Unlocking ESG Funding in Malaysia: The Role of NPOs, UN Grants, and Carbon Markets

SUMMARY

Sustainability is fast becoming mainstream for businesses and civil society alike. In Malaysia, Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) initiatives are supported by a mix of international grant funds, domestic financing mechanisms, and market-based instruments such as carbon trading. However, accessing United Nations (UN) grants and similar international funds isn’t straightforward for private companies. Instead, non-profit organizations (NPOs) and partners must act as intermediaries in grant applications, while companies bring technical expertise as project implementers.

This article outlines:

• Key UN-linked ESG funding sources and grant amounts,

• Why companies cannot directly apply for UN grants,

• Malaysia’s regulatory and carbon market landscape,

• Practical steps for collaboration,

• Misconceptions, fraud risks, and safeguards

1. UNDERSTANDING ESG FUNDING : UN GRANTS AND MALAYSIA SDG TRUST FUND

One of the most notable mechanisms in Malaysia is the Malaysia-UN SDG Trust Fund, jointly administered by the UN and the Yayasan MySDG (supported by the Ministry of Finance Malaysia )

Grant Amounts and Scope

• Total funding pool: ~USD 3.6–4.0 million per call (approx MYR 15–17 million),

• Individual project grants: Range from USD 100,000 to USD 500,000 per project.

• Project duration: Typically 6–18 months.

• Projects include healthcare access, water and sanitation initiatives, sustainable agriculture, and community empowerment programs.

Additional funding may be available via UNDP capacity building grants, supporting social enterprises and MSMEs (~USD 6,750 per entity), although these are smaller in scale.

2. WHY PRIVATE COMPANIES CANNOT DIRECTLY APPLY FOR UN GRANTS

UN and multi-partner trust funds are designed to support public benefit outcomes, not direct corporate profit:

• Eligibility: Only NPOs (Non-Profit Organization), NGOs (Non-Governmental Organization), academic institutions, or UN agencies can apply as lead entities,

• Purpose alignment: Projects must demonstrate measurable SDG impact,

• Implementation structure: NPOs act as lead applicants and fiduciaries, while private companies serve as technical partners under contract.

Implication for Malaysian companies: Collaboration with an experienced NPO is mandatory to access UN-linked ESG funding.

3. MALAYSIAN REGULATORY LANDSCAPE : MONEY FLOW AND COMPLIANCE

A. Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) and Financial Reporting

• Cross-border fund transfers must comply with foreign exchange documentation,

• Reporting ensures compliance with anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) regulations.

B. Tax and Accounting

NPOs receiving grants are generally tax-exempt, but fees paid to private companies must comply with corporate tax and invoicing rules.

Transparent contracts and audited financial reporting are essential.

C. Audit and Transparency

NPOs must maintain robust financial controls; corporate partners must align internal accounting with project reporting requirements.

4. Bursa Malaysia CARBON EXCHANGE (BCX) : ANOTHER ESG FUNDING AVENUE

BCX enables the trading of voluntary carbon credits and renewable energy certificates (RECs), providing a market-based funding mechanism to complement grant funding.

• Revenue generation: Companies can monetize validated emissions reductions,

• Project validation: NPOs can assist in meeting BCX verification requirements,

• Complementary financing: Carbon credits supplement UN grant funding, enhancing project viability,

Other agencies involved include Department of Environment Malaysia ( JABATAN ALAM SEKITAR MALAYSIA , Securities Commission Malaysia , and local NPO/validation partners.

5. The Malaysian ESG Ecosystem: Agencies and Platforms

• Department of Environment (DOE): Environmental compliance and project validation,

• Securities Commission Malaysia: Oversight of voluntary carbon markets,

• MySDG Foundation and UN partners: Administer grant processes and SDG alignment,

• Bursa Malaysia and BCX: Carbon trading and climate-aligned investment products.

This ecosystem enables Malaysian entities to combine grant funding, regulatory support, and market-based revenue streams.

6. TYPICAL STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL ESG PARTNERSHIPS

7. MISCONCEPTIONS AND RISKS : UN GRANTS, CARBON CREDITS AND FRAUD

Many in Malaysia overestimate the ease of accessing UN grants and carbon market revenue, leading to unrealistic expectations and exposure to fraud.

