OCDE - Mapping climate-related metrics in the financial sector

OECD Business and Finance Policy Papers Mapping climate-related metrics in the financial sector No.96 1

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Mapping climate-related metrics in the financial sector

PUBE2 

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Mapping climate-related metrics in the financial sector Financial institutions face considerable challenges in measuring and disclosing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, particularly for financed emissions. Data gaps, evolving methodologies and varying levels of granularity can hinder the comparability of the information disclosed. This paper identifies the main data gaps hindering the assessment of financial institutions’ progress toward their GHG emission reduction targets and netzero commitments. Drawing on several third-party data sources, it also presents an analysis of the ambition, scope and feasibility of climate commitments disclosed. The paper also proposes a framework to monitor the transparency, comparability, and credibility of net-zero commitments in the financial sector.

This paper is part of the series “ OECD Business and Finance Policy Papers ”, https://doi.org/10.1787/bf84ff64-en. 3

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

© OECD 2026.

This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary -General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Member countries of the OECD.

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

© OECD 2026.

This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary -General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Member countries of the OECD. This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

Cover design: © Mariia Vitkovska / Getty Images

Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. By using this work, you accept to be bound by the terms of this licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Attribution – you must cite the work. Translations – you must cite the original work, identify changes to the original and add the following text: In the event of any discrepancy between the original work and the translation, only the text of original work should be considered valid. Adaptations – you must cite the original work and add the following text: This is an adaptation of an original work by the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed in this adaptation should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its Member countries. Third-party material – the licence does not apply to third-party material in the work. If using such material, you are responsible for obtaining permission from the third party and for any claims of infringement. You must not use the OECD logo, visual identity or cover image without express permission or suggest the OECD endorses your use of the work. Any dispute arising under this licence shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Arbitration Rules 2012. The seat of arbitration shall be Paris (France). The number of arbitrators shall be one.4 

use of the work. Any dispute arising under this licence shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Arbitration Rules 2012. The seat of arbitration shall be Paris (France). The number of arbitrators shall be one.4 

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Foreword Robust, comparable, and decision -useful climate-related metrics are essential for financial institutions to effectively manage risks to which they are exposed. Scope 3 emissions, which include emissions by the debtors and portfolio companies of a financial institution , are especially relevant for the financial sector accounting for the largest share of its GHG emissions. Yet assessing climate-related exposures requires more than GHG emissions data alone and they must be complemented by information on portfolio composition, including investments in high - and low -carbon activities, as well as on the company’s engagement practices, governance frameworks, and transition strategies. Financial institutions continue to face considerable challenges in measuring and disclosing GHG emissions, particularly for financed emissions. Data gaps, evolving methodologies, and varying levels of granularity can hinder the comparability of disclosed i nformation. These challenges are especially pronounced for smaller institutions and in emerging and developing economies, where data availability is more limited. In addition, key asset classes such as private equity, sovereign bonds, and loans often fall outside the scope of the most commonly used methodologies, leading to blind spots in assessing climaterelated risks and exposures. A key pillar of credible climate risk management is the adoption and disclosure of clear GHG emissions reduction targets. Robust net -zero commitments, accompanied by transparent reporting on progress, enhance accountability, support effective risk management, and build trust among stakeholders. Targets offer strategic direction internally, while enabling external stakeholders to evaluate whether institutions are on track toward their climate commitments. To track progress toward emission targets, financial institutions typically rely on both absolute and intensity-based metrics. This paper identifies the main data gaps hindering the assessment of financial institutions’ progress toward

offer strategic direction internally, while enabling external stakeholders to evaluate whether institutions are on track toward their climate commitments. To track progress toward emission targets, financial institutions typically rely on both absolute and intensity-based metrics. This paper identifies the main data gaps hindering the assessment of financial institutions’ progress toward their GHG emission reduction targets and net -zero commitments. Drawing on several third-party data sources, it presents an analysis of the ambition, scope, and feasibility of disclosed climate commitments. By mapping these challenges, this paper proposes a framework to monitor the transparency, comparability, and credibility of net-zero commitments in the financial sector. This paper has been developed by the Capital Markets and Financial Institutions Division of the OECD Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs. It was prepared by Valentina Cociancich and Xue Han, with the support of John O’Shea and Matthis Cadeau, under the supervision of Caio de Oliveira, Head of the Sustainable Finance and Corporate Governance Team, and Serdar Çelik, Head of Division. Input was provided by delegates to the OECD Working Party on Sustainable Finance. 5

