Political statements in sports stadiums are not uncommon. Perhaps the most famous one was the black-power gesture by African-American sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos, who raised their fists during the victory ceremony for the 200-meter race at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City and made history. And US basketball players drove Donald Trump up a wall last year by kneeling during the playing of the national anthem.
Controversy over the politicization of the Games continues this year: Chinese track cycling sprinters Bao Shanju and Zhong Tianshi stood on the podium at the medal ceremony wearing a Mao pin in red and gold. The Olympic Committee has now launched an investigation into the matter, suspecting a possible violation of rules. In China, the press was sent into patriotic awe – although the People’s Republic is always the first to warn vociferously of the politicization of sporting events. Marcel Grzanna took a closer look at the paradox.
Contradictions can also be found in China’s green finance sector: The People’s Republic considers sustainable investments as a central building block for achieving its ambitious climate goals. However, the new regulations for more sustainability fall far short of international standards. Nico Beckert has taken a closer look at the dangers of greenwashing sustainable investments.
I wish you a pleasant Wednesday and hope you enjoy today’s briefing.
As the Great Helmsman he was once chosen to be, China’s late founder Mao Zedong might have preferred a victory ceremony for the Chinese eight rowing. But as it was, track cycling sprinters Bao Shanju and Zhong Tianshi made his likeness their own after their gold triumph. At the medal ceremony on Monday, the two athletes had pinned a button to their chests which showed Mao’s likeness – small, but clearly visible up close.
The buttons sparked controversy because they could be considered a political symbol by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and should therefore be punished as a violation of Article 50 of the Charter. The IOC did indeed launch an investigation on Tuesday and requested a statement from the Chinese team. However, the committee finds itself in a tough situation.
On Sunday, the US shot put Athlete Raven Saunders had crossed her arms above her head during the award ceremony. A gesture intended to be a sign of support for “the oppressed”, as she said. The U.S. Olympic Committee took the silver medalist’s side, recognizing the gesture as a “peaceful expression” to signal social justice for people of all colors. The IOC has so far let the gesture go unpunished, partly because it only announced a few weeks ago to interpret Article 50 less strictly than it has in the past.
Perhaps that’s why the Chinese women felt emboldened to send a political signal on their part. It will be interesting to see the IOC’s reaction to this: Whether the committee will tolerate the tribute to a brutal dictator like Mao, who was responsible for millions of deaths with his policies, just like tolerated the support of a social movement widely perceived as a symbol against inequality in the world. Especially since Beijing will host the Winter Olympics in just a few months and IOC President Thomas Bach is considered a friend of China.
At any rate, within the People’s Republic, the gesture of the track cyclists was well received, even though the government strictly emphasizes the rejection of the politicization of sport more than any other nation. It did so back in 2008, as host of the Summer Games. The news portal Cankao Xiaoxi, for example, praised the campaign as a success. The portal is linked to state news agency Xinhua and primarily considers Communist Party officials as a target audience. Considering the tight corset into which even state media are forced in China, it is almost impossible that the contradiction to one’s own maxim slipped through by mistake.
It almost seems as if the principle of non-politicization should apply to everyone except the People’s Republic of China. Last week, the Chinese embassy in Sri Lanka rallied against a photograph published by news agency Reuters showing a Chinese weightlifter lifting the weights, with her facial expression strained by exertion. Diplomats detected malicious intent, probably in an effort to make China’s athletes seem deliberately unflattering while winning a great number of medals. A politically motivated shot against a Western media that, like many others, is criticized by the Chinese side for its reporting on the People’s Republic of China.
China’s state-run Global Times newspaper also couldn’t resist a political side blow at the US when it interpreted the defeat of the US basketball team by France last week as a symbol of the evolution of the global balance of power. It was time for the US to wake up from their undefeatable dream, the appeal went. “Maybe the US could still claim the NBA represents the highest level of basketball, but they should now be aware that the world is catching up fast and the gap is closing sooner than they would have imagined.” the report said gleefully.
