International). An accreditation process will build
additional capacity, capability, and consistency within the assurance community.

About the Standards

The Standards are practice and decision-making standards – not performance or reporting standards.
The Standards set out an internal decision-making framework to help Bond Issuers develop and
implement an impact strategy to contribute positively to sustainable development in line with the
SDGs and link that impact strategy to the SDG Bond Program and the Issuer’s organization-wide
strategy. Within the scope of the defined impact strategy, the Standards help Bond Issuers direct
attention and resources to where they can optimize their contribution by focusing on all material
positive and negative impacts. Embedding the Standards into management decision-making will
strengthen impact performance and facilitate higher quality and more consistent disclosures.

The Standards are a sense making tool.

The Standards help to operationalize and link existing responsible business and impact
management principles frameworks in a consistent manner. They leverage existing decision-
making frameworks where possible, rather than create new ones, to drive convergence. They
link to other useful frameworks and tools – but with the flexibility to add or replace these with
others as new ones become available or the needs of the Bond Issuer change. Finally, they fill
the gaps, especially in strategy, governance, and requiring context by measuring performance
consistently and against suitable baselines, counterfactuals and thresholds to understand what
changes. This results in an end-to-end approach for integrating impact management into business
processes and decision-making practices and thereby optimizing the Bond Issuer’s contributions
to sustainable development and the SDGs within the scope of the impact strategy and through the
SDG Bond Program (see Figure 2).

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 9

Figure 2: SDG Impact Standards – transforming decision-making to deliver the SDGs

Embed the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and

Shared conventions Impact Management Project’s (IMP) conventions as the shared
language for sustainable development and impact

Embed the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights,

Responsible UNGC’s Ten Principles and UN Women’s Empowerment Principles
to set clear expectations for responsible business practices to
business practices anchor positive contributions to sustainable development and
the SDGs

Are consistent with, and provide additional guidance to help

operationalize high level principles frameworks, including UNGC
CFO Principles on Integrated SDG Investments and Finance; UNEP
High level principles FI Principles for Positive Impact Finance and Responsible Banking
Principles, IFC Operating Principles for Impact Management, SVI’s
seven principles of social value

Drive convergence not duplication by linking directly to

Complementary complementary decision-making frameworks, where freely
decision-making available including SVI’s Standards; Capitals Coalition ‘Natural’
and ‘Social and Human’ Capitals Protocols; OECD Guidelines for
frameworks
Multilateral Enterprises; SDGD Recommendations

For example, standardized metrics (IRIS+, GRI, UN RISD,

Links to other UNCTAD); resources (Blab/UNGC Action Manager, UNEPFI
useful tools and Radar Tool, UNGC SDG Ambition); case studies; industry specific
resources indicator catalogues (IPIECA) etc. to help implement the
Standards efficiently

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 10

The Standards complement existing bond principles frameworks and taxonomies.
The Standards complement existing bond principles frameworks and taxonomies (e.g. ICMA,
the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities and EU Green Bond Standard). By focusing on Bond
Issuers’ impact management and decision-making practices, the Standards help to fill some of the
gaps in current market practice. In particular, the Standards:

• require a Bond Issuer to embed respect for human rights in line with the UNGPs, planetary
boundaries and other responsible business practices in its organization-wide approach
(i.e. akin to an Issuer screen)
• require a Bond Issuer to develop an impact strategy (which can be limited in scope), linked to
both its SDG Bond Program and organization-wide strategy
• within the scope of its impact strategy, require the Bond Issuer to set ambitious impact
goals that take into consideration the rate of change required to move from current baseline
performance to the impact goal in line with suitable thresholds in a timely way
• within the scope of the impact strategy, require the Bond Issuer to focus on optimizing its
contribution to sustainable development and the SDGs by managing all positive and negative
material impacts (i.e. ‘do no harm’)
• help Bond Issuers explain the ‘why’ and ‘how’ to help them select and optimize the impact of the
‘what’.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 11

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers

I. The Standards at a glance

1. STRATEGY – The Issuer develops an impact strategy for contributing positively to sustainable
development and the SDGs, establishes the SDG Bond Program and sets ambitious impact goals
to implement its impact strategy.

