I.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND SURVEY RESULTS

The Research Context
 
This report focuses on sustainable banking as one of the fastest changing segments of sustainable finance.  The research 
done to support this report had several objectives.  First, it had to capture the overall picture of the emerging market 
banking sector with regard to its view on social and environmental issues and integration of sustainability practices in 
business decisionmaking.  Second, it had to document the concrete experience of emerging market banks in successfully 
implementing  social  and  environmental  management  system,  and  explore  their  business  rationale  for  pursuing 
opportunities  related  to  sustainability.    Third,  it  had  to  determine  the  role  of  IFC  capacity  building  programs  in 
improving  understanding  and  promoting  implementation  of  sustainable  finance  principles  in  emerging  markets.  
Fourth,  it  had  to  build  and  expand  the  findings  of  the  previous  research  on  this  subject,  summarized  in  IFC’s  2003 
publication, Beyond Risk.  In the view of these objectives, the research methodology included two components: 
 
Stage 1.  Administration of a survey, based on an online questionnaire to all financial institutions that had participated 
in  IFC  Competitive  Business  Advantage  (CBA)  workshops  from  July  2002  to  September  2005.  These  institutions  had 
already been introduced to the concept of sustainable finance through the workshops.   
Stage  2.    Collection  and  analysis  of  best  practice  examples  of  emerging  market  banking  institutions  that  had 
participated in the workshops. 

The Questionnaire-based Survey

Scope of the Questionnaire
The issues covered in the questionnaire included: 
 
⁻ The respondent’s professional level and functional role  
⁻ Profile of the financial institutions, including industries financed, domestic or foreign status, main lines of 
business, average number of employees, value of assets, transaction size 
⁻ Main sources of social and environmental risks for the financial institutions and its clients 
⁻ Views of financial institutions on the ways to capitalize on sustainability opportunities 
⁻ Key reasons to consider social and environmental sustainability issues 
⁻ Implementation of social and environmental sustainability standards, tools, and management systems 
⁻ Barriers to implementation 
⁻ Key business impacts of considering social and environmental sustainability issues 
⁻ Demand for IFC assistance on sustainability issues, such as further information, technical assistance and 
advisory services, financial support, product offerings in sustainability areas, and providing means to enhance 
sustainability learning. 

Respondent Profiling and Generation of a Distribution List

To meet the goals of this report and expand the findings of the Beyond Risk research, the 2005 survey included financial 
institutions  that  participated  in  IFC’s  Competitive  Business  Advantage  workshops  from  October  2002  to  September 
2005.  To ensure the accuracy of the survey data, representatives of IFC who attended these workshops were excluded 
from the survey.  

Survey Administration
The survey was administered through a professional online engine that allowed for easy distribution, high interactivity 
of the questionnaire depending on individual responses, and effective tracking of responses.  An invitation to complete 
a survey was sent out through the online engine.  The invitation then directed survey respondents to a Web site where 
they could view and complete the questionnaire.  The engine also provided tools for initial analysis of survey results.  

1
To ensure a higher response rate, the questionnaire was translated and distributed in Russian and Spanish to 
respondents from Russian‐ and Spanish‐speaking countries.  Telephone calls were made to the entire survey 
distribution list to ensure that prospective respondents had received the questionnaire and to address any question or 
technical issues they might have. 

Sample Size and Response Rate

The initial survey distribution list consisted of 498 potential respondents.  Despite the obvious advantages of an online 
survey, a common technical obstacle is inaccessibility of certain e‐mail addresses because of server failures or the fact 
that these addresses no longer exist.  In this case, 121 responses were received and 84 e‐mail addresses on the original 
list were unreachable.  Therefore, the overall response rate was 24 percent, if technical failures are not taken into 
account.  However, the response rate increases to 29 percent if the calculation is based on the number of actual survey 
recipients (total number of survey invitations sent less the number of “bounce‐back” e‐mail addresses).  
 