From a purely sporting point of view, the Chinese have no need for these kinds of low blows, considering the medal table of the Tokyo Games. China ranks at the top with the most gold medals. China has been successfully challenging the US for the top spot since 2008.
But not everyone is submitting to a flush of victory. Instead, Chinese analysts are speaking out in state media, stressing that winning medals shouldn’t be the main goal. Instead, they argue that the event should be about hope for the future and the unity of the world. But sports have always been a stage for world powers to test the strength of their systems. Both in the times of the Cold War, when the US and the Soviet Union were still competing relentlessly, and today.
Meanwhile, the anger displayed towards the Taiwanese badminton doubles Lee Yang and Wang Chi-lin shows how China reacts to sensitive political statements at the Olympic Games when they run counter to the country’s national interests. The Taiwanese had won against a Chinese doubles team in the finals. At the award ceremony, neither the Taiwanese national flag flew nor the national anthem was played. Instead, Taiwanese athletes had to make do with a neutral flag and anthem – a compromise made between the IOC and Beijing. Olympic champion Lee then dedicated the gold medal to “my country, Taiwan.” Chinese nationalists immediately rallied against the athletes for their display of patriotism.
Hong Kong badminton player Angus Ng Ka-long also had to explain himself for wearing a black T-shirt to the competition instead of the official jersey of the Hong Kong team. The latter bears the logo of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), a symbol of the city’s affiliation with the People’s Republic of China. Instead, Ng’s top only had his name imprinted. He attributed the missing HKSAR logo to time constraints. Black clothing was a popular sign of unity among protesters during the mass protests in Hong Kong in response to China’s growing influence. Accordingly, Chinese nationalists furiously demanded that individuals like Ng should not be allowed to compete in the Olympics at all.
In certain cases, however, anger can also mount against the athletes of one’s own country, as the table tennis mixed team Liu Shiwen and Xu Xin had to find out after their defeat in the final against arch-rivals Japan. They let the nation down, was heard in certain parts of social media. The defeated badminton players, who lost to the Taiwanese doubles, also became the target of fury. True, while this hardly reflects the mindset of a majority, the sheer existence of such statements shows that patriotism is seemingly more important than sportsmanship in this case.
Shooter Wang Luyao, who missed out on the air pistol final, even faced questions in some comments: “Did we send you to the Olympics to be weak?” one user asked on the social platform Weibo, according to the BBC. Her teammate Yang Qian, who won China’s first gold medal in Tokyo in shooting, was blamed for a photo showing off her shoes made by U.S. sporting goods manufacturer Nike, despite her victory. Nike had announced to stop using cotton from Xinjiang over allegations of forced labor against its producers. “As a Chinese athlete, shouldn’t you go ahead and boycott Nike?” Yang had subsequently deleted the photo.
Whether it is Al Gore, a former BlackRock executive, or the Economist, alarms about greenwashing in the area of green finance are on the rise. Companies are therefore required by more and more countries to publish certain environmental and climate information on their activities. Beijing has now also issued new rules.
Sustainable investments are seen as a key building block in China’s efforts to achieve its ambitious climate targets. Beijing’s special climate envoy Xie Zhenhua recently stated that green finance will become an important part of China’s plan to achieve climate neutrality by 2060, which will be published soon. China’s central bank has made the sector one of its priorities for 2021 (as reported by China.Table). In early June, its chairman expressed hope for G20 countries to agree on a common standard for disclosing climate-related corporate information by the end of the year.
At the end of June, China issued new regulations aimed at requiring companies to disclose the impact of their economic trading on the global climate. But these new rules fall far short of international standards. Under the rules, companies listed on Chinese exchanges are to voluntarily disclose in their semi-annual and annual reports what measures they have taken to reduce their carbon emissions during the reporting period and which impact these measures had.
