Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been classified as one of the phenomena that belongs to the current top threats to human health. AMR is the process where bacteria become resistant to the antimicrobial drug and renders the antibiotic ineffective. This phenomenon is increasing exponentially due to misuse and overuse of antibiotics and is responsible for 700,000 annual deaths globally. If the contributing factors to AMR remain persistent, the estimated amount of annual deaths will increase to the exorbitant figure of 10 million by 2050. The inappropriate waste discharge from antibiotic manufacturing plants is the third major cause contributing to AMR. For this reason, environmental sustainability within the pharmaceutical industry is tightly linked to human health, and therefore, the importance of environmental risk management becomes crucial. Pharmaceutical supply chains are extremely complex, fragmented, and rigid due to the highly regulated environment and global distribution of the chains. Constant availability is sometimes compromised, and this leads to national shortages of antibiotics, which increase AMR. Therefore, supply chain sustainability risks (SCSRs) need to be thoroughly assessed and managed. The thesis aims to identify the sustainability risks that threaten the constant supply of antibiotics and further provide a comprehensive and sufficient framework on how to assess and manage SCSRs within the pharmaceutical industry. This research is based on the review of existing literature, followed by an empirical study that included a case study of two specific antibiotics relevant to the Swedish market. The analysis of publicly available databases, together with the qualitative interviews, revealed that the most susceptible node of the supply chain resides in the primary manufacturing stage. The most relevant SCSRs have been identified, and an adapted framework is suggested. The role of regulatory agencies has been demonstrated to be fundamental to achieve change concerning environmental progress. Further research needs to be implemented for the validation of the suggested framework within a practical context.

The EU Taxonomy Regulation[1] (“EU Taxonomy”) is a relatively new classification system for determining what economic activities are considered sustainable. By creating a common language between investors, issuers, and policymakers, the regulation aims to increase transparency and help investors assess whether investments meet robust environmental standards. This thesis aims to investigate how the EU Taxonomy, as a legal instrument, aims to serve its legislative objective and secondly identify potential challenges of the regulation.  Findings indicate that the regulation can create an adequate commonly held classification system as long as the technical criteria for each sector keep up with new scientific discoveries and technological advancements. A regulation to develop uniform understanding across the EU and delegated acts to amend the legislation seems like the most appropriate legal instrument. Areas for improvement concern revising the scope of whom it applies, and this process has begun with the proposal of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Other areas for improvement concerns the political nature of what sectors should be included in the taxonomy, for instance, whether nuclear energy and gas should be deemed sustainable or not. The taxonomy may strive to be a neutral classification system; however, member states’ economic incentives affect what is included.  Finally, this thesis concludes that it is too early to predict the taxonomy’s breakthrough. In theory, it is a significant idea. Still, we can only know with time whether we have reached a more common understanding, transparency and eventually have facilitated a transition through this regulation.  [1] Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment and amending regulation (EU) 2019/288.

