On 25 June 2025, the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI), its academic partner the Transition Pathway Initiative Centre (TPI Centre) at LSE and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), hosted a corporate and investor roundtable as part of London Climate Action Week, held at the London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG). The event brought together more than 80 senior representatives from global companies (mostly in hard-to-abate sectors) and institutional investors for an action-oriented dialogue. Through facilitated roundtable discussions, participants explored how transition plans, disclosures and assessments can support investor decision-making, influence company valuation and guide the scale and direction of capital allocation. 

Participants began by examining the challenges and opportunities surrounding corporate transition plans and how such plans are interpreted and used by investors. One of the central challenges identified was a mismatch in planning horizons. While climate targets often stretch to 2040 or 2050, corporate financial planning typically operates on much shorter cycles of three to five years. This disconnect makes it difficult for investors to assess the credibility of long-term transition strategies. Furthermore, even if most participating investors were committed to supporting the net zero transition, many acknowledged the tension between their climate goals and the focus on short-term financial returns. 
 
There was also broad recognition that transition plans are often light on critical dependencies such as policy frameworks, supply chain readiness, and technological maturity. These omissions make it harder for investors to assess the feasibility of stated targets. Furthermore, participants noted that while companies are increasingly disclosing climate-related data, much of this information remains unverified or unaudited, raising concerns about comparability and reliability.

When discussing what information is most valuable, there was consensus on the need to move beyond emissions metrics alone as indicators of transition planning. Participants emphasised the value of using capital expenditure (capex) data as an indicator of transition plan credibility. Participants from both corporate and investment backgrounds stressed the importance of qualitative narrative alongside quantitative metrics. A well-articulated story about how transition will be achieved is often as influential as the data itself.

To support better planning and assessment, participants recommended more third-party verification of plans, greater transparency around key assumptions, and clearer linkages between sustainability goals and core business strategy.

Session 2: Company-Investor Communication and Transition Finance

The second session explored how companies and investors communicate on transition planning and how this information is used in financial analysis and investment decisions. One of the consistent messages was that the quality of engagement varies widely across sectors and organisations. The most effective communication occurs when sustainability, finance, and investor relations teams work together, ensuring that climate strategies are embedded in the financial narrative.

Companies expressed a desire to better understand what specific information investors need and how they use it. This gap in understanding often leads to frustration, particularly when the same data is requested in different formats or with different interpretations across jurisdictions and investor mandates. On the investor side, there was a call for more clarity, consistency, and forward-looking data to help integrate transition readiness into valuation models and portfolio decisions.

Participants observed that transition data are still not systematically incorporated into mainstream financial valuation, while recognising that they are among many other inputs that influence it. It was noted that the key transition plan inputs that may influence valuation are capex allocation, particularly the balance between green and brown investments, and the growth of low-carbon revenue streams. These were recognised as critical inputs into company cash flow modelling and overall valuation.

The conversation then turned to the deployment of transition finance. A major insight was that current capital flows often prioritise already “green” sectors, leaving harder-to-abate industries with limited access to transition-aligned funding. Participants argued that capital should be redirected to companies that are actively striving to decarbonise, even if their current emissions remain high. These companies often face the greatest barriers and would benefit most from targeted financing.

It was also noted that companies differ by type and also depending on the markets in which they operate. For instance, companies that struggle to attract capital (especially smaller ones or those with poor credit quality) may not see transition plans as a priority, while others may use them as a differentiating factor to signal efforts to put their business models on a stronger footing. At the same time, investors who operate in private markets or in infrastructure may be more willing to provide ‘patient’ capital than others. 

To scale transition finance effectively, participants pointed to the need for blended finance solutions, de-risking mechanisms, and supportive policy frameworks. Instruments such as sustainability-linked bonds and green taxonomies were seen as promising but in need of refinement to be fully effective across different sectors and geographies.

Following the workshop, we asked participants what they learned from the discussions. Below are some highlighted testimonials:
Commenting on the importance of company-investor dialogue, David Russell, Chair of TPI Limited said: “Investors need information upon which to base their buy, sell or hold decisions.  It was useful to have a discussion between investors, companies and the TPI as to how transition plans can impact investment decisions and other investment processes such as asset allocation and stewardship activities.” 

On the importance of transparency around corporate efforts to decarbonise, Chris Van Der Merwe, Responsible Investment Manager at Brunel Pension Partnership said: “Many companies are taking meaningful internal steps toward transition, but these efforts often remain behind closed doors. As investors, we need transparency to understand not only the ambition companies are setting but also the practical actions they are taking and the gap that may exist between ambition and implementation. This clarity is essential for evaluating credibility and long-term value." 

Reflecting on portfolio alignment, Carlotta Carlota Garcia-Mana, Head of Climate Transition and ESG Engagement at Royal London Asset Management added: “Some of our clients have expectations that the portfolios we manage on their behalf are, over time, as aligned as possible to the goals of the Paris Agreement. Corporate climate assessments permit our investment teams to be informed about the alignment of the holdings they invest in.” 

Thank you for your valuable contributions to the TPI & WBCSD Corporate-Investor Transition Dialogue. Your insights and active participation helped foster an engaging discussion on how we can collectively accelerate progress toward a low-carbon economy. We aim to provide more opportunities for further investor-corporate dialogue on the challenges of the transition.

As a follow-up to the dialogue, we invite you to consider the following next steps:

For further information on our research and data, please visit our websites: