英国转型金融委员会（后称：委员会）正在制定《转型金融指南》，旨在为金融机构开展为转型企业投融资提供指导。为确保《转型金融指南》不断完善并与 国际标准深度对接，该委员会现正式面向全球发起征询。本次全球意见征询自
2025 年11 月3 日 启动，至
2026 年1 月14 日 截止。我们诚挚邀请您通过问卷反馈宝贵意见，共同推动构建市场主导、可规模化的转型金融解决方案。您可访问官方网站、参考下方《指南（11 月修订版）》及《实施手册》链接，或通过扫描二维码直接提交您的意见。
To ensure continuous improvement and global interoperability of the Transition Finance Guidelines, the Transition Finance Council (UK) is launching a worldwide public consultation. The consultation period runs from 3 November 2025 to 14 January 2026 . We warmly invite stakeholders across the world to provide feedback through this questionnaire and contribute to building a market-driven, scalable transition finance framework. You may visit our official website, refer to the links to the revised Guidelines and Implementation Handbook, or simply scan the QR code to submit your views.
第一章、与《转型金融指南》相关的问题 Questions relating to the Transition Finance Guidelines
一、关于框架结构的问题 Questions on Structure
第 1节（背景）与第2.1节（指南的框架）详细阐述了本指南的制定目标与核心结构，包括"指导原则"与"评估要素"的基本概念及其应用方法。具体内容请参阅《指南》第4至8页。
Sections 1 (Context) and 2.1 (Structure of the Guidelines), explain the purpose and structure of the Guidelines, including the concept of the Principles and Factors and how they should be applied. Please refer to pages 4-8 of the Guidelines.
1.1 《指南》中关于其框架结构、原则、通用要素及情境要素的阐述是否清晰且具有可操作性？（即：重点关注各部分间的构建逻辑与相互关系，而非原则与要素的内容本身。） Is the structure of the Guidelines, Principles, Universal Factors and Contextual Factors appropriately explained and workable (i.e. the construct and relationship between them, rather than the Principles and Factors themselves)?
a) 是，整体结构是清晰的。Yes, the overall structure is clear. b) 我基本赞同整体框架结构，但对如何优化有意见与建议。I broadly agree with the overall structure but have comments or suggestions on how to improve it. c) 否，我不同意该结构设计。No, I do not agree with the structure.
1.2 请详细说明您持上述观点的理由，并就如何 让该框架结构更容易理解 、更具可操作性提出具体建议。 Please explain your answer above and suggest how the structure could be made simpler to follow and more practical to implement.
二、关于第 2.2节：原则的相关问题 Q uestions on Section 2.2: Principles
本小节详细阐述了四大原则 ——可信的目标、行动推进进展、透明的问责制度及依赖关系的处理。具体说明请参阅《指南》第9至13页。
This section details the Principles – Credible Ambition, Action into Progress, Transparent Accountability and Addressing Dependencies. Please refer to pages 9-13 of the Guidelines.
2.1 您是否认可以上四个原则的设定？ Do you agree these are the right Principles?
a) 是 / Yes b) 否/ No (若选择"否"，您认为哪些不应作为原则，或当前原则体系中可能遗漏了哪些关键要素？If not, why? Which do you believe should not be Principles or which Principles are potentially missing?)
2.2 在指导原则“可信的雄心目标”中，有关 “可信路径”的定义是否兼顾了以下几点：(1) 便于实践评估，(2) 有效驱动脱碳，以及(3)充分考虑到了新兴市场的工业运营中面临的能源安全和自身发展相关的挑战？ 若尚未能兼顾以上要点，您建议应进行哪些完善或调整？
Does the Credible Pathway definition (contained in the Credible Ambition Principle) achieve the right balance between 1) being practical to assess 2) driving decarbonisation and 3) acknowledging the energy security and development challenges of industrial operators in emerging markets? If not, are there builds or adjustments you would propose?
三、关于第 2.3节：通用要素的相关问题 Questions on Section 2.3: Universal Factors
本小节详细阐述了通用要素，包括：阶段性目标 &指标、实施、财务可行性、参与、治理及披露。具体内容请参阅《指南》第13至19页。
This section details the Universal Factors, Interim Targets & Metrics, Implementation, Financial Viability, Engagement, Governance and Disclosure. Please refer to pages 13-19 of the Guidelines.