Best Practice Examples

Best  practice  examples  were  collected  from  17  financial  institutions,  whose  representatives  have  participated  in 
Competitive Business Advantage workshops.  For the selection process, the following criteria were applied: 
• Focus on the banking sector: Since this study has a specific focus on the banking sector, institutions had to be 
engaged in a variety of activating related to commercial banking, such as lending, leasing, and/or commercial 
microfinance. 
• Focus on regional diversity: To demonstrate the business case in all emerging markets, the choice of best practice 
examples was also diversified by region. 
• Focus on expertise in sustainability management: The examples had to be from financial institutions that had made 
concrete steps toward implementing a SEMS. 
• Focus on the business case for innovation:  Financial institutions had to align sustainable innovation with their 
business goals and strategy. 
• Focus on diversity of sustainability areas:  Examples had to cover innovations in a wide variety of sustainability‐
related areas discussed in this report, such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, biodiversity conservation, 
and social finance. 
Representatives of these financial institutions were contacted and personal interviews were conducted by phone.  The 
interviews focused on: 
• Business goals of financial institutions 
• Recent market challenges they faced 
• Social and environmental management practices used to identify and mitigate risks and/pursue opportunities 
• Elements of the SEMS developed by financial institutions and their integration into corporate management 
systems, such as risk management, human recourse management, monitoring and evaluation, and reporting 
• Concrete examples of sustainability‐related investment projects; the focus included both projects that invest 
directly in sustainability areas (such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, and biodiversity conservation) and 
“business as usual” projects that included sustainability‐related components that led to overall improvement in 
projects (such as risk reduction, cost reduction, revenue increase)  
• Overall financial and nonfinancial results achieved by a financial institution as a result of considering social and 
environmental issues 
Additional information for the best practice examples was also collected through: 
• Documentation and additional information supplied by financial institutions 
• Official information available through the financial institution’s Web site and financial and nonfinancial reports 
(such as sustainability reports) 
• Internal IFC documents and project files 
• Personal interviews with IFC investment staff 

2
II. SURVEY RESULTS
 
The 2005 IFC survey collected and analyzed data from over a hundred emerging markets financial institutions in 
43 countries.  While the analysis in this publication focused on survey results reported by commercial banks, the 
quantitative  data  that  follows  represents  aggregated  results  for  all  financial  institutions  that  participated  in  the 
survey, unless otherwise stated. 

Respondent Profile
 
All Respondents
 
Fifty‐five percent of financial institutions surveyed were domestic in their respective countries, 27 percent were 
foreign, 4 percent were international financial organizations like IFC, and 14 percent represented other forms of 
ownership (such as regional banks and domestic banks with foreign capital). 
 
Sixty percent of the institutions were IFC clients; 25 percent were not.  The remaining 15 percent had other forms 
of affiliation with IFC, such as partnerships. 
 

Types of Financial Institutions Surveyed Professional Level of Survey Participants

(percent of respondents) (percent of respondents)
Developme Risk
nt Manager
Investment Other
bank/Multilat 3
Other Officer 5
eral Commercial
organization 13 bank 4
Senior
7 41
Environment Manager
al Specialist 36
18

Private
equity
Investment Business Credit/Loan
21
Microfinance Leasing Insurance bank Developmen Officer
6 7 0 5 t Officer 24
10
 
Figure 1  Figure 2 

Regional Distribution of Financial Institutions Main Sectors Financed

Surveyed
(percent of respondents) Domestic general manufacturing 63
Agriculture 50
Sub
Middle East Infrastructure 49
Rest of the Saharan and North
Asia Africa
Tourism 33
World Africa
7 2 17 Extractive industries 31
4
Latin Health and Education 25
America Hi-tech 20
32 Trade 14
Other 13
Central and Biodiversity 8
Eastern Construction and Real Estate 7
Southern Europe
Europe and Finance 4
19
Central Asia 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
19 percent of respondents

Figure 3  Figure 4 

3
Commercial Bank Respondents
 
Sixty‐seven percent of commercial banks surveyed were domestic in their respective countries, 21 percent were 
foreign, 12 percent were international banks and 14 percent represented other forms of ownership (such as 
regional banks and domestic banks with foreign capital). 
 
Seventy‐seven percent of commercial banks were IFC clients; 14 percent were not.  The remaining 9 percent had 
other forms of affiliation with IFC, such as partnerships. 
 
