We were on the lookout for good ESG news that materialized over the holidays but may have been overlooked as we all celebrated our key Western holidays sustainably cheerfully. Our top three:

#1 A ban on microbeads in health and beauty products passed the US Congress just before the holiday break. And that’s not all. It passed “without changing a word and by unanimous consent”. John Schwartz of the New York Times filed an article that nicely summarizes the bill’s passing, underlying motivations for federal legislation and interest groups’ voices. A substantive feat – and also a great reference point on future environmental policy making. Helpful conditions that were in effect prior to the legislation passing appear to have contributed to success: a clearly defined scope, backed by science, initiated at the local level by consumer demand, limited consumer downsides to product alteration, and manufacturer alignment to a new normal.

#2 China launched official rules on issuing green bonds, the first country to do so. The momentum for green bonds globally is enormous, both on the supply and demand side, despite the fact that the exact definition what is considered a green bond is still in flux, albeit converging.  Global intentions (such as the Green Bond Principles) are being translated into standards and local contexts and cultures. Of course, there has been abuse of the intent of the “green bond” label during this storming phase. Of note in China’s pioneering formal standards is that “clean coal” qualifies for a green bond – contrary to what the Climate Bonds Initiative recommends, but somewhat in line with the Multilateral Development Banks that have to balance development and climate policy in light of their mandates and constituencies’ needs and interests. However, the misalignment on coal doesn’t mean that the Climate Bonds Initiative hasn’t been a champion of China’s effort, contributing significantly, in conjunction with the International Institute for Sustainable Development, to China’s research efforts and momentum (key reports here and here). Climate Bonds Initiative’s Sean Kidney’s engaging blog posts (sample here and here) highlight the iterative research efforts, rounds of consultations, sponsorship from the top, and energetic leadership on the road to formalizing these guidelines. Congratulations to all for leading the charge on issuing these guidelines rapidly in what appears to be a well-orchestrated and transparent manner.

#3 Japan stated that it would, by May 2016, compile its climate change plan that will detail how it intends to make its emission reduction pledge – 26% below 2013 emissions levels by 2030 – a reality, including at least considering a national emissions trading system (ETS) as part of the plan. A minor piece of news on substance to “consider a national ETS” but important given Japan’s rocky record on consistency around low carbon energy policy. The stars really haven’t been aligning to transition seamlessly to a low carbon energy mix: The host nation of the Kyoto Protocol, Japan was rattled by the Fukushima disaster in 2011, deeply questioning the safety of nuclear power and thus its role in Japan’s future energy mix. Further, as an island nation and energy importer, the nation’s sensitivities around cost competitiveness are not surprising in the context of Japan’s Lost Two Decades. The chances of Japan actually operationalizing a mandatory national ETS in the near future are rather slim if one considers history and influencing voices. Currently, the environment on carbon reduction policy mechanisms consist of a few local emissions trading schemes, a (comparatively low) carbon tax on fossil fuels and some few voluntary schemes – along with past intents of a mandatory national ETS that were shelved. As a bright spot, scalable carbon trading infrastructure ought to be in place, deployable whenever Japan is ready for it politically. Grappling with the energy consequences of the Fukushima disaster, Japan increased its efficiency efforts tremendously, sported the the world’s most valuable solar incentives for a while, then slashed them two years later, while having already backed away from stated emissions reduction goals in 2013, and is currently at a standstill on integration of renewables into its (arguably capacity-challenged) grids. In light of this lack of overarching consistency on low carbon energy policy, any signals of continuation that the country is working towards realizing sizable reductions bodes well – for now.