Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Next-Generation Climate Finance Solutions Take Centre Stage at the 2026 Climate Investment Challenge

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Wed, 01 Jul 2026 14:43:50 +0000

Next-Generation Climate Finance Solutions Take Centre Stage at the 2026 Climate Investment Challenge

Evie Burrows-Taylor Wed, 01/07/2026 - 14:43

1 July 2026

Two teams took the top prizes: AquaRisk Horizon, a marine risk-analytics platform from New York University, in the Climate Data Analytics track, and the Specialty Crops Resilience Fund, a blended-finance pilot for Indian smallholder farmers from ��ý, in the Innovative Financing Mechanisms track. Now in its seventh year and organised by Imperial College Business School ��ý and the Centre for Climate Finance and Investment, the Challenge held its 2026 final in London on 11 June, where the eight finalist teams pitched to a panel of expert judges.

The Challenge could not have happened without its generous sponsors (General Atlantic, Hitachi, Morgan Stanley and the Centre for Climate Finance and Investment (CCFI) and Centre for Sectoral Economic Performance (CSEP), both at ��ý).

Following a rigorous evaluation process, the teams had been shortlisted across two tracks: Climate Data Analytics and Innovative Financing Mechanisms.

New for 2026, the Climate Data Analytics track focused on tools, models, and decision-support systems that help investors assess climate-related risks and opportunities with greater precision. The Innovative Financing Mechanisms track continued the Challenge’s focus on investable structures, including funds, bonds, securitisation vehicles, and blended finance models designed to deploy capital at scale. Together, the two tracks showcased the breadth of innovation emerging across climate finance, from analytics platforms and transition risk tools to financing vehicles for infrastructure, agriculture, and nature-based solutions. The two-track structure reflects where climate finance is heading: better data and new financial instruments increasingly advance together, since capital follows credible risk measurement, and risk measurement matters only when it helps unlock investment.

The Innovative Financing Mechanisms finalists included Tilo Cooperativo Fund from UC Berkeley, Social Housing Infrastructure Project from University College London, Geopulse Syndicate Fund from Copenhagen Business School, and Specialty Crops Resilience Fund from ��ý. The Climate Data Analytics finalists included AquaRisk Horizon from New York University, Climate360 from ��ý, SIGDRI from University College London, and the Climate Transition Financing Ratio Tool from Columbia University.

The judging panel included: Ashley Edwards (Morgan Stanley), Cornelia Gomez (General Atlantic), Robert Kosowski (��ý) and Rowan Douglas (Centre for Climate Finance and Investment, Imperial). The quality of submissions impressed the panel of senior leaders and academics from across the climate finance ecosystem. Cornelia Gomez, Managing Director and Global Head of Sustainability at General Atlantic, reflected on the calibre of the participants: “Judging this challenge was a genuine reminder of the talent and quality of the next generation of leaders entering this field; the command of financial and sustainability-linked thinking from the teams was exceptional.”

Robert Kosowski, Professor at Imperial Business School, added: “I was impressed by the quality of the presentations, ��ý’ passion for their topics and how ��ý leveraged their work experience and classwork to propose novel solutions. I wish the candidates all the best and hope that their ideas will have the impact they envisaged.” In addition to the judges’ constructive feedback, the winning teams will receive mentoring and technical feedback from Hitachi’s R&D lab.

The winning team in the Climate Data Analytics track was AquaRisk Horizon, developed by Juyeon Kim and Jangho Lee from New York University. AquaRisk Horizon addresses a critical blind spot in aquaculture finance: while many physical risk tools assess damage to fixed infrastructure, they often fail to capture how changing ocean conditions affect living aquatic assets. The platform translates location-specific marine stressors into biological risk indicators and lender-facing credit metrics, including asset-level climate risk scores, debt service coverage impacts, and climate-adjusted probability of default.