Regional Distribution of Commercial Banks Professional Level of Survey Participants,
Surveyed Commercal Banks
(percent of respondents) (percent of respondents)
Sub Investment Risk
Rest of the Middle East
Saharan Officer Manager
World Asia and North
Latin Africa 0 8 Senior
5 0 Africa Other
America 12 Manager
2 5
23 Environmen
28
tal
Specialist
14

Southern Central and

Europe and Eastern Business
Central Credit/Loan
Europe Developmen
Asia Officer
28 t Officer
30 34
11

Figure 5  Figure 6 
 
Main Lines of Business, Commercial Banks

Corporate finance 76

Consumer finance 71

Project finance 64

SME finance 62

Housing finance 55

other 21

‐ 20 40 60 80 100

percent of respondents who mentioned a business line

 
Figure 7 

4
Reasons Why Banks Consider Social and Environmental Issues

Virtually all the survey respondents (97 percent) reported that they consider social and environmental issues 
either by managing risks (40 percent), developing business opportunities, or both.  Some 57 percent said that their 
banks consider social and environmental opportunities. 
 

Key Reasons Why Banks Consider Environmental and Social

Issues
Increased credibility and gain in reputation 66

Demand by investors 57

Increased value to stakeholders 51

Lower risk and better returns 40

Bank/clients facing liability claims 15

Demand by clients 13

Other 13

Nonperforming loan experience 10

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

percent of respondents
 
 
Figure 8 

How Financial Institutions Perceive Social and Environmental Risks

The following figures demonstrate how financial institutions that responded to IFC 2005 survey perceive 
social and environmental risks for their clients and for themselves. 

Banks’ Perceptions of Key Social and Environmental Risks Facing Their

Clients

Environmental legal issues 76

Health and safety for workers 72

Disruption of operations 70
Loss of market share because of
46
environmental regulations
Market devaluation because of social or
26
environmental liabilities
Loss of liability insurance coverage 15

Other 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

percent of respondents

Figure 9 

5
  

Key Social and Environemntal Risks Indentified by Financial Insitutions

Reputational risk / Negative publicity w ith customers,

shareholders and the general public 76
Credit risk (defaults, payments rescheduling) 59
Nonperforming loans/investments/leases 45
Security (devalued collateral) 39
Loss of financing from international financial institutions 38
Liability for clean up of contaminated property/collateral 32
Reduced access to capital from private financial
institutions/international bond market 32
Potential civil or criminal liability for negligence 31
Loss of depositors or retail clients 11
Other 3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
percent of respondents
 
Figure 10 

Main Areas of Social and Environmental Business Opportunities

 
 The following figure shows areas where financial institutions that responded to IFC 2005 survey see   
opportunities to benefit from considering social and environmental issues 

Main Areas of Social and Environmental Business Opportunities

Developing business in sustainable areas 66

Getting access to new markets 59

Providing loans for environmental projects 55

Improving access to financing from international
55
financial institutions
Providing advisory services/loans for eco-
44
efficiency and cleaner production
Attracting improved terms of insurance 11

Other 2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
percent of respondents

Figure 11 

6
Implementation of Social and Environmental Sustainability Management Practices

Eighty‐two percent of financial institutions that answered the survey reported that they used one or several social 
and environmental procedures before participating in the IFC Competitive Business Advantage (CBA) 
workshops. The types of procedures and tools used are presented in the following figures. Sixty‐eight percent 
reported that their institutions have developed a formal SEMS following their participation in a CBA workshop. 
Twelve percent reported that their financial institutions have also developed financial products in sustainable 
areas. 
 

Use of Social and Environmental Standards Use of Social and Environmental Tools Prior to
Prior to IFC Workshops IFC Workshops

Local social and environmental Site visit 77

regulations 85
Environmental
72
impact
IFC's exclusion list
54 Environmental
34
audit
IFC's project categorization Environmental
41 11
liability
Cleaner
IFC's safeguard policies 13
37 production

Other 9
Other
15
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 10 20 30 40 50
Percent of respondents
60 70 80 90 Perent of respondents

Figure 13 
Figure 12 

Elements of Environmental and Social Sustainability Management System Developed

Identified social and environmental risks and opportunities 75

Developed procedures to integrate social and environmental considerations
into project screening and client evaluation 58

Articulated objectives for social and environmental risk management 48

Developed an action plan and/or allocated resources system
implementation 41

Designed a formal sustainability policy 38

Established a monitoring and evaluation procedure for social and
environmental management 36
Identified internal training needs for environmental and sustainability
management
35
Specified criteria to use for reviewing and screening investments (e.g.
exclusion lists, local environmental regulations) 30
Held media events and/or undertook reporting initiatives to communicate
sustainability achievements both internally and to stakeholders
28

Defined and assigned responsibilities for system implementation 25

Created an environment/sustainability department or unit 22

Identified environmentally related business opportunities using business
case matrix 19
Established incentive schemes to motivate the investment officers to pay
attention to social and environmental issues
12
Nominated board representative responsible for social and environmental
sustainability 12
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent of respondents