3.1 您是否认同通用要素的整体设计？（包括阶段性目标 &指标、 实施、财务可行性、参与、治理及披露 ）
Do you agree with the overall themes of the Universal Factors? (Interim Targets & Metrics, Implementation, Financial Viability, Engagement, Governance and Disclosure)
a) 是 / Yes b) 否/No (若选择"否"，请说明哪些通用要素不具备普适性？以及可能遗漏了哪些关键要素，请阐述原因。If not, which Universal Factors are not universal and which Factors might be missing and why?）
3.2 无论作为资本提供方还是实体企业，您认为参考《通用要素》的评估标准，在实践层面是否具备可操作性且合理（尤其是与现有披露要求重叠的内容部分）？您认为哪些通用要素涉及的证据收集将会比较困难？为什么？针对此类举证难题，您有哪些建议？
As either a capital provider or an entity, do you feel the assessment against the criteria in the Universal Factors is practically implementable and reasonable (considering the overlap with existing disclosure requirements)? Which Universal Factors do you foresee being most difficult to evidence and why? How would you practically approach that challenge of evidencing?
3.3 您认为应当要求实体机构遵循所有已成文的评估标准，还是宜将标准划分为 "必须遵循"与"推荐遵循"两类更为合理？ Do you believe an entity should be required to meet all the written criteria, or do you think it would be appropriate to split the criteria into categories of “essential” and “desirable”?
3.4 若您支持对标准进行分类，请就《指南》中提出的分类方案提出改进意见，并 /或选出您认为最具操作可行性的划分方式并阐述理由。
If you support the splitting of the criteria, please comment on the split suggested in the Guidelines and/or select which approach could practically work best and explain why.
a) 建立"门槛"机制： 允许评估方先根据核心标准快速筛选出符合基本条件的实体，随后再依据推荐标准对这些实体进行深入评估。Create a ‘gating’ mechanism that allows assessors to quickly rule in/rule out entities that meet the essential criteria, before then also assessing them against the desired criteria, or b) 为部分实体设置宽限期，允许其在初始阶段仅满足核心标准的举证要求，并在特定期限内（例如，融资完成后的1-2年之内）逐步达到推荐标准的举证要求。 Give a grace period to some entities that only initially need to meet the essential evidence points, before meeting the desired evidence points over a set time (e.g. 1-2 years from financing), or c) 特定实体仅需满足核心标准即可，例如中型企业、未上市公司等。Certain entities (e.g. medium-sized companies, unlisted companies) need to meet the essential criteria only. d) 以上方案均不适用（若持此观点，请说明何种方案更为可行）None of the above (please explain what could work better if so) e) 其他建议 Other Suggestion
3.5 若您认同特定实体仅需满足核心标准，您认为应如何界定适用的实体范围？
If you believe certain entities are only required to meet ‘essential’ criteria, how would you set an expectation of w hat type of entity this is?
3.6 通用要素是否为转型实体（包括新兴市场实体及中型企业）设定了恰当的准入门槛？Do the Universal Factors set an appropriate threshold for transitioning entities including entities in emerging markets or medium-sized entities?
a）是 Yes b）否 No（若持否定意见，请说明您对要素中哪些具体标准存在异议及其原因。If not, which criteria do you disagree with within the Factors and why? ）
3.7 通用要素中关于"碳锁定"相关表述，您认为是否需进一步调整？Are there any amendments required in relation to the carbon lock in wording?
3.8 关于通用要素，您是否有其他补充意见, 包括应该参考的其他相关框架或指南的建议？
Are there any other comments you would like to make about the Universal Factors, including other frameworks or guidance that should be referred to?
四、关于第 2.4节： 情境要素的相关问题
Questions on Section 2.4: Contextual Factors
本小节详细阐述了情境要素的概念及其应用方法，具体内容请参阅《指南》第 20至25页。
This section details the concept of Contextual Factors and how they might be applied. Please refer to pages 20-25 of the Guidelines.
4.1 您是否认同情境要素的考量方式和适用条件？若不认同，应如何优化使其清晰明确？
Do you agree with how and when Contextual Factors are considered? If not, how could it be made clearer or improved?
4.2 关于情境要素，您是否还有其他需要补充的意见？
Are there any other comments you would like to make about the Contextual Factors?
