Consultant Column

In the complex chess game of global energy transition, each country's strategic positioning is full of differences. Following the previous article's in-depth analysis of the important roles and development directions of the US and China in nuclear energy and natural gas, this article shifts its perspective to two key economies in Asia and Europe: Japan and the EU. We will explore how these two major blocs are formulating green energy deployment and energy transition pathways in response to their unique geographical, economic, and political environments. The article will also highlight the specific green energy strategies that Japanese and EU companies have adopted to ensure their leading position in global competition amid pressure for global net-zero emissions.

Despite broad global consensus on net-zero emission targets, there are significant differences among countries in defining "green electricity," reflecting their varying land resources, geopolitical considerations, and economic structures. The US tends to include nuclear and natural gas within the broader category of "clean energy," while China focuses on ultra-large-scale deployment of renewable energy. The EU, through its Sustainable Finance Taxonomy, defines nuclear and natural gas as "transitional" sustainable investments under strict conditions.

The 11th (2024) Corporate Governance Evaluation results have been officially announced, and the evaluation system is about to transform. This article will help you quickly grasp the key points of the transition between old and new systems, as well as the new indicator content for the next corporate governance evaluation.

From March 24-30, 2025, the ESG field saw several important developments, particularly those with far-reaching impacts on Taiwan's listed companies. News such as the EU's proposal to simplify sustainability reporting rules, Apple and Foxconn's sustainability milestones, and Taiwan's green talent training program highlight the dynamic changes in global ESG trends.

EU CBAM delayed to 2027, how should Taiwanese enterprises respond? This article analyzes the CBAM mechanism, affected industries, and response strategies to help businesses grasp future carbon trading trends.

On January 20, 2025, with the announcement of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, global carbon reduction efforts faced significant impact. As the world's second-largest carbon emitter, the US's reduced commitment to climate agreements not only weakens the coordination of international cooperation but may also cause some countries and enterprises to relax their carbon reduction efforts. However, supply chain pressure has not diminished, especially as the EU and other regions maintain strict carbon emission management requirements, with global brands and purchasers still requiring supply chain partners to maintain high-standard carbon inventory capabilities.

The 12th Corporate Governance Evaluation significantly increases the 'Promoting Sustainable Development' dimension weighting to nearly 50%, with plans to officially transform into an 'ESG Evaluation' in 2026, demonstrating Taiwan's capital market's continued commitment to corporate governance mechanisms and sustainable development. This article explains the key modifications to this year's indicators to help enterprises prepare in advance and improve their evaluation performance.