The Issuer develops an impact strategy for contributing positively to sustainable development
1.1
and the SDGs.

The Issuer establishes the SDG Bond Program and sets ambitious impact goals to implement
1.2
its impact strategy.

2. MANAGEMENT APPROACH – The Issuer integrates impact management into its

management approach to optimize the SDG Bond Program’s contribution to sustainable
development and the SDGs.

The Issuer has effective processes and other mechanisms to deliver on the impact strategy and
2.1
the SDG Bond Program impact goals.

Within the scope of the impact strategy, the Issuer assesses and compares the material
positive and negative impacts associated with its products, services and operations and makes
2.2
choices between options to optimize its contribution to sustainable development and the SDGs
in line with its SDG Bond Program impact goals.

Within the scope of its impact strategy, the Issuer systematically monitors and manages its
2.3 ongoing impacts and acts to optimize its contribution to sustainable development and the SDGs
(including managing unexpected outcomes).

3. TRANSPARENCY – The Issuer discloses how it integrates contributing positively to sustainable

development and the SDGs into the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and related aspects of its
strategy, management approach and governance practices, and reports (at least annually) on its
performance.

4. GOVERNANCE – The Issuer’s commitment to contributing positively to sustainable

development and the SDGs through the impact strategy and SDG Bond Program is reinforced
through its governance practices.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 12

II. Standards and practice indicators

1. STRATEGY – The Issuer develops an impact strategy for contributing positively to

sustainable development and the SDGs, establishes the SDG Bond Program and sets
ambitious impact goals to implement its impact strategy.

1.1 The Issuer develops an impact strategy for contributing positively to sustainable development
and the SDGs.

Practice Indicators:

1.1.1 The Issuer includes respect for human rights in line with the UNGPs, planetary boundaries,
and other responsible business practices in its organization-wide approach.

1.1.2 The Issuer develops an impact strategy (which can be limited in scope to one or more
business and/or product lines, geographies, Stakeholder segments or outcome areas)
for contributing positively to sustainable development and the SDGs, linking its impact
strategy to its organization-wide strategy.

1.1.3 Within the scope of the impact strategy, the Issuer:

1.1.3.1 considers the interdependency of sustainable development issues and the SDGs

1.1.3.2 optimizes its impact through its business model(s) and partnerships (including by
reducing negative impacts)

1.1.3.3 has a formal engagement plan to effectively involve Stakeholders on an ongoing

basis to understand outcomes that matter to them

1.1.3.4 uses available evidence and relevant social and scientific data from reputable
agencies such as government, scientific and civil society organizations, including
to identify suitable outcomes thresholds

1.1.3.5 implements a formal approach to determine the materiality of sustainable

development issues based on where the Issuer can make (or is making) the most
significant (positive and negative) impacts on sustainable development outcomes
and the SDGs

1.1.3.6 incorporates sustainable development risks and opportunities into its formal risk
management approach, including Stakeholder perspectives

1.1.3.7 uses sensitivity and scenario analysis to test the resilience of its impact strategy

1.1.3.8 implements a formal approach to ensure its impact strategy and impact goals
remain fit for purpose as the internal and sustainable development contexts
change

1.1.3.9 determines the resources (including budget, capability, and leadership) it intends
to allocate towards implementing its impact strategy.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 13

1. STRATEGY – The Issuer develops an impact strategy for contributing positively to
sustainable development and the SDGs, establishes the SDG Bond Program and sets
ambitious impact goals to implement its impact strategy.