第二章、关于《实施手册》的相关问题 Questions relating to the Implementation Handbook
五、关于框架结构与设立目的的问题 Questions on Structure and purpose
5.1 《实施手册》的编写目的描述是否清晰，并且是否达成了该目的？若没有，您对该手册的结构框架、篇幅长度或导引设计这三个方面有何优化建议？Is the purpose of the Implementation Handbook clear, and does it deliver on that purpose? If not, how do you think the structure, length, navigation could be improved?
六、 《指南》的全球互操作性的问题
Questions on Section 3: Global interoperability of the Guidelines
本小节重点阐述如何将本《指南》与现行其他监管框架及非强制指导文件结合使用。具体内容请参阅《手册》第13至22页。
This section highlights how the Guidelines can be used in conjunction with other existing regulatory frameworks and voluntary guidance documents. Please refer to pages 13-22 of the Handbook.
6.1 本小节是否充分阐明了《指南》与其他方法论和框架的衔接与互操作性问题？有哪些地方需要更清晰的说明，或哪些重要框架有遗漏？
How well does this section address the interaction of the Guidelines with other methodologies and frameworks? Do any areas require more clarity or are there any significant frameworks we have missed?
注：基于此前咨询所获反馈，我们尤其关注对以下新增章节的反馈意见：3.4与《净零投资框架》的互操作性 和 3.6与公私债务框架的互操作性
Following feedback from the previous consultation, we are particularly interested in opinions on new sections 3.4 Interoperability with the Net Zero Investment Framework and 3.6 Interoperability with frameworks for public and private debt.
6.2 您是否担心本《指南》与您正在使用的其他框架或分类标准存在冲突或不一致？若有，请具体说明是那些冲突或不一致？
Do you have concern that the Guidelines conflict or are inconsistent with other frameworks and taxonomies you use? If so, what conflicts or inconsistencies are you most concerned about?
七、关于第 4节： 对采集的证据信息进行评估相关问题
Questions on Section 4: Obtaining evidence required for assessment
本小节探讨在应用本《指南》时，应如何应对数据挑战，以及认证机构所扮演的角色。具体内容请参阅《手册》第23至24页。具体内容请参阅《手册》第23至24页。
This section addresses how users of the Guidelines could approach data challenges and touches on the role of assurance providers. Please refer to pages 23-24 of the Handbook.
7.1 本小节对您是否有帮助？若否，请提出补充建议（例如：是否应提供可信的原始数据与次级数据的范例，以及何时需使用代理数据等）。Is this section useful to you? If no, please suggest how it might be added to, e.g. is there a necessity to see examples of credible primary and secondary data, and when proxy data might need to be used?
八、关于第 5节： 要素与原则评估示例的相关问题
Questions on Section 5: Factor and Principle assessment examples
本小节收录的案例旨在示范如何依据特定证据要点对实体进行评估，详细内容请参阅《手册》第25至31页。
This section includes case studies which aim to exemplify how to assess an entity against particular evidence points. Please refer to pages 25-31 of the Handbook.
8.1 本节提供的案例是否准确阐明了特定标准的举证方法以及预期的达标门槛？为提升实践指导价值，应如何改进案例的结构设计/分析深度？？Do the examples provided in this section make it clearer how certain criteria could be evidenced and what the threshold of expectation is? How could the structure/depth of the case studies be improved to be more practically useful?
8.2 您是否认同案例在《手册》中的编排方式？即：将案例集中收录于单一文档是否便于使用，或您更倾向于采用可动态更新的网页形式（此举将大幅缩减《手册》篇幅）？
Do you agree with the placement of the case studies within the Handbook? i.e. Is it useful to have them in one document, or would you prefer to have them as live web pages which would then reduce the length of the handbook?
a) 同意当前方式 Agreed on the current placement b) 建议采用网页方式 Prefer the live web pages c) 其他方式 Other
8.3 针对哪些通用要素（或具体标准），您认为有必要增补更多案例？
Which Universal Factors (or specific criteria) would it be useful to see additional case studies on?
8.4 对于本节中的所有案例研究，您是否有其他具体反馈意见？
Do you have any other specific feedback on any of case studies in this section?