The team brings together strong scientific and commercial expertise. Jangho Lee is a postdoctoral researcher at NYU with a background in Earth and Environmental Science from Seoul National University and a PhD from Texas A&M University. His research experience in climate modelling, climate impacts, Python, AI, and diffusion models supports the technical foundation of the platform. Juyeon Kim brings engineering, strategy, and business experience, including prior roles at Samsung Electronics and Daelim, alongside MBA training at NYU Stern. Together, the team combines climate science, biological risk modelling, and financial translation.

The winning team in the Innovative Financing Mechanisms track was Specialty Crops Resilience Fund, developed by an ��ý team led by Dwaipayan Chakraborty, with Summer Hong, Sofian Kurniawan, Snigdha Kyathari, and Rajeshwari H S. The proposal is a £5 million blended finance pilot designed to support Indian smallholder farmers growing climate-resilient specialty crops, beginning with makhana (fox nut) in Bihar and later expanding to saffron and turmeric.

The fund tackles a structural financing challenge faced by smallholder farmers: limited access to bank-recognised collateral often forces farmers into distress sales, reducing income and weakening incentives to maintain climate-positive agricultural systems. In essence, the fund pays farmers a fair price for their crops up front and shares in the gains when those crops sell well, so growers are not forced to sell cheaply after a poor season. Specialty Crops Resilience Fund proposes a structure combining advance purchase agreements, warehouse inventory collateral, escrow waterfalls, parametric insurance, and a Convertible Revenue Right mechanism. The model aims to improve farmer liquidity and income while preserving carbon-stable agricultural landscapes and creating an investable pathway for climate-resilient agriculture.

Together, the two winning teams illustrate the ambition of the 2026 Climate Investment Challenge. AquaRisk Horizon strengthens the information layer behind climate finance by translating ocean stress into actionable credit metrics. Specialty Crops Resilience Fund demonstrates how blended finance can unlock capital for underserved agricultural communities while supporting farmer resilience and climate-positive land use. Their solutions highlight the role of student-led innovation in advancing practical, investment-ready responses to climate challenges. From risk analytics to investable financing structures, the 2026 cohort points to a wider trend: the practical tools needed to move capital toward climate solutions are increasingly being built by the next generation of finance professionals.

Find out more about the Climate Investment Challenge here.

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Finance

Sustainability and climate change

Research Centre

Centre for Climate Finance & Investment

Academic area

Finance

Off

External

Off

The 2026 Climate Investment Challenge brought together student-led climate finance solutions from more than 30 institutions across five continents

Participants in this year's Climate Investment Challenge. Source: Imperial Business School

4 minute read

Climate resilience in focus at London Climate Action Week

Lou Lee — Mon, 14 Apr 2025 10:15:24 +0000

Climate resilience in focus at London Climate Action Week

Lou Lee Mon, 14/04/2025 - 10:15

23 July 2026 News

Negotiating wicked problems with the power of AI

22 July 2026 News

Exploring new frontiers at the Africa Innovates Conference 2026

15 July 2026 News

Business School academic nominated for second term on UK's fiscal watchdog

29 June 2026

Delivered in collaboration with General Atlantic, the event reflected the Centre for Climate Finance and Investment's (CCFI) growing role as a convenor of interdisciplinary expertise on climate risk and finance. Discussions explored how climate-related risks such as extreme weather are increasingly affecting economic stability, infrastructure, and investment decisions, and how organisations are adapting their approach to managing these risks over the long term.

The event opened with a keynote from Abigail Ng, Chief Sustainability Officer at the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), who highlighted climate resilience as a key part of protecting economic security. This was followed by a panel discussion chaired by Rowan Douglas CBE, Honorary Practice Fellow at CCFI, and featuring Kemal Erçevik (Bank of England), Natasha Fowlie (General Atlantic), Paul Munday (S&P Global), Julian Wentzel (HSBC).

A central theme throughout the conversation was the need to integrate climate and nature risks into the core functioning of financial systems, rather than treating them separately. Speakers highlighted the importance of better data, shared standards, and clearer ways of measuring risk in order to improve decision-making across banking, insurance, regulation and investment.