Nachhaltigkeitsaspekte wie zum Beispiel Klimawandel, Umweltschutz und generationsübergreifender Ressourcenverbrauch gewinnen sowohl im globalen als auch unternehmensspezifischen Kontext signifikant an Bedeutung. Die damit verbundenen Unsicherheiten werden jedoch von den meisten Unternehmen unzureichend reflektiert, sodass die daraus resultierenden Nachhaltigkeitsrisiken im Rahmen des Risikomanagements größtenteils unberücksichtigt bleiben. Hinzukommend erschweren insbesondere fehlende Kenntnisse zur Auswahl geeigneter, qualitativer Methoden zunehmend die Identifikation, Bewertung, Steuerung und Überwachung von Nachhaltigkeitsrisiken. Um diesen Schwierigkeiten entgegenzuwirken ist der Einsatz eines Methoden- oder Kennzahlenverbundes, wie der Szenarioanalyse und Sustainability Balanced Scorecard, zielführend. Die dem Artikel zugrundeliegende Forschungsfrage untersucht, wie mithilfe der Szenarioanalyse und Sustainability Balanced Scorecard als Instrumente des Risikomanagements Nachhaltigkeitsrisiken präziser abgesichert werden können. Anhand eines umfassenden Literaturreviews wird aufgezeigt, dass sich der Risikomanagementprozess in den einzelnen Phasen beider Instrumente wiederspiegelt. Hierfür wurden die jeweiligen Phasen analysiert, um anschließend den Phasen des Risikomanagementprozesses zugeordnet zu werden. Somit wird offenbart in welchen Phasen Nachhaltigkeitsrisiken identifiziert, qualitativ-verbal bewertet, mit geeigneten Handlungsoptionen gesteuert und kontinuierlich überwacht werden. Unterstützend wird zur Beantwortung der Forschungsfrage zudem auf geeignete, qualitative Methoden, eine umfassende Beurteilung der Szenarioanalyse und Sustainability Balanced Scorecard sowie auf ausgewählte Praxisbeispiele eingegangen. / Sustainability aspects, such as climate change, environmental protection and cross-generational resource consumption, are becoming significantly more important, both in a global and company-specific context. However, the associated uncertainties are insufficiently reflected by most companies, so that the resulting sustainability risks are largely ignored in risk management. In addition, a lack of knowledge about the selection of suitable, qualitative methods in particular increasingly complicates the identification, evaluation, control and monitoring of sustainability risks. In order to counteract these difficulties, the use of a combination of methods or indicators, such as scenario analysis and Sustainability Balanced Scorecard, is appropriate. The research question investigates how sustainability risks can be hedged more precisely using scenario analysis and the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard as instruments of risk management. A comprehensive literature review shows that the risk management process is reflected in the individual phases of both instruments. For this purpose, the respective phases were analysed and then assigned to the phases of the risk management process. This reveals the phases in which sustainability risks are identified, qualitatively and verbally assessed, managed with suitable options for action and continuously monitored. In addition, suitable qualitative methods, a comprehensive assessment of the scenario analysis and the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard as well as selected practical examples will be discussed in order to answer the research question.

In March 2018 the European Commission published the Action Plan on Financing Sustainable Growth. One of the main objectives with the actions presented in the action plan is to reorient capital flows towards sustainable investments, i.e. to influence more investors to invest sustainably. The action plan was followed by three proposals for transparency regulation regarding an EU taxonomy on sustainability, sustainability benchmarks and sustainability disclosures. Furthermore, the action plan included actions regarding two other transparency measures – sustainability labels and sustainability ratings. The first purpose of the thesis is to investigate if transparency regulation in the EU can be used as a tool to influence investors to choose sustainable investment funds. One of the main aims of the actions presented in the Action Plan on Financing Sustainable Growth, as well as the accompanying regulation proposals, is to reorient capital flows towards sustainable investments, i.e. to influence more investors to invest sustainably. In light of this, the Commission’s three proposed transparency regulations, as well as the concept of sustainability labels and ratings, are used as a basis for the investigation. The second purpose of the thesis is therefore to critically review the three regulation proposals and the concept of sustainability labels and ratings in order to gain an understanding of how different transparency measures can influence investors to choose sustainable investment funds. The transparency regulations and measures are analysed and critically reviewed in light of their objective to influence more investors to invest sustainably. A behavioural economics perspective, as well as consumer behaviour theories and decision-making models, are applied in order to analyse the transparency regulations and measures from an external perspective. Based on the analysis there are many indicators that transparency regulation can be used as a tool to influence investors to choose sustainable investment funds. However, to what extent transparency regulation can influence investor behaviour varies depending on which transparency measures are used and how they are designed. Sustainability benchmarks seem to have the least potential to influence investor behaviour, while the EU taxonomy on sustainability and sustainability labels seem to have the best potential to influence investor behaviour.