1.2 The Issuer establishes the SDG Bond Program and sets ambitious impact goals to implement its
impact strategy.

Practice Indicators:

1.2.1 The Issuer establishes the SDG Bond Program, linking it to the impact strategy.

1.2.2 The Issuer sets impact goals for its SDG Bond Program that:

1.2.2.1 align with the impact strategy

1.2.2.2 are ambitious including taking into account the rate of change required
to move from current baseline performance to the impact goal in a timely way

1.2.2.3 specify the sustainable development outcome areas (e.g. SDG targets) it intends
to target and the types of impact (i.e. ABC Impact Classifications) it intends to
achieve

1.2.2.4 relate to the material sustainable development issues (positive and negative) as
defined in Clause 1.1.3.5 alongside any need for collective action, including cross-
cutting goals relating to gender equality, climate action, and decent work

1.2.2.5 address all material negative impacts in its direct operations, supply and through
its business relationships and value chains

1.2.2.6 are expressed in terms of the expected change in outcome levels relative to
suitable baselines and threshold levels

1.2.2.7 consider the potential for unintended consequences and seek to limit the
potential for unintended negative and/or perverse outcomes.

1.2.3 The Issuer sets out clear measures within its SDG Bond Program if impact goals are not met.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 14

 2. MANAGEMENT APPROACH – The Issuer integrates impact management into its
management approach to optimize the SDG Bond Program’s contribution to sustainable
development and the SDGs.

2.1 The Issuer has effective processes and other mechanisms to deliver on the impact strategy and
SDG Bond Program impact goals.

Practice Indicators:

2.1.1 The Issuer embeds respect for human rights in line with the UNGPs, planetary boundaries,
and other responsible business practices in its organization-wide policies and practices,
including:

2.1.1.1 integrating accountability into organizational culture, business operations,

day-to-day roles, cross-functional teams and decision-making processes

2.1.1.2 demonstrating sufficient diversity across gender, race and other dimensions at
the appropriate level of seniority and authority to influence decision-making

2.1.1.3 implementing effective grievance and reparation mechanisms with

whistleblowing safeguards for affected Stakeholders

2.1.1.4 ensuring visibility of senior leadership’s commitment throughout the

organization, including monitoring performance and conformance and driving a
culture of continuous improvement

2.1.1.5 avoiding or reducing negative impacts and promoting respect for human rights
in line with the UNGPs, planetary boundaries and other responsible business
practices in supply and value chains

2.1.1.6 complying with relevant local and international laws and regulations, striving to
comply with the highest possible level of industry best practice, particularly
in cases that lack local regulation, or the standard is comparatively low, and
reconciling when local and international laws and regulations conflict.

Within the scope of the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and related decisions and actions:

2.1.2 The Issuer implements a formal approach to involve Stakeholders on issues that impact
them, including by (i) supporting Stakeholder involvement with adequate budget
and resources (including training and local leadership), and (ii) transparently keeping
Stakeholders informed of actions, progress and lessons.

2.1.3 The Issuer integrates accountability for impact management into business operations
and information systems, day-to-day roles and cross-functional teams and decision-
making processes, including by:

2.1.3.1 implementing appropriate culture, communication systems and training to enable

decision-making

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 15

 2.1.3.2 holding people at all levels accountable for operating in accordance with its
impact management policies and practices, including aligning incentive
mechanisms with its impact strategy and impact goals

2.1.3.3 having sufficient impact management capability at the appropriate level of

seniority and authority to influence decision-making

2.1.3.4 monitoring its impact performance and conformance with impact management
policies and practices to drive a culture of continuous improvement.

2.1.4 The Issuer implements a formal approach to collect, verify, manage and use impact data,
including:

2.1.4.1 managing data ownership on behalf of Stakeholders – including privacy, ethical

and commercial issues regarding data gathering, use and disclosure

2.1.4.2 systematically capturing impact data from activities

2.1.4.3 taking a risk-based approach to if and when impact data needs to be verified or
assured, and taking into account findings in decision-making

2.1.4.4 integrating impact data into management decisions.