“This is what CCFI is all about: a platform that brings together scholarly excellence and leading market participants to deliver effective solutions at scale.”

Dr Enrico Biffis

Academic Director of CCFI and Professor of Actuarial Finance

Rowan Douglas commented: “We now have our resilience priorities confirmed and an excellent community of financial-sector partners to mobilise with CCFI and Imperial’s School of Convergence Science. Our mission is to help retrain the invisible hand to value resilience and better protect exposed assets and communities in the years and decades ahead.”

In closing remarks, Dr Enrico Biffis, Director of CCFI and Professor of Actuarial Finance and Academic, said: “This is what CCFI is all about: a platform that brings together scholarly excellence and leading market participants to deliver effective solutions at scale.”

The event underscored CCFI’s role within Imperial Business School as a bridge between academic research and industry practice, and highlighted ongoing collaboration with MAS and other partners to strengthen resilience in the face of growing climate challenges.

Panel speakers (from left to right): Natasha Fowlie (General Atlantic), Kemal Ercevik (Bank of England), Julian Wentzel (HSBC), Paul Munday (S&P Global), and Rowan Douglas (Imperial Business School).

Subscribe for research and events from the Business School

Banking

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Finance and institutional resilience

Sustainability and climate change

Research Centre

Centre for Climate Finance & Investment

Academic area

Finance

Economics & Public Policy

Off

External

Off

The Centre for Climate Finance and Investment (CCFI) brought together leaders from finance, insurance, law, technology, policy and academia for an event on Climate Resilience & Economic Security during London Climate Action Week (20-28 June).

Abigail Ng and Rowan Douglas at London Climate Action Week

2 minute read

Are investors falling out of love with ESG?: Forbes quotes CCFI's Mike Wilkins

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Mon, 06 Jan 2025 10:38:43 +0000

Are investors falling out of love with ESG?: Forbes quotes CCFI's Mike Wilkins Evie Burrows-Taylor Mon, 06/01/2025 - 10:38

19 December 2024

Sustainability and climate change

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Corporate Social Responsibility

Bloomberg speaks to Raffaele Della Croce about the climate adaptation lessons London can learn from Singapore and Copenhagen

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Wed, 18 Dec 2024 15:37:59 +0000

Bloomberg speaks to Raffaele Della Croce about the climate adaptation lessons London can learn from Singapore and Copenhagen Evie Burrows-Taylor Wed, 18/12/2024 - 15:37

3 December 2024

Sustainability and climate change

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Sustainability

The selfish case for climate finance: The Financial Times covers new report by Professor Patrick Bolton

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Tue, 03 Dec 2024 15:01:39 +0000

The selfish case for climate finance: The Financial Times covers new report by Professor Patrick Bolton Evie Burrows-Taylor Tue, 03/12/2024 - 15:01

20 November 2024

Sustainability and climate change

Climate Change

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Finance

Mike Wilkins speaks to the Associated Press about climate finance measures at COP29

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Tue, 19 Nov 2024 14:48:31 +0000

Mike Wilkins speaks to the Associated Press about climate finance measures at COP29 Evie Burrows-Taylor Tue, 19/11/2024 - 14:48

11 November 2024

Sustainability and climate change

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

What's holding back the green transition?

Mirabelle Muûls — Mon, 11 Nov 2024 12:21:54 +0000

What's holding back the green transition?

Mirabelle Muûls Mon, 11/11/2024 - 12:21

12 November 2024

New research from Imperial Business School reveals what’s stopping businesses from taking action to protect our overheated planet.

A wide commitment to reach net zero climate goals by 2050 requires a concerted effort from industry and business to make drastic cuts to emissions, consume less and introduce cleaner ways of producing. But this requires major investments.

While multinationals such as Apple have already set zero emissions goals, smaller companies can find it harder to commit. Modest as their individual impact is, combined, they make a substantial difference.

Switching to cleaner ways of doing business requires money and expertise – and we wanted to discover what exactly is hampering progress. How easy is it for smaller firms to find the funds for cleaner technology and methods? How crucial are managers when implementing greener strategies? How important is it for firms to set goals to limit their use of energy and water, and reduce pollution?

