Capital Follows Credibility
ASEAN-ISE and the Race to Build a Sustainable Investment Ecosystem
Le Xuan Hai – CEO, Vietnam Exchange
Hanoi 17 June 2026
At the coming 39th ASEAN Exchanges CEOs Meeting in Hội An, I find myself reflecting on a question that has shaped much of our work at the Vietnam Exchange over the past several years: what does it actually take for a capital market to be trusted — not just by its domestic investors, but by the global institutions that increasingly determine the cost of capital for every listed company in our region? The answer, I believe, is credibility. And credibility, in today’s market, is inseparable from sustainability
There is a quiet but profound shift underway in the capital markets of Southeast Asia. Fund managers in Singapore are recalibrating their allocation models. Institutional investors in Tokyo and Frankfurt are running ESG screens before committing to listed equities across the region. And increasingly, the companies that cannot demonstrate credible, comparable, and independently verifiable sustainability practices are finding themselves at the back of the queue — not for moral reasons, but financial ones.
This is the new reality that the ASEAN-Interconnected Sustainability Ecosystem, or ASEAN-ISE, was built to address. Launched in February 2024 through a landmark collaboration between Bursa Malaysia, the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX), the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), and Singapore Exchange (SGX Group), ASEAN-ISE represents the region’s most ambitious and architecturally serious attempt to convert sustainability commitments into investable, bankable outcomes. Its goal is nothing less than to solidify ASEAN’s position as a leading hub for sustainable investment — and in doing so, make ESG compliance a direct driver of capital attractiveness for listed firms across the region
The timing could not be more consequential. As Europe retreats from some of its most ambitious sustainability directives — scaling back key frameworks like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive by nearly 80% under its 2025 Omnibus Proposal — ASEAN is pressing forward. The region is not simply filling a vacuum. It is staking a claim to become the world’s most credible emerging-market ESG destination. Whether it succeeds will depend not only on the strength of its frameworks, but on its ability to confront the very real risks that could undermine investor confidence before it is fully established
The Capital Magnet: Why ESG Compliance Now Moves Money
The argument that ESG compliance is “good for business” has long been made in abstract terms. What is different today is that the evidence has become quantifiable, and investors are acting on it
Across ASEAN, investors, regulators, and corporations are converging on a shared goal: to make sustainability measurable, comparable, and genuinely investable. Private markets have expanded their low-carbon portfolios at a five-year compound annual growth rate of 17% — significantly outpacing the 11.9% recorded by public markets over the same period, according to MSCI. This is not a trend driven by idealism. It is driven by risk-adjusted return calculations that increasingly price ESG non-compliance as a liability rather than merely an absence of virtue.
For listed companies in ASEAN, the implications are direct. The FTSE4Good ASEAN 5 Index — which screens companies across Bursa Malaysia, IDX, the Philippine Exchange, SGX, and the Stock Exchange of Thailand against transparent ESG criteria — has become a benchmark that institutional allocators reference when constructing regional equity portfolios. Inclusion signals credibility. Exclusion signals risk. The financial premium attached to ESG-compliant listings is no longer theoretical. Vietnam is not yet part of this index. The FTSE4Good ASEAN 5 screens companies across five exchanges — and the Vietnam Exchange is not among them. This is not a criticism; it is a statement of where we are and, more importantly, where we are going. Having achieved secondary emerging market status in 2026, VNX understands that index inclusion is not granted — it is earned, through the sustained demonstration of exactly the kind of standardised, verifiable ESG infrastructure that ASEAN-ISE is now building. Joining ASEAN-ISE at the 39th CEO meeting of Asean exchanges is, in that sense, Vietnam’s most direct and deliberate step toward the credibility that regional index inclusion requires.
What ASEAN-ISE provides is the infrastructure that makes this premium scalable across borders. Prior to its establishment, ESG data in the region was fragmented, inconsistently defined, and difficult to compare across jurisdictions. A fund manager seeking to assess the sustainability credentials of a Thai property developer against a Malaysian manufacturer and a Singapore logistics firm was confronted with incompatible reporting frameworks, different disclosure timelines, and varying definitions of even foundational metrics like Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions.