2.1.5 The Issuer implements a formal approach to ensure its impact management practices
continue to improve over time and remain fit for purpose, including by:

2.1.5.1 analyzing deviations from expected performance

2.1.5.2 incorporating lessons from its engagement with partners and Stakeholders, and
updated research and evidence

2.1.5.3 considering changes in the sustainable development context

2.1.5.4 assessing the effectiveness of its impact management practices in driving

decision-making and impact performance.

2.1.6 To the extent practicable, the Issuer works proactively with its arrangers and (potential)
investors to set expectations and promote alignment between the impact strategy and
SDG Bond Program, and the motivations and intentions of investors participating in the
SDG Bond Program issues.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 16

2. MANAGEMENT APPROACH – The Issuer integrates impact management into its
management approach to optimize the SDG Bond Program’s contribution to sustainable
development and the SDGs.

2.2 Within the scope of its impact strategy, the Issuer assesses and compares the material positive
and negative impacts associated with its products, services and operations and makes choices
between options to optimize its contribution to sustainable development and the SDGs in line
with its SDG Bond Program impact goals

Practice Indicators:

Within the scope of the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and related decisions and actions:

2.2.1 The Issuer implements a formal approach to identify all material (positive and negative)
sustainable development issues in its direct operations and in its supply and value chains
including:
2.2.1.1 assessing outcomes consistently, using wellbeing as the common measure

2.2.1.2 determining suitable baselines, counterfactuals and thresholds

2.2.1.3 assessing the potential outcomes on Stakeholder groups, and segments within
groups, separately (with a particular focus on the core SDG objective of ‘leaving
no-one behind’)

2.2.1.4 taking into account uncertainty when it is unable to quantify outcomes,

recognizing that measurement in direct operations, supply chains and value
chains can be challenging, and developing strategies to reduce risk over time.

2.2.2 The Issuer estimates the depth and scale of its expected contribution to the outcomes
identified in 2.2.1, taking into account: (i) what would have happened anyway, (ii) what
others contribute to the outcomes, and (iii) how long the impact is likely to last.

2.2.3 The Issuer assesses the risk that actual impacts do not occur as and when expected,
taking into account (i) the likelihood and magnitude of the risks, (ii) the tolerance for
unexpected outcomes, and (iii) any risk mitigation measures.

2.2.4 The Issuer considers which metrics to use and how much data is sufficient to make a
decision including:

2.2.4.1 selecting and using decision-useful outcome metrics (i.e. rather than activities
or output metrics) that: (i) wherever possible include context by taking into account
what matters most to the Stakeholders experiencing the outcomes, (ii) value
outcomes consistently using wellbeing as the common measure, and (iii) provide
the required level of confidence that the targeted outcome is being achieved

2.2.4.2 using relevant standardized metrics and metrics sets where suitable, but
recognizing management accounting and internal metrics will likely be needed

2.2.4.3 assessing the risk (including to Stakeholders) of uncertainty when impact

data is unavailable or insufficient, and possible risk mitigation measures,
including the opportunity to fill data gaps (quality and completeness) and build
the evidence base over time

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 17

 2.2.4.4 where activity or output (rather than outcome) metrics are used as proxies for
expected outcomes, having a robust process to assess the implications for
decision-making, both on the number of potential decisions and the risk to those
decisions, and to replace those metrics with outcome metrics as soon as practicable

2.2.4.5 considering the potential for unintended consequences and seeking to limit
the potential for unintended negative and perverse outcomes in how it selects
and uses metrics.

2.2.5 The Issuer makes (relative and absolute) choices between its product, service and
operational options in a transparent way to optimize its contribution to sustainable
development and the SDGs, taking into account the risk that impacts may not occur as
expected, and trade-offs between different outcomes or Stakeholder groups.

2.2.6 The Issuer takes a risk-based approach to if and when comprehensive independent impact
evaluations are required for certain activities, in line with international guidance.

2.2.7 The Issuer systematically captures the results from its impact assessments (including
documenting its calculation methodologies and assumptions applied) so it can be
connected to its decision-making and ongoing impact management activities.

