Labels, Standards, and Decarbonization: Insights from Carbone 4 Experts on Sustainable Finance | Carbone 4

Article|December 19, 2025

Labels, Standards, and Decarbonization: Insights from Carbone 4 Experts on Sustainable Finance

Carbone 4 highlights the three key takeaways from its event held during Responsible Finance Week

Ten years after the Paris Agreement, sustainable finance has moved out of the shadows: labels, ratings, climate standards, and “net-zero” trajectories now shape the day-to-day activities of investors and financiers. But for a bank, an insurer, or an asset management firm, a very practical question remains: how can portfolios be successfully decarbonized amid an ever-changing landscape of frameworks, labels, and regulations? How can we create the conditions for the emergence of “finance compatible with a sustainable world,” in the words of Jean-Marc Jancovici?

This was the question addressed during the discussions organized by Carbone 4 Conseil and Carbon4Finance at La REcyclerie in Paris, as part of the Responsible Finance Week. Following an introduction by Jean-Marc Jancovici and Laurent Morel, partners at Carbone 4, Lucie Mauzé (Climate and Biodiversity Data Sales, Carbon4 Finance) moderated the first panel discussion with Matthieu Silva Santos (Director of Product Development and SRI, Goodvest), before a second discussion, moderated by Georges Dib (project manager, division Sustainable Finance (by Carbone 4), does not give the floor to Marc Wormser (Chief Executive Officer, Wormser Frères Bank).

Three Key Takeaways for Funders and Investors

1. Labels and standards: a starting point, not an end goal

The labels (ISR, Greenfin, Finansol…) operate as stamps visible to the general public, while the standards (SBTi, Net Zero Investment Framework, etc.) provide a common language to professionals to help them set goals and develop action plans. “Their value stems from their qualities requirement, by transparency and readability "as Laurent Morel, a partner at Carbone 4, pointed out."

But these are living tools, which evolve alongside scientific advances, data quality, and regulatory pressure. This evolution is positive, provided it remains transparent. Matthieu Silva Santos of Goodvest emphasized how the proliferation of frameworks—national labels, European frameworks, voluntary standards—can create confusionif the objectives, the exclusions and the The methodological limitations are not explained clearly to customers.

Lucie Mauzé emphasized the educational role of non-financial data providers: making complex metrics interpretable, clarifying assumptions, and acknowledging areas of uncertainty. By drawing on data from Carbon4Finance, Goodvest is able to supplement existing labels with its own methodology that assesses the warming trajectory and biodiversity impact of investors’ portfolios, ensuring that only funds truly aligned with the Paris Agreement are selected.

2. The credibility of commitments becomes a risk that must be managed

Is what is marketed as sustainable really sustainable? Today, a climate commitment that lacks credibility becomes, in itself, a reputational, compliance, and market risks. The point is not to pile up certification logos, but to be able to demonstrate, with supporting facts, that the commitments, the wallets and the incentives internal vpoint in the same direction.

Labels and standards must therefore be accompanied by tvisible changes : application of the exclusionary policies fossil fuels, credible decarbonization pathways,committed governance. Marc Wormser highlighted this point as he outlined the holistic approach of Banque Wormser Frères—in collaboration with Carbone 4 Conseil—which integrates the bank’s convictions with the selection of its financed counterparties, employs a differentiated approach by asset class, and adapts its governance structure, particularly through variable compensation for its teams.

3. Shift from “reducing financed emissions” to “financing emissions reductions”

This new credibility risk and the reforms to the certification labels highlight the recent shift in approaches to climate finance. The first wave A number of initiatives have focused on reducing "funded programs" at the portfolio level, through targets for absolute emissions or emissions intensity, and through allocation trade-offs. This approach helped structure the issue, but it sometimes led to decarbonization that is primarily an accounting measure or "on paper."

The movement that is taking shape goes further: it is to now channel financial flows toward actual emissions reductions in the economy. In other words, to move beyond simply improving a portfolio’s aggregate carbon footprint and instead finance transition plans and low-carbon solutions, by managing and measuring alignment from his portfolio. Georges Dib put it this way, using the language of the Net Zero Investment Framework: "We can no longer be content with simply reducing emissions through financing; we must finance emissions reductions."

This shift requiresincorporate these tools—labels and standards—into a coherent climate strategy at the institutional level : Develop a plan to reduce funding for “brown” initiatives and increase funding for “green” ones; reform governance and compensation systems; train teams and their clients; and design products that provide concrete support to economic actors as they transition.

illu article event pr fi c4f.png

The Carbone 4 Conseil's Finance Division is currently working to translate these principles into operational tools: analyzing frameworks, developing credible pathways, aligning portfolio objectives with engagement plans, and designing products and policies that finance tangible emissions reductions.

Contact the Finance Division at Carbone 4 Conseil

Carbon4Finance provides investors with independent and robust climate and biodiversity data to inform their decisions and strengthen the credibility of their commitments.

Contact Carbon4 Finance