Better environmental investments

Our early analysis revealed that firms differ significantly in how much money they can borrow, and the competence of their environmental leadership. Both these factors affect corporate carbon footprints: less money means fewer green investments and better management makes for better environmental investments.

We’ve looked in depth at nearly 11,000 companies in 22 European emerging economies, collaborating with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Our information came from a vast wealth of records including the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register, which holds information on emissions and pollution for industrial facilities, as well as bank data. Crucially, face-to-face surveys with business managers yielded detailed insights into firms’ investments in green technology, the quality of environmental management and availability of credit.

We delved deep into the data and used econometric tools to show that it was indeed credit access and green management practices that prompted a shift in environmental performance.

Nearly all growth in energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions in the coming three decades will come from less developed economies

In order to measure the availability of finance at the level of individual firms, we looked at where banks’ branches are located, and what constraints they were placed under, particularly during the credit squeeze that followed the 2008 global financial crisis.

We also looked at whether corporate knowhow about greener practices tends to spread within regions. Managers in areas that have experienced extreme weather such as flooding, heatwaves and fierce storms tend to be more switched on about the need to improve their businesses’ climate performance. They are also more open to better management, and these insights trickle down among firms.

This work reinforced our initial findings. If businesses can’t borrow the money, they’re less likely to invest in more climate-friendly, but costly, green machinery and vehicles, our analysis shows, or in more efficient heating, lighting and cooling. Only 12 per cent of businesses invested in generating their own green energy. We found too that access to finance is less crucial for “low-hanging fruit” improvements such as energy-efficiency measures.

Weak and ineffective green management appears to hamper most types of green investments.

Why focus on emerging markets?

Nearly all growth in energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions in the coming three decades will come from less developed economies, research shows. These are the countries that desperately need investment to clean up their polluting industries – green investment at this stage could ensure a cleaner transition in the future. It’s a cost-effective way to help fight climate change.

Our analysis also warns against false claims. Although economic decline can herald a short-term drop in emissions, thanks to less activity, the picture is bleaker in the longer term. This is true of the global financial crisis and also of the pandemic – the economic fallout from the crisis damaged longer term green investments because cash was hard to find.

Firms differ significantly in how much money they can borrow, and the competence of their environmental leadership

In areas where banks were hardest hit by the global financial crisis, we showed that carbon emissions were 5.6 per cent higher than they would have been, had banks not deleveraged in the wake of the event. We also find that companies’ weak green management has resulted in emissions 2.3 per cent higher than they might have been with better expertise. And the scarcity of credit in some areas means emissions have been 4.5 per cent above where they would be, had they been able to borrow more cash.

Investing in the environment

Our results provide hope. Some actions are relatively cheap to implement and could lead to businesses cutting emissions – if they set out and stick to an environmental strategy, for instance, and fix clear green targets. Competent managers can also help raise their firms’ green investments and have an impact across a wide range of issues such as emissions, pollution and cleaner practices.

Weak and ineffective green management appears to hamper most types of green investments

These results offer environmental policy makers a broader mix of options beyond the established carbon taxes and carbon markets. Targeted policies could include further requirements to measure and declare emissions and environmental impacts. Development banks could boost credit lines for green investments – more access to finance ensures that businesses invest significantly in the green transition.

Not only should businesses invest in innovative new tech, but also adopt cleaner production technologies that already exist. And stronger environmental leadership within companies would help businesses make more progress towards green goals. These are opportunities that developing economies can’t afford to miss.

This article draws on findings from "Managerial and Financial Barriers to the Green Transition" by Ralph De Haas (European Bank for Reconstruction and Development), Ralf Martin (��ý), Mirabelle Muûls (��ý) Helena Schweiger (European Bank for Reconstruction and Development).

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Monthly newsletter

Receive the latest insights from Imperial Business School

Do consumers really care about sustainability?

