Why green finance taxonomies matter for sustainable investment

A green finance taxonomy defines which economic activities qualify as environmentally sustainable. Creating a common language for policymakers, financial institutions and businesses can strengthen investor confidence, reduce the risk of greenwashing and direct capital towards climate and development priorities.

But clear definitions are only the starting point. A taxonomy needs institutions that can apply its criteria consistently, reliable evidence to demonstrate alignment, and financing mechanisms that turn aligned activities into investment.

Grant Thornton Bharat's report, "Green Finance Taxonomy: Building credible green taxonomies to unlock sustainable finance", examines this journey. Drawing on international approaches, it explains how policymakers, regulators and market participants can develop credible, sustainable finance frameworks, prepare institutions for implementation and connect taxonomy alignment with financing that supports measurable environmental outcomes. 

Core components of an effective green taxonomy framework

A green finance taxonomy is credible only if it uses science-based technical screening criteria (TSC). These criteria convert environmental objectives into measurable requirements, including emissions-intensity limits, energy-efficiency improvements, and technology-specific benchmarks. Thresholds should be set using transparent methods and strong evidence. When local conditions require alternative approaches, provide a clear technical justification.

Two safeguards are also essential. The Do No Significant Harm (DNSH) principle requires activities contributing to one environmental objective to avoid significant harm to other environmental objectives. Minimum social safeguards protect labour rights, human rights, and the rights of affected communities. Together, these measures prevent a narrow focus on environmental benefits from overlooking broader social and environmental impacts.

Balancing national relevance with international comparability

National green finance taxonomies need to reflect a country's economic conditions. International investors also need to understand and use them. Alignment with regional and global sustainable finance frameworks can make investments easier to compare across countries and less costly to assess.

For these frameworks to work together, countries need to:

Regulators, environmental authorities, technical experts, financial institutions, industry and civil society all have a role in developing and reviewing the framework. Clear responsibilities, consultation and regular updates help keep it useful as science, technology and market conditions change.

Preparing institutions to apply the framework

While publishing a green finance taxonomy starts the implementation process, institutions will still need guidance, skills, data and systems to apply it consistently.

A critical distinction is the difference between taxonomy eligibility and taxonomy alignment. An eligible activity falls within the taxonomy's coverage. An aligned activity meets the applicable technical screening criteria and safeguards. Confusing the two can overstate environmental performance and weaken confidence in financial products.

Regulators need the capability to set expectations, assess compliance, and resolve questions of interpretation. Banks and investors need teams that can evaluate activities, assess environmental evidence, track the use of proceeds and incorporate findings into product and portfolio decisions. Corporations need to provide the activity-level information on which these assessments depend.

Climate disclosure frameworks can provide a useful baseline, but taxonomy assessment often requires more detailed technical information. Emissions intensity, water use, biodiversity impacts and evidence of safeguards may need to be collected at the activity or project level.

Institutions need practical support to apply the taxonomy: screening tools, sector-specific guides, standard reporting templates and access to verification services. Training should help staff understand the requirements and apply them confidently, with trainers who can share that knowledge across their organisations.

How organisations can implement green finance taxonomies

The report’s indicative post-issuance roadmap sets out three stages for preparing institutions and integrating taxonomy requirements over 24 months:
The success of a green taxonomy for any country lies not in its launch, but in its adoption and operationalisation. Practical guidance manuals followed by comprehensive capacity building are essential to accelerate implementation across the market.
Manoj Kumar Bansal Partner, Climate Ecosystem, Grant Thornton Bharat

Turning alignment into investment

Disclosure helps investors understand environmental performance, but that is not enough to attract funding for the green transition. A green investment framework should bring taxonomy criteria into financial products, lending policies, investment mandates and public procurement.

Several forms of support can help turn aligned projects into investment opportunities:

Public procurement can create demand too. Applying taxonomy criteria to purchases of buildings, infrastructure and materials can encourage investment in greener goods and services. These incentives should be tied to verified results. Taxonomy alignment should also be considered alongside credit assessments and climate risk analysis. Meeting environmental criteria does not, by itself, mean a project is financially viable.

The success of a green taxonomy for any country lies not in its launch, but in its adoption and operationalisation. Practical guidance manuals followed by comprehensive capacity building are essential to accelerate implementation across the market.
Nand Gopal Esambadi Executive Director, Climate Ecosystem, Grant Thornton Bharat

Supporting credible transition pathways

High-emitting sectors need funding to cut emissions, even if they do not yet meet the green finance taxonomy's thresholds. Clear transition categories can help them access this funding while maintaining the framework's environmental standards.

For high-emitting sectors such as steel, cement and chemicals, transition categories should require defined technical thresholds, time-bound decarbonisation milestones, environmental safeguards and credible verification. Regular reviews and clear sunset provisions should establish when activities must meet stricter standards or lose eligibility.

Funding should support a credible plan to reduce emissions. It should also account for workers and communities whose jobs and livelihoods may be affected as industries change.

Measuring results and strengthening accountability

Success should be measured by both the capital mobilised and the environmental outcomes achieved. Monitoring should track taxonomy-aligned financial flows, the allocation of funds and relevant outcomes such as emissions reductions, energy savings or improvements in water use.

Independent checks help build trust in these results. Regular reviews can reveal gaps in how the taxonomy is applied and where its criteria need updating. Together, they strengthen accountability and keep the framework relevant as conditions change.

How Grant Thornton Bharat can support green taxonomy initiatives

We support policymakers, regulators and financial institutions across taxonomy development and implementation activities. Our services include needs assessments, governance frameworks, international alignment assessments, pilot testing, market studies and capacity building.

We also develop technical guidance, screening tools and green finance frameworks, and support portfolio alignment assessments, data analysis and taxonomy reporting. This helps institutions connect credible classification with practical financing decisions.

Green Finance Taxonomy
Read the report

Green Finance Taxonomy

Building credible green taxonomies to unlock
sustainable finance