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Table of contents Foreword 4 Abbreviations and acronyms 7 Executive summary 8 1 Introduction 10 2 Market practices 11 2.1. A comprehensive set of information points and metrics for the financial sector 11 2.2. Disclosure of GHG emission metrics 13 2.3. Disclosure of GHG emission reduction targets and net-zero commitments 23 2.4. Corporate governance and risk assessment disclosure 29 3 Assessing financial institutions’ net-zero commitments 32 3.1. Assessing existing targets and net-zero commitments 32 3.2. Country cases: Financial authorities’ role in monitoring GHG emission targets 36 3.3. Revenues, portfolio and underwriting activities 41 4 Key challenges, policies and practices for better monitoring net-zero commitments 45 4.1. Key challenges and potential policies 45

3.2. Country cases: Financial authorities’ role in monitoring GHG emission targets 36 3.3. Revenues, portfolio and underwriting activities 41 4 Key challenges, policies and practices for better monitoring net-zero commitments 45 4.1. Key challenges and potential policies 45 4.2. A proposed framework for monitoring net-zero commitments 48 References 50 Annex A. Methodology for data collection and classification 53

FIGURES Figure 2.1. Reported GHG emissions and data coverage of listed financial institutions, 2016-24 13 Figure 2.2. Disclosure of reported and estimated scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions, 2024 14 Figure 2.3. Disclosure of total scope 3 reported and estimated GHG emissions, 2024 15 Figure 2.4 Changes in reported scope 3 emissions of a group of listed financial institutions 16 Figure 2.5 Reported and estimated scope 3, category 15 GHG emissions, 2024 17 Figure 2.6 Methodologies used for GHG emission reporting, 2024 20 Figure 2.7 Reported and estimated GHG emissions for all scopes of a group of listed financial institutions, 2024 21 Figure 2.8. Reported and estimated GHG emission intensity per assets, 2024 22 Figure 2.9 GHG emissions with external assurance, 2024 236 

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Figure 2.10 Disclosure of GHG emission reduction targets, 2024 23 Figure 2.11. Financial institutions setting scope 3 GHG emissions reduction targets, 2024 24 Figure 2.12. Financial institutions with emission targets disclosing baseline and target years, 2024 25 Figure 2.13. Listed financial institutions disclosing baseline emissions, 2024 25 Figure 2.14. Disclosure of science-based and net-zero GHG emission reduction targets, 2024 26

Figure 2.12. Financial institutions with emission targets disclosing baseline and target years, 2024 25 Figure 2.13. Listed financial institutions disclosing baseline emissions, 2024 25 Figure 2.14. Disclosure of science-based and net-zero GHG emission reduction targets, 2024 26 Figure 2.15. Commitment to the SBTi targets by listed financial institutions, 2024 27 Figure 2.16. Transition planning by financial institutions, 2024 29 Figure 2.17. Climate-related risks identified as material by financial institutions, 2024 29 Figure 2.18. Self-reported board-level oversight of climate-related issues, 2024 30 Figure 2.19 Existence of a board committee responsible for sustainability, 2024 30 Figure 2.20 Executive and board compensation linked to sustainability matters, 2024 31 Figure 3.1 The average annual GHG emission reduction rate of scope 3 GHG emissions, 2024 32 Figure 3.2 Target year of the existing GHG emission reduction targets, 2024 33 Figure 3.3 Reported scope 3 GHG emissions covered by financial institutions’ targets on scope 3 GHG emissions, 2024 34 Figure 3.4 Progress of listed financial institutions in reaching the scope 3 reduction target, 2024 35 Figure 3.5 Projected pathway of GHG emissions of listed financial institutions, 2023-50 36 Figure 3.6. Portfolio contribution to green and climate solutions: green revenues, 2024 42 Figure 3.7. Global sustainable bond issuance and outstanding amount 42 Figure 3.8 Sustainable syndicated loans and sustainable-linked syndicated loans: issuances 2015-2024 43 Figure 3.9 Sustainable loans and sustainable-linked loans: issuances in 2024, industry distribution 44

TABLES Table 2.1 Most common topics and metric categories for financial institutions 11 Table 2.2 Scope 3 GHG emissions in existing reporting initiatives 18

Figure 3.9 Sustainable loans and sustainable-linked loans: issuances in 2024, industry distribution 44

TABLES Table 2.1 Most common topics and metric categories for financial institutions 11 Table 2.2 Scope 3 GHG emissions in existing reporting initiatives 18 Table 4.1. Key challenges and potential policies 45 Table 4.2 A proposed framework for monitoring progress against net-zero commitments by financial institutions 48 7