Consumers may care about sustainability in theory, but how much does it impact their spending habits? And what can policymakers do to encourage us all to make more eco-friendly choices?

Download PDF

Research Centre

Centre for Climate Finance & Investment

Academic area

Economics & Public Policy

Knowledge Categories

Strategy & Leadership

Off

CCFI's Mike Wilkins tells Reuters why it's key for Asia to shift away from coal

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Fri, 04 Oct 2024 14:50:17 +0000

CCFI's Mike Wilkins tells Reuters why it's key for Asia to shift away from coal Evie Burrows-Taylor Fri, 04/10/2024 - 14:50

1 October 2024

Finance and institutional resilience

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Why are businesses falling short on climate goals?

Marcin Kacperczyk — Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:55:21 +0000

Why are businesses falling short on climate goals?

Marcin Kacperczyk Thu, 18/07/2024 - 13:55

23 July 2024

Despite efforts to improve, large corporations are still playing a major role in the rise in global temperatures. Here, Professor of Finance Marcin Kacperczyk explores why.

At the beginning of 2024, the world reached a sad milestone, completing an entire year in which average global warming exceeded 1.5C. This was, of course, unwelcome news for the 196 nations and territories who pledged “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels” in the 2016 Paris Agreement.

However, to pin the blame purely on states would ignore the parallel impact of business. According to the Carbon Majors Database, the majority of CO2 emissions since the Paris Agreement are directly linked to major corporations. Even if many of those are state-owned, we cannot disregard the key role businesses can play in slowing global temperature rises.

This is not to say companies are not trying. There is a growing culture of environmental transparency and setting climate goals among businesses. So, why are we still failing to keep global warming under control?

Unrealistic targets

Our research explores some of the reasons behind this. We found that most corporate carbon pledges have a short horizon, with almost 50 per cent specifying a target just five years away, and only six per cent setting a target date of 2050, suggesting that many have limited scope to make a real impact. Additionally, 72 per cent of companies with pledges have been falling behind on those commitments, and will need to accelerate their reductions in order to meet their targets.

One possible explanation for this is a lack of market penalties for failing to hit milestones. In 2023, for example, in the wake of soaring oil profits, BP announced it was cutting its 2030 target for reducing oil and gas production from 40 per cent to just 25 per cent, and actually saw its share price increase significantly after the announcement.

The majority of CO2 emissions since the Paris Agreement are directly linked to major corporations

However, this is just one example, and doesn’t explain the root cause. Another possible reason we explored is external energy supply shocks, such as those that arose from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. If this were the main cause, we would expect to see similar commitment failures across all companies, but this is not what we observed.

This suggests that overpromising and unrealistic targets are the real problem for many businesses. Digging deeper into the data, we found that, while no particular industries had a significantly higher rate of failures, there was a link with the length of the carbon pledge, the overall level of emissions, and each company’s sales growth.

Risk factors

Specifically, we first observed that companies making long-term pledges experience lower rates of failure, on average. This seems counterintuitive, as we might assume longer-term pledges face greater uncertainty. However, our findings suggest that gradual, long-term routes to decarbonisation are more realistic and practical to achieve.

We also found that companies with higher emissions levels are more likely to fail, and by bigger margins, than those starting from a less polluting position. Given that we did not observe a strong link with specific industries, this suggests it’s the already best-in-class companies that are most likely to commit and stick to ambitious decarbonisation goals.

Finally, we found companies with higher sales growth were more likely to fail to meet their own targets. This implies that an unexpected surge in sales – and the corresponding upscaling of production – can derail a decarbonisation pathway, and companies that set targets without accurately predicting their own future growth potential are more likely to fail to meet them.

A new approach to decarbonisation

However, none of these risk factors are inescapable. For a start, businesses can make their decarbonisation commitments more robust by stress-testing them before announcing them. This would mean analysing whether targets could still be met during adverse events, and determine what adjustments would need to be made to avoid falling behind.