The emphasis here lies on “voluntary” for most companies. Only large, particularly dirty companies (“key polluting enterprises”) that are listed on the stock exchange are required by law to publish environmental data in their annual and semi-annual reports. These data include:
But the guidelines do not specify whether “major polluters” should also disclose the CO2 emissions they caused. Experts assume that they only have to report emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, soot (particulates/dust) and volatile organic compounds because high emissions in these areas define a “key polluting enterprise.” For “non-key polluters” the submission of this data is still voluntary.
Initially, the China Securities Regulatory Commission had planned for all companies listed in China to disclose environmental information by 2020. But so far this has not happened, and no reason has been given for the delay. The Covid outbreak is speculated to have caused the delay.
By way of comparison, international climate-related disclosure standards outlined by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), among others, require companies to disclose the following information:
International investors are calling for further efforts in ESG reporting by Chinese companies. The Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), the investment management division of the Norwegian Central Bank, responsible for investing the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global, informed China’s Securities Regulatory Commission that companies would “benefit from more detailed guidance [on ESG information disclosure]”. China’s authorities could follow international frameworks such as the TCFD on ESG disclosure, suggested Norwegian Investment Managers, which, according to their own statements, have invested about $5 billion in Chinese equities and $1.8 billion in fixed-income investments in China.
Experts believe there is still much to be done. Janz Chiang, environmental analyst at consulting firm Trivium China, says: “The existing disclosure requirements are useful, but expanding mandatory environmental information disclosure to all listed companies would be a huge step forward in improving the comparability of green-ness among listed companies”.
However, some Chinese companies indeed provide information on the environmental and climate impacts of their activities voluntarily. But they are very incomplete. While 85 percent of all companies listed in China’s most important stock index (Chinese Securities Index 300) now publish an annual ESG report with information on environmental, social and governance issues, only twelve percent of these reports are reviewed by independent auditors.
The volume and quality of this data are inferior in comparison to data provided by companies of other major exchanges such as the US, Japan, the UK or Hong Kong. This is evidenced by a report by Chinese insurance company Ping An. Only 26 percent of the ESG reports of the CSI 300 companies contain any information on the greenhouse gas emissions caused by the respective companies. According to Ping An, many Chinese companies often don’t even know how to calculate their CO2 emissions in the first place, “especially if they need to be categorized into Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions,” meaning if emissions along the supply chain and emissions occurring during the use and disposal of their products is to be disclosed as well. The situation looks even worse for Chinese companies on other stock market indices. Only 27 percent of all companies listed in China published ESG reports last year.
According to the financial services provider MSCI, listed Chinese state-owned enterprises are also ranked among the world’s largest CO2 emitters that do not publish any information at all on their emissions. Accordingly, seven Chinese companies are among the world’s ten largest CO2 emitters that do not disclose any data.
Accordingly, it comes as no surprise that the effect of green finance has been limited at best. Analyst Chiang says: “Green finance has not significantly reduced emissions or addressed climate change.” This is despite the fact that the country claims to be the second-largest green finance market in the world. But it’s not just a lack of useful information about environmental and climate impacts of companies. Chinese standards on the definition of green investment made by companies also barely meet international standards (as reported by China.Table).
But Chiang is optimistic that the climate impact of green investments will change soon, as there is “increased political impetus driving the growth in green finance with a focus on ensuring that funds are impactful”.
This includes a push by the central bank for China’s financial institutions to disclose climate-related information. According to Chiang, the first pilot projects are in the works. And Yi Gang, chairman of the central bank, has repeatedly stated that disclosure should be made mandatory for financial institutions. However, this is only possible if financial institutions receive useful climate data from companies to which they lend money or in which they hold stakes.
Pink double offspring in France: Newly born Panda twins are welcomed at Beauval Zoo. The mother is panda lady Huan Huan, a loan from a Chinese zoo. The two babies are said to be “pink and plump”, the zoo announced after the birth. The offspring weigh 149 and 129 grams. So far, the two mini bears are still without names. Their names are to be decided by Peng Liyuan, the wife of China’s President Xi Jinping. All panda babies born under the loan program officially belong to the People’s Republic.