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Abbreviations and acronyms A-P Asia-Pacific IIGCC Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change AUM assets under management IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change BIS Bank for International Settlements ISAE International Standard on Assurance Engagements CCM carbon credit mechanism ISIN International Securities Identification Number CDP Carbon Disclosure Project ISO International Organization for Standardization CEO Chief Executive Officer ISSB International Sustainability Standards Board CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent JP Japan CN China (People’s Republic of) KPI key performance indicators CPI Consumer Price Index KRI key risk indicators CPRS climate policy relevant sectors LSI less significant institution CSRD Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive MTF Multilateral Trading Facility CTB Climate Transition Benchmark NACE Nomenclature statistique des activites économiques dans la Communauté européenne EBA European Banking Authority NDC Nationally Determined Contribution ECB European Central Bank NGFS Network for Greening the Financial System EFRAG European Financial Reporting Advisory Group NZIF Net Zero Investment Framework EIOPA European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority OECD Organisation For Economic Co-Operation and Development ESAP European Single Access Point OTC over the counter ESG environmental, social and governance ISO International Organization for Standardization ESMA European Securities and Markets Authority PAB Regulation Paris Aligned Benchmark Regulation ESRB European Systemic Risk Board PACTA Paris Agreement Capital Transition Assessment ESRS European Sustainability Reporting Standards PCAF Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials ESRS E1 European Sustainability Reporting Standards E1 Climate Change

ESMA European Securities and Markets Authority PAB Regulation Paris Aligned Benchmark Regulation ESRB European Systemic Risk Board PACTA Paris Agreement Capital Transition Assessment ESRS European Sustainability Reporting Standards PCAF Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials ESRS E1 European Sustainability Reporting Standards E1 Climate Change REIT Real Estate Investment Trust EU European Union RIC Refinitiv Identification Code FCA Financial Conduct Authority SBTi Science Based Targets initiative FSB Financial Stability Board SBTi-FI SBTi Guidance for the Financial Sector GFANZ Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero SDS sustainable development scenario GHG greenhouse gas SI significant institution GHG Protocol Greenhouse Gas Protocol SLB sustainability-linked bond GRI Global Reporting Initiative SSM Single Supervisory Mechanism G-SIBs Global Systemically Important Banks TCFD Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures GSS green, social and sustainability TPT Transition Plan Taskforce IAASA Irish Auditing and Accounting Supervisory Authority TRBC the Refinitiv business classification IASB International Accounting Standards Board UK United Kingdom IEA Internal Energy Agency UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development IFRS S2 IFRS S2 Climate-Related Disclosures WRI World Resources Institute8 

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Executive summary This paper identifies key challenges in assessing the current state of climate-related metric disclosures by financial institutions and proposes a framework for monitoring their net-zero commitments. Disclosure of emission metrics. The largest portion of GHG emissions from the financial sector comes from indirect emissions, specifically classified as scope 3 emissions , notably the so -called “financed emissions” resulting from financial institutions’ investments. However, disclosure rates remain low. In 2024, only 19% of listed financial institutions globally reported scope 3 GHG emissions. Using GHG emission estimates by external service providers may help fill data gaps in reported GHG

emissions” resulting from financial institutions’ investments. However, disclosure rates remain low. In 2024, only 19% of listed financial institutions globally reported scope 3 GHG emissions. Using GHG emission estimates by external service providers may help fill data gaps in reported GHG emissions. For example, the data coverage for scope 3 GHG emissions increases from 19% when using reported data, to 57% when using estimated data from two prominent data providers. Likewise, a comparison between reported and estimated GHG emissions for 1 166 listed financial institutions suggests that the sector may underreport its current GHG emissions by up to eight times , if estimated data is accurate. Globally, one-third of financial institutions that reported GHG emissions had a third party assuring the information. Insurance companies had relatively higher levels of third-party verification , including in Developed Asia-Pacific excl. US (54%), Europe (54%), and the United States (34%). Disclosure of GHG emission reduction targets and net-zero commitments. Financial institutions may adopt a comprehensive strategy that considers climate risks and opportunities , including GHG emission reduction targets. Globally, 908 listed financial institutions have set GHG emission reduction targets , and 78% of them have set net-zero targets. Nevertheless, despite the relevance of financed emissions , only 27% of listed financial institutions disclosing targets have set scope 3 GHG emission reduction targets, and 41% of them have committed to science -based targets. Moreover, only 8% of financial institutions globally have developed a climate-related transition plan. Even among the financial institutions disclosing GHG emission reduction targets, incomplete disclosures can hinder investors’ ability to compare institutions’ progress and assess their management’s performance toward net-zero goals. Data from three major commercial database providers indicate a significant gap in disclosures among listed financial institutions with reduction targets, particularly concerning the baseline year and baseline emission data. Analysis of the available data for targets and net -zero commitments . The ambition , comprehensiveness, and feasibility of GHG emission reduction targets help assess the credibility and effectiveness of financial institutions’ climate-related goals.