Alternatively, companies could simply acknowledge – publicly – that they may fail to meet their commitments in certain circumstances, such as external price shocks, unexpected sales growth, or technological changes that reduce the potential of particular carbon reduction innovations. Being upfront about this would increase credibility, particularly if alternative plans were set out clearly.

Long-term routes to decarbonisation are more realistic and practical to achieve

In support of long-term targets, companies could include measurable interim targets. This reduces the risk of management teams leaving carbon commitments to their successors, particularly if their remuneration is partly tied to meeting the interim targets. Some companies, notably energy giant Enel, have taken financial incentivisation even further, releasing sustainability-linked bonds that pay out more if the company fails to meet a specified decarbonisation target.

Whatever tactics companies choose, it’s clear a new approach is needed. Our research suggests that we have seen, in the years since the Paris Agreement, the birth of the first generation of commitments, with an emphasis more on signalling than detailed carbon reduction plans. The next generation of commitments must be more robust, impactful and – crucially – achievable, in order to really slow the rate of global warming.

This article draws on findings from "Behind Schedule: The Corporate Effort to Fulfill Climate Obligations", by Joseph E. Aldy (Harvard University), Patrick Bolton (��ý), Marcin Kacperczyk (��ý) and Zachery M. Halem (Director of the Climate Center at Lazard).

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Sustainability

Sustainability and climate change

Monthly newsletter

Receive the latest insights from Imperial Business School

Do carbon markets work?

In 2005, the European Union created the world's first and largest market-based carbon policy. Here, we look at how it's going.

Download PDF

Research Centre

Centre for Climate Finance & Investment

Academic area

Finance

Knowledge Categories

Finance

Off

Dr Mirabelle Muûls speaks to French newspaper L'Express about carbon pricing and lowering emissions

Evie Burrows-Taylor — Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:22:06 +0000

Dr Mirabelle Muûls speaks to French newspaper L'Express about carbon pricing and lowering emissions Evie Burrows-Taylor Wed, 17/07/2024 - 13:22

12 July 2024

Sustainability and climate change

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Climate Change

Climate Finance

Centre for Climate Finance and Investment

Next-Generation Climate Finance Solutions Take Centre Stage at the 2026 Climate Investment Challenge

Next-Generation Climate Finance Solutions Take Centre Stage at the 2026 Climate Investment Challenge

Share

The 2026 Climate Investment Challenge brought together student-led climate finance solutions from more than 30 institutions across five continents

Climate resilience in focus at London Climate Action Week

Climate resilience in focus at London Climate Action Week

Negotiating wicked problems with the power of AI

Exploring new frontiers at the Africa Innovates Conference 2026

Business School academic nominated for second term on UK's fiscal watchdog

Subscribe for research and events from the Business School

Share

The Centre for Climate Finance and Investment (CCFI) brought together leaders from finance, insurance, law, technology, policy and academia for an event on Climate Resilience & Economic Security during London Climate Action Week (20-28 June).

Are investors falling out of love with ESG?: Forbes quotes CCFI's Mike Wilkins

Share

Bloomberg speaks to Raffaele Della Croce about the climate adaptation lessons London can learn from Singapore and Copenhagen

Share

The selfish case for climate finance: The Financial Times covers new report by Professor Patrick Bolton

Share

Mike Wilkins speaks to the Associated Press about climate finance measures at COP29

Share

What's holding back the green transition?

New research from Imperial Business School reveals what’s stopping businesses from taking action to protect our overheated planet.

Better environmental investments

Why focus on emerging markets?

Investing in the environment

Monthly newsletter

Do consumers really care about sustainability?

CCFI's Mike Wilkins tells Reuters why it's key for Asia to shift away from coal

Share

Why are businesses falling short on climate goals?

Despite efforts to improve, large corporations are still playing a major role in the rise in global temperatures. Here, Professor of Finance Marcin Kacperczyk explores why.

Unrealistic targets

Risk factors

A new approach to decarbonisation

Monthly newsletter

Do carbon markets work?

Dr Mirabelle Muûls speaks to French newspaper L'Express about carbon pricing and lowering emissions

Share