By considering both sector-specific and geographical factors, we aim to foster investments that are sensitive to the unique challenges and opportunities in each context.
Sector selection and relevance in Peace Finance
Taking inspiration from the proposed European Union Social Taxonomy, we utilise a sector-specific methodology, aligning with the Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community (commonly known as NACE) as an approach to help us identify priority sectors.
Priority sectors include:
- Agriculture, forestry, and fishing
- Mining and quarrying
- Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply
- Water supply, sewage, waste management and remediation activities
- Transportation and storage
- Construction
- Information and communication
- Financial and insurance activities
- Real-estate activities
- Public administration and defence
- Education
Geographical scope for peace impact projects
Peace impact investments are universally relevant and can be implemented in any geographic setting. While our strategic focus is on catalysing investments in emerging markets and states affected by conflict and fragility, we recognise that peace impacts can be realised globally, including in middle-income and developed regions.
- Transversal peace impacts: Peace-related issues are not confined to any single region – they are a global concern. Our taxonomy-aligned projects can address peace impacts in diverse settings.
- Beyond political peace: In more stable, developed areas, peace issues might not be directly linked to political peace. However, social-peace concerns, such as those related to land use, resource distribution or market dynamics, are highly relevant and can influence the risk profile of investments.
- Complementary criteria: The social-peace components of the PFIF complement other social-impact frameworks, providing a holistic view of investments’ impact on peace and stability.