disclosures among listed financial institutions with reduction targets, particularly concerning the baseline year and baseline emission data. Analysis of the available data for targets and net -zero commitments . The ambition , comprehensiveness, and feasibility of GHG emission reduction targets help assess the credibility and effectiveness of financial institutions’ climate-related goals. One way to evaluate t he ambition of corporate reduction targets is by assessing annual reduction rates. On average, listed financial institutions aim for a 4% annual reduction rate of total GHG emissions globally. Comprehensiveness reflects the extent to which a company’s target addresses its total emissions. In 2024, only 55% of total reported GHG emissions were covered by these targets, with Europe leading in coverage at 65%, followed by the United States (61%) and Emerging and Developing Asia excl. China (51%). 9

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

Regarding feasibility, targets may be challenging to achieve when ambition and comprehensiveness are high. In 2024, 65% of listed financial institutions failed to meet their targets, while only 35% successfully met all or some of the targets. Corporate governance and materiality of climate-related risks. Globally, 22% of financial institutions identified climate-related risks as material, accounting for 87% of total assets in 2024. Smaller shares are found in emerging markets and developing economies. Financial institutions that identify climate -related risks as material are also proactive in ensuring board oversight of those risks. Globally, 85% of listed financial institutions by total assets report board oversight of climate-related risks, with the People’s Republic of China (hereafter ‘China’) and Developed Asia-Pacific excl. US having the highest shares of companies . Globally, 16% of financial institutions have a boardlevel committee responsible for broader sustainability-related issues. Fifteen percent of boards considered sustainability matters when establishing key executives’ compensation in 2024. Solutions for improving the data to monitor progress against net-zero commitments. A clear set of

level committee responsible for broader sustainability-related issues. Fifteen percent of boards considered sustainability matters when establishing key executives’ compensation in 2024. Solutions for improving the data to monitor progress against net-zero commitments. A clear set of credible, transparent and comparable metrics is needed to track progress on GHG emission reduction targets by financial institutions. Several potential solutions exist for enhancing the data needed to monitor net-zero commitments.

To enhance data availability: (i) focus on a limited set of essential metrics to monitor net-zero commitments in the financial sector, including historical GHG emissions, GHG emission reduction target rate(s), target year(s), baseline year, and emissions covered by the target; (ii) adhere to high-quality, understandable, enforceable and internationally recognised climate -related disclosure frameworks ; (i ii) creat e digital taxonomies for climate-related disclosure and/or a digital platform centralising financial institutions’ public climate-related information.

To increase the quality of climate -related disclosure: (i) phas e in requirements for annual assurance attestations by an independent, competent, and qualified attestation service provider for the most relevant climate-related metrics by financial institutions; (ii) oversee financial institutions' disclosure of GHG emissions based on a comparison between reported and estimated emissions. To improve the credibility and effectiveness of GHG emission reduction targets : (i) encourag e the development of net -zero transition plans by all financial institutions; (ii) provid e regulatory incentives for financial institutions to provide more climate finance. A proposed f ramework for monitoring net -zero commitments. A framework for monitoring progress against net-zero commitments by financial institutions could be structured around five high-level steps: (i) collect GHG emissions and reduction targets, ensuring a minimum level of information; (ii) evaluat e reduction targets by GHG emission scopes, focusing on assessing their ambition, comprehensiveness, and feasibility; (iii) monitor adherence to voluntary initiatives, emphasising tangible performance and outcomes rather than mere participation; (iv) assess the corporate governance of financial institutions; (v)

reduction targets by GHG emission scopes, focusing on assessing their ambition, comprehensiveness, and feasibility; (iii) monitor adherence to voluntary initiatives, emphasising tangible performance and outcomes rather than mere participation; (iv) assess the corporate governance of financial institutions; (v) track climate finance, including green bonds, sustainable loans and investments in green technologies.10 