Figure 14 
7
   Financial Products in Sustainable Areas Developed
 
  Other 18
  Renewable energy finance 18
  Environmental venture capital 12
  Environmental credit cards 12
  Cleaner production technology 24
Carbon emission trading schemes 6
 
Sustainable leasing 12
 
Environmental loan for SMEs 41
  Sustainable equity fund 6
  Environmental liability insurance 0
  Green mortgages 6
  Green investment funds 24
  0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Percent of respondents
35 40 45

 
Figure 15 
                                   
Perceptions of Barriers to Implementing Social and Environmental Sustainability Management
Practices and System
 
Financial institutions that considered social and environmental issues in their management practices reported a 
number of barriers to implementation.  The survey results varied depending on whether financial institutions had 
implemented (or were in the process of implementing) a SEMS or had not yet implemented a formal social and 
environmental sustainability the system. 
 
Perceptions of Barriers to Perceptions of Barriers to
Implementation, Financial Institutions Implementation, Financial Institutions
that Had Not Implemented a Social and that Had Implemented a Social and
Environmental Management System Environmental Management System
Lack of best practice cases about social and
environmental management for financial institutions in 49 45
the emerging markets
No qualified environmental consultants to advise clients 35 26

Cost of developing and implementing internal guidelines

32 35
and procedures is too high

Lack of know-how/in-house capacity 30 43

Senior management does not see the need for social

24 17
and environmental risk management

Other 24 12
Potential inconsistencies between government
regulations and IFC/organization social and/or 19 25
environmental requirements
No qualified environmental consultants to advise your
19 11
institution

It is not standard financial practice 19 18

The belief that there is no business gain 8 15

Customers do not demand it 8 0

Concerns on how shareholders will view this change 8 11

Table 1 
8
Business Impact of Considering and Managing Social and Environmental Issues

Most of the financial institutions that responded to the survey—81 percent—reported that positive changes had 
resulted from their steps to integrate social and environmental sustainability issues in their business, either by 
implementing a formal SEMS or using other procedures. About a quarter of these respondents (26 percent) 
perceived these changes as significant.  Not a single respondent reported a negative change from considering 
social and environmental issues.   
 
These figures varied for financial institutions that considered social and environmental risks only as opposed to 
considering both risks and sustainability‐related opportunities.  While 79 percent of respondents whose financial 
institutions considered risks only reported a positive change in their business, this figure was higher (84 percent) 
for those who considered both risks and opportunities.  Notably, only 21 percent of respondents whose 
institutions considered risks only perceived this change to be significant compared to 33 percent for those who 
considered both. 
 
 
Benefits of Considering Social and Environmental Issues
 
 
  Increased revenues 59
  Improved community relations 50
  Reduced risk 41
 
Improved access to international financing 39
 
  Improved brand value and reputation 29
  Cost savings 13
  Better quality of work 9
 
Developed new business 7
 
  Developed new products and services 4
  Other 2
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
 
Percent of respondents
 
 
Figure 16 

IFC Assistance Requested

All Respondents
 
Most financial institutions (85 percent) that responded to the survey indicted that they would like to receive 
further assistance from IFC on social and environmental sustainability issues.  The type of assistance requested 
was distributed as follows: 
⁻ Providing technical assistance and advisory services (82 percent) 
⁻ Providing information  (79 percent) 
⁻ Providing means to enhance sustainability learning  (66 percent) 
⁻ Providing sustainability‐related business opportunities and new products (57 percent) 
⁻ Providing financial resources (54 percent). 
The figures below break down the preferences within these categories. 
 

9
 Technical Assistance and Advisory Services

Training staff in environmental risk management and sustainability

opportunities 76
Advanced workshops for implementing performance-focused social
and environmental management system 61
Advice on how to identify the risks and determine what insurance is
required 57
Advisory services for sustainability business development 51
Technical assistance for IFC's sustainability products 49

Training local consultants to assist clients 44

In-house support on social and environmental management system
implementation
39
Advice/assistance on how to incorporate insurance requirements
into the financing agreements
32

Other 1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent of respondents

Figure 17 
 
Informational Support

Industry risk briefings: provide updated information on international

risk/opportunities by sector
76
Market briefings: signaling environmental value-added to regional
analysts, raters, media, central banks)
62

