top of page
Search

From Crisis to Action: What Boards Must Learn from the FT Climate Summit 2025

  • Writer: Chapter Zero Kazakhstan
    Chapter Zero Kazakhstan
  • Jul 1
  • 3 min read

Updated: Jul 1

By Chapter Zero Kazakhstan




The FT Climate & Impact Summit Europe 2025 gathered over 250 leaders from business, finance, and policy circles in London to confront an inescapable truth: climate risk has moved from the periphery to the centre of boardroom and financial stability concerns. No longer theoretical, it is now disrupting markets, capital flows, and governance structures.


Attending as a participant, Karlygash Imanbayeva, Founder and Chair of Chapter Zero Kazakhstan, joined these critical discussions to draw lessons for Kazakhstan’s corporate sector. The summit underscored the rising imperative for boards to act decisively at the intersection of climate, geopolitics, and finance.



Geopolitical fragmentation and risk to climate cooperation


John Podesta, former U.S. climate advisor, warned of growing U.S. political instability undermining global efforts: “Whether the U.S. is in or out — the rest of the world must pull up its pants and keep going.” The potential for the U.S. to withdraw from international agreements, he noted, could fracture the global climate architecture.



Finance, cost of capital, and transition bottlenecks


Ma Jun, is a director at one of China's most dynamic environmental NGOs, the Institute of Public & Environmental Affairs (IPE), underscored that clean technologies are now commercially viable — the challenge is the cost of capital. Emerging and middle-income economies, responsible for the bulk of future emissions, face borrowing costs of 12-16% for renewable projects. Without creative financial de-risking mechanisms and blended finance, the transition will stall where it matters most.



Insurance and physical climate risk


Tobias Grimm (Munich Re) and Louise Pryor (Ecology Building Society) detailed how climate extremes are breaking insurance models, with reinsurance on the brink in high-risk regions: “If events become too frequent, the entire model breaks down.”


Purpose-driven business and nature’s value


André Hoffmann, Vice Chair of Roche and a champion of corporate sustainability, reminded boards that climate action must reconnect business with its true purpose: “We need to move from a system that extracts value to one that creates value — for society, nature, and shareholders.” His intervention echoed the growing demand for boards to adopt nature-positive, regenerative strategies.


AI: climate burden and solution


The summit spotlighted AI’s dual role. Its energy demands are rising, but its potential for emissions reductions is clear. Google’s Solar API and aviation contrail tools, and IBM’s emphasis on intentional AI deployment, showed real-world progress when boards steer innovation with purpose.


The regulatory gap


Speakers like Carine Smith Ihenacho (Norges Bank) underscored that “good regulation gives companies a level playing field and the confidence to act.” Weak, inconsistent frameworks are slowing meaningful climate action — a warning especially relevant for economies navigating alignment with EU Green Deal and CBAM requirements.



Kazakhstan’s Call to Action


For Kazakhstan, the summit’s themes hit close to home. The country faces the dual challenge of decarbonising a resource-dependent economy while building resilience to physical climate risks.


Karlygash Imanbayeva observed that global conversations are shifting from vision to implementation. For Kazakhstan’s boards, this means:

  • Embedding climate governance not as an ESG add-on, but as a strategic necessity.

  • Addressing transition risks proactively, as CBAM and other trade measures tighten the net on carbon-intensive exports.

  • Recognising that the cost of capital — as Ma Jun emphasised — will define Kazakhstan’s ability to scale clean technologies and secure its place in low-carbon value chains.

  • Engaging in purpose-driven business models that, as André Hoffmann argued, regenerate rather than extract value.



Kazakhstan cannot rely solely on external political leadership or market forces. Its boards must demonstrate strategic foresight, ensure capital flows toward resilience and renewal, and contribute to the global transition on Kazakhstan’s terms — or risk economic and geopolitical marginalisation.


The systems Kazakhstan’s leaders design today will determine whether the nation adapts — or is left behind.



 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page