2.2.8 Where the Issuer is not the end user of the SDG Bond Program proceeds:

2.2.8.1 it develops new products and/or establishes eligibility criteria to qualify or

select assets (e.g. grants, loans or other obligations to individuals, enterprises,
projects or programs) for inclusion in its SDG Bond Program to optimize its
contribution to sustainable development and the SDGs in line with the impact
strategy and SDG Bond Program impact goals

2.2.8.2 depending on the nature of the products and obligors (e.g. homogenous products
to individuals or micro-businesses), it may conduct its impact assessments at the
product or portfolio level rather than the obligor level)

2.2.8.3 where relevant, it is transparent with obligors about its impact strategy, goals
and expectations

2.2.8.4 where relevant (e.g. when lending to enterprises or projects), it embeds impact
terms within the facility legal documentation such that: (i) obligors are held to
the same standard as direct issuers under these Standards (e.g. by promoting
adoption of the SDG Impact Standards for Enterprises among its obligors, where
feasible); and (ii) the Issuer is provided sufficient information to assess the
effectiveness of the impact strategy and manage its performance against its SDG
Bond Program impact goals – and has a robust process to assess the implications
for decision-making where this is not the case

2.2.8.5 recognizing its access to primary data may be limited, it seeks to reduce data gaps
including through technology solutions and use of high quality and relevant
secondary data

2.2.8.6 where it is refinancing pre-existing assets that meet its eligibility criteria, it uses the
additional capacity created to further the impact strategy and SDG Bond Program
impact goals.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 18

2. MANAGEMENT APPROACH – The Issuer integrates impact management into its manage-
ment approach to optimize the SDG Bond Program’s contribution to sustainable develop-
ment and the SDGs.

2.3 Within the scope of its impact strategy, the Issuer systematically monitors and manages its
ongoing impacts and acts to optimize its contribution to sustainable development and the SDGs
(including managing unexpected outcomes).

Practice Indicators:

Within the scope of the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and related decisions and actions:

2.3.1 The Issuer implements a formal approach to measure and monitor the effectiveness of its
impact strategy and its actual impact performance against: (i) expected impact
performance, (ii) baselines, counterfactuals and thresholds, and (iii) its impact goals.

2.3.2 The Issuer fills material data gaps, including by: (i) replacing proxies with outcome
measures, where possible, and (ii) testing the validity of any assumptions made.

2.3.3 The Issuer identifies and analyzes the reasons for deviations from expected impact
performance and acts to optimize impact, including by:

2.3.3.1 developing mitigation plans including actions to ensure impact performance

ahead of ceasing or exiting activities

2.3.3.2 managing unexpected negative impacts on Stakeholders arising from the

emergence of additional impact risks or under-performance.

2.3.4 The Issuer includes the positive and negative impacts from exited activities/projects
in its overall assessment of its impact performance.

2.3.5 The Issuer systematically captures the results from its impact management activities
to inform future decision-making.

Where the Issuer is not the end user of the bond proceeds, and where relevant:

2.3.6 The Issuer monitors end users’ impact performance and adherence to impact terms.

2.3.7 The Issuer engages proactively with end users to share resources and lessons so they can
continuously improve their own impact performance.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 19

3. TRANSPARENCY – The Issuer discloses how it integrates contributing positively to
sustainable development and the SDGs into the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and
related aspects of its management approach and governance practices, and reports (at
least annually) on its performance.

Practice Indicators:

3.1 The Issuer discloses relevant information about the Issuer, the impact strategy and the
SDG Bond Program to enable Stakeholders and potential investors to make informed
decisions, including:

3.1.1 the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program impact terms and impact goals, and how
material the scope of the impact strategy and SDG Bond Program impact
goals are relative to the Issuer’s overall strategy and impacts on sustainable
development and the SDGs

3.1.2 how the Issuer integrates contributing positively to sustainable development

and the SDGs into the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and related aspects
of its management approach and governance practices

3.1.3 how the Issuer implements reporting mechanisms to meet the needs of
Stakeholders affected by its activities and the civil society organizations that act
on their behalf, including considering additional non-public, tailored reporting
or changes to existing public reporting to make disclosures more relevant and
accessible to a broader range of Stakeholders