Country-specific sustainability topics 61

Sector strategies (e.g. sustainability in auto industry) 47

Private Equity/Venture Capital and Sustainability 43

Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) 43

Share insurance market intelligence in each country (local players,
availability of coverage pricing etc.) 33

Other 6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Percent of respondents
 
Figure 18 
 
  Most useful
Means to Enhance Sustainability Learning
  Less useful
  Dedicated web-page
- for sustainability in the financial 77
sector
  14
Practical tools (ex. Software for environmental
  assessments interactive CD-Rom)
76
16
  Newsletter for wide distribution to workshop parcitipants
55
  36
  Directory of sustainability companies in emerging
54
markets
34
 
Directory of sustainability suppliers in emerging
  markets
51
36
  51
-On-line direct learning 38
 
Create a networking platform between IFC workshop
  participants
47
38
 
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
 
  Percent of respondents

 
 
Figure 19 

10
 Sustainability-related business opportunities Financial Assistance
and new products

Agri-business 74
Debt 56
Energy Efficiency Finance 60
Partial Risk Guarantees 53
Renewable Energy 57
Eco-tourism 55 Non-reimbursable Grants 43
Clean Technologies 52
Equity 37
Bio-diversity conservation 40
Reimbursable Grants 30
Carbon Finance 36
Other 4 Other 7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percent of respondents Percent of respondents

Figure 20  Figure 21 

Commercial Bank Respondents

Among commercial banks that responded to the survey, 86 percent indicted that they would like to receive 
further assistance from IFC on social and environmental sustainability issues.  The type of assistance requested 
was distributed as follows: 
⁻ Providing means to enhance sustainability learning (73 percent) 
⁻ Providing information  (70 percent)   
⁻ Providing technical assistance and advisory services  (68 percent) 
⁻ Providing sustainability‐related business opportunities and new products  (51 percent) 
⁻ Providing financial resources  (49 percent) 
The figures below break down the preferences within these categories. 
 
Technical Assistance and Advisory Services: Commercial Bank Response
Training staff in environmental risk management and
sustainability opportunities 72
Advanced w orkshops for implementing performance-focused
social and environmental management system 66
Advice on how to identify the risks and determine w hat
insurance is required 63
Advisory services for sustainability business development 59
Technical assistance for IFC's sustainability products 44
Training local consultants to assist clients 44
In-house support on social and environmental management
system implementation 34
Advice/assistance on how to incorporate insurance
requirements into the financing agreements 22
Other 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent of respondents

Figure 22 
 

11
 Informational Support: Commercial Bank Response

Industry risk briefings: provide updated information on

international risk/opportunities by sector 88
Market briefings: signaling environmental value-added to
regional analysts, raters, media, central banks) 58
Country-specific sustainability topics 55
Sector strategies (e.g. sustainability in auto industry) 55
Private Equity/Venture Capital and Sustainability 33
Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) 33
Share insurance market intelligence in each country (local
players, availability of coverage pricing etc.) 30
Other 6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of respondents

Figure 23 

Most useful
Means to Enhance Sustainability Learning: Commercial Bank Response
Less useful
Practical tools (ex. Softw are for environmental assessments 82
interactive CD-Rom) 15

Dedicated w eb-page for sustainability in the financial sector

77
24

New sletter for w ide distribution to w orkshop participants

59
38

Directory of sustainability companies in emerging markets 47

47

On-line direct learning

47
47
Create a netw orking platform betw een IFC w orkshop 44
participants 53

Directory of sustainability suppliers in emerging markets

41
53

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Percent of respondents

Figure 24 
 
 
Sustainability-related business Financial Assistance: Commerical Bank
opportunities and new products: Response  
Commerical Bank Response  
Debt 59  
Agri-business 81
 
Partial Risk
Energy Efficiency Finance 58 52  
Guarantees
Renewable Energy 52 Non-  
reimbursable 37  
Eco-tourism 49
 
Clean Technologies 42 Equity 26
 
Carbon Finance 39 Reimbursable
22  
Bio-diversity conservation 19 Grants
 
Other 3 Other 4  
0 20 40 60 80 100  
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percent of respondents  
Percent of respondents
 
Figure 25  Figure 26 
12
III. IFC COMPETITIVE BUSINESS ADVANTAGE WORKSHOP IN
SUSTAINABLE FINANCE
 
The Sustainable Finance Workshop: A Learning Experience with a Difference
 
Three characteristics set the IFC Sustainable Finance Workshop apart from traditional seminars on environmental 
or social issues.  
 