Political statements in sports stadiums are not uncommon. Perhaps the most famous one was the black-power gesture by African-American sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos, who raised their fists during the victory ceremony for the 200-meter race at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City and made history. And US basketball players drove Donald Trump up a wall last year by kneeling during the playing of the national anthem.
Controversy over the politicization of the Games continues this year: Chinese track cycling sprinters Bao Shanju and Zhong Tianshi stood on the podium at the medal ceremony wearing a Mao pin in red and gold. The Olympic Committee has now launched an investigation into the matter, suspecting a possible violation of rules. In China, the press was sent into patriotic awe – although the People’s Republic is always the first to warn vociferously of the politicization of sporting events. Marcel Grzanna took a closer look at the paradox.
Contradictions can also be found in China’s green finance sector: The People’s Republic considers sustainable investments as a central building block for achieving its ambitious climate goals. However, the new regulations for more sustainability fall far short of international standards. Nico Beckert has taken a closer look at the dangers of greenwashing sustainable investments.
I wish you a pleasant Wednesday and hope you enjoy today’s briefing.
As the Great Helmsman he was once chosen to be, China’s late founder Mao Zedong might have preferred a victory ceremony for the Chinese eight rowing. But as it was, track cycling sprinters Bao Shanju and Zhong Tianshi made his likeness their own after their gold triumph. At the medal ceremony on Monday, the two athletes had pinned a button to their chests which showed Mao’s likeness – small, but clearly visible up close.
The buttons sparked controversy because they could be considered a political symbol by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and should therefore be punished as a violation of Article 50 of the Charter. The IOC did indeed launch an investigation on Tuesday and requested a statement from the Chinese team. However, the committee finds itself in a tough situation.
On Sunday, the US shot put Athlete Raven Saunders had crossed her arms above her head during the award ceremony. A gesture intended to be a sign of support for “the oppressed”, as she said. The U.S. Olympic Committee took the silver medalist’s side, recognizing the gesture as a “peaceful expression” to signal social justice for people of all colors. The IOC has so far let the gesture go unpunished, partly because it only announced a few weeks ago to interpret Article 50 less strictly than it has in the past.
Perhaps that’s why the Chinese women felt emboldened to send a political signal on their part. It will be interesting to see the IOC’s reaction to this: Whether the committee will tolerate the tribute to a brutal dictator like Mao, who was responsible for millions of deaths with his policies, just like tolerated the support of a social movement widely perceived as a symbol against inequality in the world. Especially since Beijing will host the Winter Olympics in just a few months and IOC President Thomas Bach is considered a friend of China.
At any rate, within the People’s Republic, the gesture of the track cyclists was well received, even though the government strictly emphasizes the rejection of the politicization of sport more than any other nation. It did so back in 2008, as host of the Summer Games. The news portal Cankao Xiaoxi, for example, praised the campaign as a success. The portal is linked to state news agency Xinhua and primarily considers Communist Party officials as a target audience. Considering the tight corset into which even state media are forced in China, it is almost impossible that the contradiction to one’s own maxim slipped through by mistake.
It almost seems as if the principle of non-politicization should apply to everyone except the People’s Republic of China. Last week, the Chinese embassy in Sri Lanka rallied against a photograph published by news agency Reuters showing a Chinese weightlifter lifting the weights, with her facial expression strained by exertion. Diplomats detected malicious intent, probably in an effort to make China’s athletes seem deliberately unflattering while winning a great number of medals. A politically motivated shot against a Western media that, like many others, is criticized by the Chinese side for its reporting on the People’s Republic of China.
China’s state-run Global Times newspaper also couldn’t resist a political side blow at the US when it interpreted the defeat of the US basketball team by France last week as a symbol of the evolution of the global balance of power. It was time for the US to wake up from their undefeatable dream, the appeal went. “Maybe the US could still claim the NBA represents the highest level of basketball, but they should now be aware that the world is catching up fast and the gap is closing sooner than they would have imagined.” the report said gleefully.