3.1.4 how the Issuer makes publicly available its policies concerning respect for
human rights in line with the UNGPs, planetary boundaries and other responsible
business practices and discloses how it implements and manages its performance
and conformance

3.1.5 how the Issuer complies with relevant laws and regulations regarding social and
environmental disclosures

3.2 The Issuer reports publicly at least annually on the performance of its SDG Bond Program
including:

3.2.1 communicating its impacts consistently by using the SDGs (and related targets)
and the ABC Impact Classifications

3.2.2 providing sufficient context by: (i) relating actual impact performance against
impact goals and against suitable baselines, counterfactuals and thresholds,
(ii) disclosing any trade-offs made between different sustainable development
outcomes or Stakeholder groups, and (iii) disclosing material limitations and
assumptions made.

3.3 The Issuer has its external impact reporting assured by an independent third party
(or otherwise explains why it has selected not to) and follows up findings with suitable
rectification measures in a timely way.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 20

4. GOVERNANCE – The Issuer’s commitment to contributing positively to sustainable de-
velopment and the SDGs through the impact strategy and SDG Bond Program is reinforced
through its governance practices

Practice Indicators:

4.1 The Issuer’s governing body has active oversight of matters relating to:

4.1.1 the Issuer’s policies concerning respect for human rights in line with the UNGPs,
planetary boundaries and other responsible business practices, including its
effective grievance and reparation mechanisms with whistleblowing safeguards
for affected Stakeholders, and its performance and conformance against those
policies and associated practices

4.1.2 Stakeholder complaints and remedial actions taken (ensuring no instances of

adverse findings without having adequate remedies in place)

4.1.3 organizational culture, the impact strategy, SDG Bond Program and impact goals

4.1.4 within the scope of the impact strategy, the Issuer’s process of Stakeholder
identification and involvement in decision-making

4.1.5 within the scope of the impact strategy, the Issuer’s budget and resources to
manage Stakeholder involvement effectively and to deliver its impact strategy
and impact goals

4.1.6 within the scope of the impact strategy, the Issuer’s policies concerning
impact management, and its performance and conformance against those
policies and associated practices

4.1.7 within the scope of the impact strategy, the Issuer’s determination of material
sustainable development issues and how these are integrated into the impact
strategy

4.1.8 within the scope of the impact strategy, the compatibility of the Issuer’s impact
goals, financial return targets and both the Issuer’s and Stakeholders’ impact risk
appetite and tolerance

4.1.9 within the scope of the impact strategy, a separation between roles of drafting
and approving impact goals, where those approving the goals recognize they are
acting in both the interests of the Issuer and Stakeholders likely to be impacted

4.1.10 the effectiveness of the impact strategy and the Issuer’s performance against its
impact goals and relative to suitable baselines, counterfactuals and thresholds

4.1.11 within the scope of the impact strategy, third party assurance findings and
remedial actions

4.1.12 the Issuer’s SDG Bond Program and impact-related external disclosures.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 21

4.2 The Issuer’s governing body meets the national minimum corporate governance
standards, as appropriate, and:

4.2.1 has competencies concerning sustainable development issues and impact

management

4.2.2 prioritizes gender and other dimensions of diversity

4.2.3 recognizes the implications of low accountability to those impacted and the need
to act on their behalf in decisions

4.2.4 holds the appropriate leaders accountable for the Issuer’s impact strategy
and SDG Bond Program performance against its impact goals, including
operating in accordance with its responsible business and impact management
policies and practices.

4.3 The Issuer’s parent and/or holding company – including its ultimate holding company –
has policies, practices and performance relating to corporate governance, and respect
for human rights in line with the UNGPs, planetary boundaries and other responsible
business practices that are consistent with the requirements set out in these Standards.

SDG Impact Standards for Bond Issuers 22

[email protected] @sdgimpact sdgimpact.undp.org