Clearly defined deliverables: In the workshop you will acquire know‐how and the skills to deal with sustainability 
issues. However, the course is not intended to be a mere class exercise. You are expected to be productive and to 
work on an outline social and environmental management system (SEMS). This will be tailored to your institution 
and ready for implementation at the end of the workshop. 
 
The financial professionalʹs business perspective: The concepts and language used in the workshop are those familiar 
in the financial sector. Taking a business perspective means analyzing social and environmental issues in terms of 
financial risks, investment opportunities and reputation.  Sustainability jargon is kept to a minimum. 
 
High interactivity: Expect a high level of interaction. The workshop is designed to create synergies between 
participantsʹ expertise, thought‐provoking inputs by trainers, and support by seasoned coaches. 
 

Target Audience
 
The workshop is tailored to management staff in financial institutions who are in charge of sustainability issues, 
environmental management, or credit risk management. A modular structure makes the course suitable for both 
beginners and advanced professionals familiar with social and environmental issues. 
 

Practical Approach, Business Perspective

 
Capacity‐building is the first objective of the workshop. You will acquire the skills for analyzing, discussing, and 
managing sustainability issues within your institution and with relevant stakeholders. 
 
The focus, however, is on the second objective: to set up an outline of SEMS that deals with the issues relevant to 
your institution and in your business environment. Guidance is provided in the form of a workbook designed to 
accompany your work on the SEMS and to serve as a blueprint before, during, and after the training event. 
 
Implementing SEMS benefits financial institutions in two ways: 
• Firstly, by capitalizing on the business case linked to sustainability issues. 
• Secondly, by ensuring compliance with IFC guidelines/policies. 
 
It is this practical focus that distinguishes the Sustainable Finance Workshops from similar courses that 
traditionally focus on awareness‐raising. You will start to deal with sustainability issues and to set up your SEMS 
while still in the workshop, while experienced coaches are on hand to provide you with any support you may 
require. 
 
If your institution already has social and environmental management system running, the workshop is a good 
opportunity to review it. 

13
Content: Five Steps toward a Social and Environmental Management System
 
In the workshop you will take six steps towards your SEMS. Each step is initiated by a presentation providing 
you with a thorough understanding of the issues at hand and a range of conceptual tools you may find useful in 
your work. 
 
Step 1:  Analyze and Prioritize 
 
Step 2: Sustainability Policy 
 
Step 3: Procedures 
 
Step 4: Resources and Planning 
 
Step 5: Monitoring and Feedback 
 
Break‐out sessions will be available for those interested in particular business areas such as insurance, or for 
participants with expertise in managing sustainability issues. 
 

Training and Coaching By Experienced Professionals

 
The trainers delivering the sustainable finance workshops and the coaches supporting you in your work on the 
SEMS have a sound background in both finance and sustainability issues. 
 
• This encompasses, first of all, a thorough understanding of a bankʹs mechanics and business activities. 
 
• Secondly, trainers are both familiar with environmental, social, and development problems and have the 
expertise to discuss these from a business perspective. 
 
• Thirdly, you will be able to draw from the coachesʹ experience in setting up and maintaining 
management systems dealing with risk, sustainability, environmental issues and quality. 
 
 
 

14
IV. COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL/BUSINESS ADVANTAGE
WORKSHOPS, JULY 2002–MID-2006
 

2002 2005
Miami (September) Johannesburg (February)
London (October) Sarajevo (March)
Moscow (October) Belgrade (March)
Skopje (April)
2003 Tirana (April)
Miami (May)
Istanbul (February) Singapore (July)
Johannesburg (June) Ulaanbaatar (October)
Lagos (June) Bucharest (October)
Budapest (November) Tunisia (November)
Miami (December) Sao Paulo (November)
Washington, DC (December) Ho Chi Minh (November)
Hanoi (December)
2004
2006
Dakar (March)
Washington, DC (April) Singapore (March)
Sao Paulo (May) Cairo (May)
Beijing (June) Apia (May)
Sao Paulo (July) Casablanca (June)
Dhaka (October) Hong Kong (June)
Bucharest (October) Shanghai (October)
Moscow (November)
Miami (December)

 
 
Note:  For the list of workshops from November 1997 to October 2002, see Beyond Risk (IFC, 2003). 

15