From a purely sporting point of view, the Chinese have no need for these kinds of low blows, considering the medal table of the Tokyo Games. China ranks at the top with the most gold medals. China has been successfully challenging the US for the top spot since 2008.
But not everyone is submitting to a flush of victory. Instead, Chinese analysts are speaking out in state media, stressing that winning medals shouldn’t be the main goal. Instead, they argue that the event should be about hope for the future and the unity of the world. But sports have always been a stage for world powers to test the strength of their systems. Both in the times of the Cold War, when the US and the Soviet Union were still competing relentlessly, and today.
Meanwhile, the anger displayed towards the Taiwanese badminton doubles Lee Yang and Wang Chi-lin shows how China reacts to sensitive political statements at the Olympic Games when they run counter to the country’s national interests. The Taiwanese had won against a Chinese doubles team in the finals. At the award ceremony, neither the Taiwanese national flag flew nor the national anthem was played. Instead, Taiwanese athletes had to make do with a neutral flag and anthem – a compromise made between the IOC and Beijing. Olympic champion Lee then dedicated the gold medal to “my country, Taiwan.” Chinese nationalists immediately rallied against the athletes for their display of patriotism.
Hong Kong badminton player Angus Ng Ka-long also had to explain himself for wearing a black T-shirt to the competition instead of the official jersey of the Hong Kong team. The latter bears the logo of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), a symbol of the city’s affiliation with the People’s Republic of China. Instead, Ng’s top only had his name imprinted. He attributed the missing HKSAR logo to time constraints. Black clothing was a popular sign of unity among protesters during the mass protests in Hong Kong in response to China’s growing influence. Accordingly, Chinese nationalists furiously demanded that individuals like Ng should not be allowed to compete in the Olympics at all.
In certain cases, however, anger can also mount against the athletes of one’s own country, as the table tennis mixed team Liu Shiwen and Xu Xin had to find out after their defeat in the final against arch-rivals Japan. They let the nation down, was heard in certain parts of social media. The defeated badminton players, who lost to the Taiwanese doubles, also became the target of fury. True, while this hardly reflects the mindset of a majority, the sheer existence of such statements shows that patriotism is seemingly more important than sportsmanship in this case.
Shooter Wang Luyao, who missed out on the air pistol final, even faced questions in some comments: “Did we send you to the Olympics to be weak?” one user asked on the social platform Weibo, according to the BBC. Her teammate Yang Qian, who won China’s first gold medal in Tokyo in shooting, was blamed for a photo showing off her shoes made by U.S. sporting goods manufacturer Nike, despite her victory. Nike had announced to stop using cotton from Xinjiang over allegations of forced labor against its producers. “As a Chinese athlete, shouldn’t you go ahead and boycott Nike?” Yang had subsequently deleted the photo.
Whether it is Al Gore, a former BlackRock executive, or the Economist, alarms about greenwashing in the area of green finance are on the rise. Companies are therefore required by more and more countries to publish certain environmental and climate information on their activities. Beijing has now also issued new rules.
Sustainable investments are seen as a key building block in China’s efforts to achieve its ambitious climate targets. Beijing’s special climate envoy Xie Zhenhua recently stated that green finance will become an important part of China’s plan to achieve climate neutrality by 2060, which will be published soon. China’s central bank has made the sector one of its priorities for 2021 (as reported by China.Table). In early June, its chairman expressed hope for G20 countries to agree on a common standard for disclosing climate-related corporate information by the end of the year.
At the end of June, China issued new regulations aimed at requiring companies to disclose the impact of their economic trading on the global climate. But these new rules fall far short of international standards. Under the rules, companies listed on Chinese exchanges are to voluntarily disclose in their semi-annual and annual reports what measures they have taken to reduce their carbon emissions during the reporting period and which impact these measures had.