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

The disclosure of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by financial institutions , as well as their adoption of GHG emission reduction targets and other related commitments, are useful in at least two ways. First, central banks, financial regulators and investors can better understand the financial institutions’ climaterelated performance and whether those institutions’ strategy and governance are capable of adequately managing existing risks. Second, it can allow investors and other stakeholders to make informed decisions based on company’s climate-related goals and performance against those goals. Previously, the OECD analysed the metrics and methodologies used by five voluntary frameworks to support the monitoring of financial institutions’ net-zero commitments (OECD, 2023[1]). The conclusion was that while voluntary frameworks provide a valuable resource on the information to be disclosed by financial institutions, more could be done to outline a clear set of specific and credible metrics. This paper builds on the previous work by assessing current disclosure practices in the financial sector. The second chapter identifies the main data gaps for a stakeholder willing to assess financial institutions’ progress against their GHG emission reduction targets, including net-zero commitments, using prominent third-party (commercial) data providers . The third chapter presents an analysis of the available data on existing GHG emission reduction targets and underwriting activities . The fourth chapter proposes how policymakers and financial authorities could use the findings in this paper to reduce data gaps, improve data quality and assess net-zero commitments at a sector level. The paper defines “financial institutions ” to include companies in the following industries: (i) retail and commercial banks (commercial banks, consumer finance, and mortgage finance); (ii) insurance

data quality and assess net-zero commitments at a sector level. The paper defines “financial institutions ” to include companies in the following industries: (i) retail and commercial banks (commercial banks, consumer finance, and mortgage finance); (ii) insurance companies; (iii) investment b anks (including brokerage services); and (iv) asset managers (including custody activities). Analysis is typically by industry or, when data is limited, for all financial institutions. The paper analyses disclosure practices considering both the individual number of companies adopting specific practices and the sizes of the institutions doing so. The metrics used as a proxy of the size of the financial institutions a nd their potential impact on financial markets are the total assets of institutions as informed in their financial statements and their assets under management ( AUM). Notably, their total owned assets include the loans or other forms of credit they extend to their clients. AUM are the resources their clients own that financial institutions may invest in equity, bonds and other assets. The dataset developed for this paper ’s coverage varies depending on the data point. For instance, it includes information on 1 167 listed financial institutions with total owned assets of USD 171 trillion and USD 120 trillion of AUM at the end of 2024, whether they reported some or all of their GHG emissions in 2023 or 2024. This sample is from a wider universe of 4 922 listed financial institutions globally with total owned assets of USD 194 trillion and USD 139 trillion of AUM. 1 Introduction 11

MAPPING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR © OECD 2026

2.1. A comprehensive set of information points and metrics for the financial sector A clear set of comparable, credible and transparent metrics is needed to track progress on GHG emission reduction targets by financial institutions. In this context, the OECD analysed the guidance the main voluntary frameworks provided on the information financial institutions should disclose in the report Assessing net -zero metrics for financial institutions (OECD, 2023 [1]). The OECD analysis found

reduction targets by financial institutions. In this context, the OECD analysed the guidance the main voluntary frameworks provided on the information financial institutions should disclose in the report Assessing net -zero metrics for financial institutions (OECD, 2023 [1]). The OECD analysis found commonalities in the topics these frameworks cover. Still, it noted limited alignment on specific metrics and calculation methods to assess the progress of financial institutions toward their net-zero targets. The topics and categories of the identified metrics are summarised in the first column of Table 2.1. The second column states whether the identified metrics are currently made available by the commercial data providers whose datasets are used to develop the current report ( Bloomberg, LSEG, Morningstar, MSCI, COGEM ) for a non-negligible number of financial institutions . The column also shows in which figures of the paper the data is presented (information about the number of financial institutions disclosing the specific metric is included in the notes to the figures). The third and fourth columns indicate in which sections of the two major international sustainability accounting standards the information points and metrics are requested : the IFRS S2 Climate -related Disclosures set by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and the European Sustainability Reporting Standard (ESRS) E1 Climate Change adopted by the European Commission. The existence of disclosure requirements in those standards may signal that any data gaps for the relevant metrics and information points would be expected to be reduced soon with broader adoption of IFRS S2 and ESRS E1. Table 2.1 Most common topics and metric categories for financial institutions 2 Market practices Greenhouse Gas emissions metrics Reference figures

IFRS S2 ESRS E1

Historic and current GHG emissions Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.7 Figure 2.8 Figure 2.5 Figure 2.8 Figure 2.9

IFRS S.2.29(a)

IFRS S2.B19–

B63

Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.7 Figure 2.8 Figure 2.5 Figure 2.8 Figure 2.9

IFRS S.2.29(a)

IFRS S2.B19–

B63

ESRS E1.6 (4452)

ESRS E1.6

(531-55)

ESRS E1.AR3952

GHG emission targets (short, medium and long-term) Figure 2.10 Figure 2.11 Figure 2.12 Figure 2.13 Figure 2.14

IFRS S2.33-37

ESRS E1.4 (30)

ESRS E1.4 (34)

ESRS E1.AR2331

Alignment assessment with a benchmark, including Paris Agreement N