ASEAN-ISE addresses this directly. The participating exchanges have collectively agreed on a set of common ESG core metrics — including standardized greenhouse gas emissions reporting, energy consumption, water usage, waste management, and social and governance indicators — to be integrated across their respective data platforms. The initiative envisions a centralized data infrastructure with a harmonized data structure, enabling what then – Bursa Malaysia CEO Datuk Muhamad Umar Swift has described as “a seamless aggregation of the ASEAN view, in promoting the region as a unified market”.
For listed firms, this harmonization is transformative. ESG compliance is no longer a matter of satisfying individual exchange requirements in isolation. It becomes a passport — one that, when properly endorsed, opens access to a far wider pool of regional and global capital than any single-market listing can command.
The Architecture of Trust: Standards, Mandates, and the ISSB Alignment
The credibility of ASEAN-ISE rests on the quality of the standards to which it anchors itself. Here, the region has made a clear and deliberate choice: alignment with the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), whose frameworks have emerged as the global baseline for comparable, decision-useful sustainability disclosures
This alignment is already being translated into regulatory mandates across the region’s leading capital markets. Malaysia’s Bursa Malaysia has moved from voluntary to mandatory sustainability reporting with ISSB-aligned climate disclosure required for large-cap Main Market listed companies beginning in fiscal year 2025. Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed a roadmap to mandate sustainability disclosure for listed companies, with ISSB-aligned climate-related reporting for large-cap companies targeted to commence in 2026. Singapore’s SGX, while adopting a phased implementation timeline — and having extended some deadlines for smaller entities in August 2025 — has committed to mandatory ISSB-aligned climate reporting as its destination standard, with full assurance requirements phased in progressively.
Underpinning these national mandates is the ASEAN Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance, now in its fourth version, which provides the region’s green finance classification system. Its multi-tiered design — a “Green” tier benchmarked to the 1.5°C Paris Agreement target, “Amber” tiers recognizing transitional activities, and a “Red” classification for activities incompatible with sustainability goals — is a masterstroke of inclusive policy architecture. It acknowledges the profound diversity of economic development and infrastructure maturity across ASEAN member states, from Singapore’s advanced financial center to the emerging economies of Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar. The taxonomy does not demand that every economy move at the same pace; it demands that every economy move in the same direction
This combination — common metrics, ISSB-aligned national mandates, and an inclusive regional taxonomy — forms the trust architecture that serious investors need before committing capital at scale. It signals that ASEAN is not building a local variant of sustainability governance. It is building a local expression of international standards. That distinction matters enormously to global institutional allocators, for whom comparability across jurisdictions is a prerequisite, not a preference
The Make-or-Break Tensions: Where the Ecosystem Is Vulnerable
For all its ambition, ASEAN-ISE faces headwinds that are as structural as they are urgent. Acknowledging them honestly is not a counsel of despair — it is a precondition for addressing them effectively
The first and most immediate threat is greenwashing. As ESG compliance becomes a capital advantage, the incentive to project sustainability credentials without fully substantiating them grows commensurately. Across the region, there are already instances of listed companies publishing sustainability reports that are more aspirational than verifiable — long on narrative, short on independently audited data. For ASEAN-ISE to function as a genuine trust infrastructure, it must develop robust verification mechanisms that go beyond disclosure requirements to encompass assurance standards. The move toward mandatory third-party assurance, already built into Singapore’s phased roadmap, needs to become a regional norm rather than a leading-market exception. In a world where investors are increasingly sophisticated and where ESG litigation is beginning to reach Asian jurisdictions, the cost of greenwashing is no longer merely reputational. It is legal, financial, and systemic.
The second tension is the SME gap. ASEAN’s economy is not built on large-cap listed companies. Small and medium enterprises constitute over 90% of businesses across the region and account for a substantial share of employment, supply chain activity, and economic output. Yet the architecture of ASEAN-ISE, like most ESG frameworks globally, is currently oriented almost entirely toward publicly listed firms. The vast SME ecosystem largely lacks the capacity, resources, and often the regulatory incentive to engage with sustainability reporting at the level required to participate meaningfully in the transition
This matters for two reasons. First, the supply chains of listed companies — through which much of the region’s real environmental and social impact flows — run directly through SMEs. A listed firm cannot credibly claim sustainability leadership if its tier-two suppliers are operating without any ESG accountability framework. Second, if the transition leaves SMEs behind, it will deepen existing inequalities within ASEAN economies rather than reduce them. Addressing the SME gap requires targeted capacity-building programmes, simplified localized reporting tools, and — critically — the development of financial incentives that make ESG compliance attractive to small businesses, not merely mandatory for large ones. ASEAN-ISE’s framework includes a provision for suppliers with strong ESG practices to access more competitive financing rates — a promising mechanism that needs far greater scale and visibility.