The emphasis here lies on “voluntary” for most companies. Only large, particularly dirty companies (“key polluting enterprises”) that are listed on the stock exchange are required by law to publish environmental data in their annual and semi-annual reports. These data include:
But the guidelines do not specify whether “major polluters” should also disclose the CO2 emissions they caused. Experts assume that they only have to report emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, soot (particulates/dust) and volatile organic compounds because high emissions in these areas define a “key polluting enterprise.” For “non-key polluters” the submission of this data is still voluntary.
Initially, the China Securities Regulatory Commission had planned for all companies listed in China to disclose environmental information by 2020. But so far this has not happened, and no reason has been given for the delay. The Covid outbreak is speculated to have caused the delay.
By way of comparison, international climate-related disclosure standards outlined by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), among others, require companies to disclose the following information:
International investors are calling for further efforts in ESG reporting by Chinese companies. The Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), the investment management division of the Norwegian Central Bank, responsible for investing the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global, informed China’s Securities Regulatory Commission that companies would “benefit from more detailed guidance [on ESG information disclosure]”. China’s authorities could follow international frameworks such as the TCFD on ESG disclosure, suggested Norwegian Investment Managers, which, according to their own statements, have invested about $5 billion in Chinese equities and $1.8 billion in fixed-income investments in China.
Experts believe there is still much to be done. Janz Chiang, environmental analyst at consulting firm Trivium China, says: “The existing disclosure requirements are useful, but expanding mandatory environmental information disclosure to all listed companies would be a huge step forward in improving the comparability of green-ness among listed companies”.
However, some Chinese companies indeed provide information on the environmental and climate impacts of their activities voluntarily. But they are very incomplete. While 85 percent of all companies listed in China’s most important stock index (Chinese Securities Index 300) now publish an annual ESG report with information on environmental, social and governance issues, only twelve percent of these reports are reviewed by independent auditors.
The volume and quality of this data are inferior in comparison to data provided by companies of other major exchanges such as the US, Japan, the UK or Hong Kong. This is evidenced by a report by Chinese insurance company Ping An. Only 26 percent of the ESG reports of the CSI 300 companies contain any information on the greenhouse gas emissions caused by the respective companies. According to Ping An, many Chinese companies often don’t even know how to calculate their CO2 emissions in the first place, “especially if they need to be categorized into Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions,” meaning if emissions along the supply chain and emissions occurring during the use and disposal of their products is to be disclosed as well. The situation looks even worse for Chinese companies on other stock market indices. Only 27 percent of all companies listed in China published ESG reports last year.
According to the financial services provider MSCI, listed Chinese state-owned enterprises are also ranked among the world’s largest CO2 emitters that do not publish any information at all on their emissions. Accordingly, seven Chinese companies are among the world’s ten largest CO2 emitters that do not disclose any data.
Accordingly, it comes as no surprise that the effect of green finance has been limited at best. Analyst Chiang says: “Green finance has not significantly reduced emissions or addressed climate change.” This is despite the fact that the country claims to be the second-largest green finance market in the world. But it’s not just a lack of useful information about environmental and climate impacts of companies. Chinese standards on the definition of green investment made by companies also barely meet international standards (as reported by China.Table).
But Chiang is optimistic that the climate impact of green investments will change soon, as there is “increased political impetus driving the growth in green finance with a focus on ensuring that funds are impactful”.
This includes a push by the central bank for China’s financial institutions to disclose climate-related information. According to Chiang, the first pilot projects are in the works. And Yi Gang, chairman of the central bank, has repeatedly stated that disclosure should be made mandatory for financial institutions. However, this is only possible if financial institutions receive useful climate data from companies to which they lend money or in which they hold stakes.
Pink double offspring in France: Newly born Panda twins are welcomed at Beauval Zoo. The mother is panda lady Huan Huan, a loan from a Chinese zoo. The two babies are said to be “pink and plump”, the zoo announced after the birth. The offspring weigh 149 and 129 grams. So far, the two mini bears are still without names. Their names are to be decided by Peng Liyuan, the wife of China’s President Xi Jinping. All panda babies born under the loan program officially belong to the People’s Republic.