九、关于第 6节： 针对新兴市场与发展中经济体及中小企业的实施支持
Questions on Section 6: Implementation support for EMDEs and SMEs
本小节针对新兴市场与发展中经济体及中小企业在应用《指南》时可能面临的挑战提供了补充说明，同时列举了评估方应对这些挑战的范例与参考方法。具体内容请参阅《手册》第32至38页。
This section provides some additional detail on the challenges that entities in an EMDE or SME context may face in applying the Guidelines. It also provides some examples and references of ways assessors could address these challenges. Please refer to pages 32-38 of the Handbook.
9.1 您建议《指南》应如何更好地应对新兴市场、发展中经济体及中小企业面临的挑战？若您在的过往实践中，曾使用了相关方法或工具有效地应对了这些挑战，能否提供案例说明？（例如：对新兴市场高排放行业转型路径的可信度评估有关的优秀实践）How would you propose the Guidelines could better address challenges for EMDEs and SME? Can you provide examples of tools you have used or case studies in these contexts that helped address those challenges? (e.g. good practice for assessing the credibility of pathways for high-emitting sectors in emerging markets).
9.2 （英国）转型金融委员会是否需要制定其他配套文件，以支持《指南》的解读和应用？例如，为跨国企业以及跨行业实体制定相应的应用指南。 Is there other guidance that is necessary for the Council to develop to support the interpretation and implementation of the Guidelines? Examples might include application to multi-national enterprises or multi-sector entities
9.3 关于本小节内容，您是否有其他反馈意见需要补充？Is there any other feedback you would like to give on this section?
十、关于第 7节： 《指南》在跨资产类别中应用的相关问题
Questions on Section 7: Applying the Guidelines across different asset classes
本小节概述了三大资产类别（上市公司股票、公共债券与私募股权）中的常见考量因素与实施难点，并在可行范围内提出了有助于克服这些障碍的务实方法。具体应用说明请参阅《手册》第39至47页。
This section outlines typical considerations and barriers encountered within three asset classes (public equity, public debt and private equity) and proposes, where feasible, pragmatic approaches to help overcome them. Please refer to pages 39-47 of the Handbook.
10.1 本节的结构设计是否简洁易懂？（即按投资前与投资后划分内容，并围绕策略、数据可得性等关键主题展开介绍）。对于如何提升本节的实用性，您有何具体建议？Is the structure of this section intuitive and useful? (i.e. splitting the content between pre investment and post-investment, addressing key themes like strategies and data availability). Do you have any suggestions of how to make this section more useful?
10.2 若您希望本小节内容扩展至其他资产类别，请告知具体类别，以及您是否有意向参与起草工作？（委员会目前计划拓展至实物资产、私募债权等类别，具体将根据实际情况推进）。
If you are interested in seeing this section expanded to other asset classes, please let us know which ones and whether you would be interested in collaborating in drafting? (the Council is currently planning on building out to real assets, private debt and potentially others, though this is dependent on capacity).
10.3 《手册》是否就"可信转型路径"及与《巴黎协定》兼容性，为用户提供了充分指导？在哪些方面（如有）可以进一步阐述或改进？
Does the Handbook provide enough guidance in relation to Credible Pathways and compatibility with the Paris Agreement for users on how to satisfy these expectations? What, if anything, could be made clearer or improved?
十一、其他反馈意见 Other feedback 11.1 我们欢迎对《指南》或《手册》的任何其他反馈或建议，包括但不限于：需要删减的内容，以及论证不足或待完善的内容。如有，请在下方填写。
Please let us know if you have any other feedback or suggestions to improve the Guidelines or Handbook. This may include removal of material or build out of areas you consider to be under-developed or absent.
11.2 我们诚挚欢迎并希望征集所有与本《指南》相关的案例，特别是有关实践过程中面临的具体挑战，或是界定实体是否符合转型金融标准有关的案例。若其他的评估标准中，与《指南》中的“指导原则”与“评估要素”有类似之处，希望了解其具体的实践情况。We would be grateful for any case studies with relevance to these Guidelines. Particularly where challenges have been faced, or where it has been difficult to assess whether an entity meets the requirements to qualify as transition finance. Where assessment criteria used bear some resemblance to the Principles/Factors, we are very interested to know how this has been applied.
If you would prefer, please email your case studies to transitionfinancecouncil@cityoflondon.gov.uk.
您的基本信息 Your Information：您的个人数据将仅限因本次征询工作确有必要知悉的人员访问，并可能披露。如您希望匿名回应，请备注说明！）
姓名： 所在机构： 职务： 邮箱: 备注（如需保密身份请说明）：