The third tension is governance inconsistency across member states. The pace of mandatory disclosure adoption varies significantly — from Singapore and Malaysia’s advanced frameworks to markets where sustainability reporting remains largely voluntary. Without greater convergence in the regulatory baseline, the “interconnected” in ASEAN-ISE risks becoming more aspirational than operational. The 2024 Request for Information process to develop a centralized ASEAN ESG data infrastructure is a positive step, but the harder work of expanding regulatory alignment beyond the current five participating exchanges to encompass the full breadth of ASEAN’s diverse economies lies ahead.
The Path Forward: From Compliance to Strategy, and Toward Net Zero 2050
The most significant shift now underway in ASEAN’s sustainability landscape is the movement from ESG as a compliance exercise to ESG as a strategic orientation. This distinction is not semantic. A company that discloses its Scope 1 and 2 emissions because a regulator requires it is managing a reporting obligation. A company that integrates sustainability targets into its capital allocation decisions, its supply chain design, and its board-level governance is managing its future.
The net zero 2050 goal — adopted by ASEAN member states in alignment with the Paris Agreement — provides the long horizon against which all of this activity must ultimately be measured. The transition pathways required to reach net zero across a region as economically diverse as ASEAN are genuinely complex. They involve energy transitions in coal-dependent economies like Indonesia and Vietnam, land-use transformations in agricultural nations, and industrial decarbonisation across manufacturing sectors that are central to regional employment. The ASEAN Taxonomy’s tiered framework is the right tool for navigating this complexity — but the ambition must be sustained over decades, through political cycles and economic disruptions that will test the commitment of governments and corporations alike
For listed firms, the message from capital markets is already clear: the direction of travel is set, the standards are converging, and the investors who will determine your cost of capital are watching. Companies that treat ESG compliance as an early mover advantage — building the data systems, governance structures, and transition plans now — will find themselves better positioned not only for regulatory requirements but for the investor scrutiny that will only intensify as the decade progresses.
ASEAN-ISE, at its core, is a bet that the region’s capital markets can become an accelerant of this transition rather than a lagging indicator of it. By creating a common language for sustainability data, aligning with international standards, and building an interconnected infrastructure across the region’s major exchanges, it is establishing the conditions under which capital can follow credibility at scale
Conclusion: Credibility Is Now the Currency
The question for ASEAN’s capital markets is no longer whether ESG matters. That debate is settled — settled by the movement of capital, by the mandates of regulators, and by the mounting physical evidence of climate risk across the region. The question now is whether the region can build a sustainability ecosystem that is credible enough, comprehensive enough, and durable enough to capture the full scale of investment opportunity that ESG transition represents.
ASEAN-ISE is the most serious institutional answer to that question yet advanced. But its success is not guaranteed. It will require sustained commitment from exchanges, regulators, and listed companies. It will require honest confrontation of greenwashing risks and the SME gap. And it will require the courage to move from coordination to genuine interoperability —where that pose many challenges across regional countries.
The capital is waiting. The standards are in place. The architecture is being built. For Vietnam, joining ASEAN-ISE at this meeting is not a symbolic gesture — it is a deliberate choice to be part of the architecture rather than a recipient of its outcomes. Having achieved secondary emerging market status in 2026, the Vietnam Exchange understands that upgrading a market is not a destination. It is a starting point. The harder and more consequential work is building the credibility that justifies the upgrade — and that work is regional, not national.
What ASEAN’s capital markets must now demonstrate, to their own investors and to the world, is that their commitment to sustainability is not a declaration of intent — it is a statement of fact, verifiable, auditable, and built to endure.
In the ESG era, credibility is the currency. ASEAN-ISE is how the region intends to earn it. The Vietnam Exchange stands ready to cooperate fully and honestly on this shared journey, eager to work hand-in-hand with our fellow exchanges to build a sustainable, resilient future for all ASEAN exchanges.