Common Misconceptions

• “UN grants are easy to obtain.” Reality: Highly competitive and project-specific,

• “Carbon credits automatically generate revenue.” Reality : Only properly validated projects can issue credits for trading.

Fraud and Scam Risks

• Fake grant offers: Fraudsters may request advance fees or personal information,

• Carbon credit scams*: Selling unverified or non-existent credits is a common fraud,

• Unregistered NPO intermediaries: Using unaccredited partners can result in lost funding or compliance issues.

Carbon credit scams involve fraudulent schemes where fake, overstated, or worthless carbon credits are sold, often promising high returns but leaving investors unable to sell them, exploiting loopholes in the largely unregulated green investment market through misleading claims, fabricated projects, or misuse of government logos for crypto schemes, leading to significant financial loss while undermining genuine climate efforts. Common types include "ghost credits," "double counting,", selling credits for projects or crypto-related scams that aren't real reductions. 

How They Work

• High-Pressure Tactics: Unsolicited calls/emails, pressure to invest quickly, promises of unrealistic returns,

• Misleading Claims: Marketing as "the new big thing," exploiting government focus on green initiatives,

• Fake Certifications: Using voluntary certifications that lack strong oversight or recognition

• Lack of Liquidity: Investors buy credits but can't find buyers to sell them to later. 

How to Protect Yourself

• Be Skeptical: Be wary of unexpected offers, especially those promising quick profits or using government-like branding.

• Verify Contact: If a government agency is involved, contact them directly using official numbers, not from the scam email/call.

• Seek Advice: Get independent professional financial advice before investing.

• Check Regulation: Understand that the carbon market isn't fully regulated, meaning no compensation if you lose money.

• Demand Transparency: Ask for detailed, verifiable information about the underlying project. 

Real-World Examples

• A billion-euro fraud involving so-called "Chinese Projects" approved under a German scheme. Investigations showing over 90% of credits from top providers like Verra might be worthless. 

While carbon credits aim to fight climate change, the market is vulnerable to fraud; always verify the legitimacy of projects and be wary of aggressive sales tactics to avoid being scammed. 

Safeguards

• Verify all funding sources through official UN or BCX channels

• Partner only with NPOs with proven track records,

• Conduct rigorous due diligence and internal training.

ESG funding is valuable but not “easy money.” Structured partnerships, verification, and regulatory compliance are essential.

8. SAFEGUARDS AGAINST FUND MISUSE

There have been cases where grant funds were misused, either redirected to unrelated projects or used for personal benefit. To protect organizations and stakeholders, the following safeguards are critical:

Common Misuse Scenarios

• Funds diverted to unrelated corporate or NPO activities,

• Payments used for personal lifestyles or non-project purposes,

• Poor documentation enabling undetected misappropriation.

Available Safeguards

• Auditing and Financial Oversight – Independent and internal audits track fund allocation,

• Clear Contractual Agreements – Define roles, responsibilities, and fund usage with disbursement tied to project milestones,

• Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Frameworks – Ensure funds are linked to measurable outcomes,

• Transparency and Public Reporting – Public disclosure of budgets, activities, and results enhances accountability,

• Regulatory Compliance – Adhere to BNM, LHDN (Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri) , and Companies Commission Of Malaysia / Suruhanjaya Syarikat Malaysia (SSM) regulations; non-compliance risks funding loss and legal consequences.

• Capacity Building and Training – Financial management and governance training reduces misuse risk.

9. CONCLUSION : A PATHWAY FOR IMPACT AND SUSTAINABILITY

UN and related ESG funds provide meaningful opportunities for Malaysian ESG projects, but access is contingent on NPO partnerships, compliance, and robust project design. Complementary mechanisms like Bursa Malaysia Carbon Exchange enhance project viability, enabling companies and NPOs to create measurable environmental and social impact.

10. CALL TO ACTION

For Corporate ESG Teams:

• Identify credible NPO partners with UN funding experience,

• Explore pilot projects that deliver measurable ESG outcomes and carbon credits.

For NPO Leaders:

• Strengthen grant proposal capabilities aligned with SDGs,

• Maintain transparent governance to support corporate partnerships.

For Policymakers:

• Support frameworks facilitating public-private collaboration,

• Promote capacity building for local NPOs to engage with international funds safely.

Together, Malaysia’s public, private, and non-profit sectors can build a sustainable financing ecosystem that leverages global funding, national policy, and market innovation to achieve SDG ambitions.

Also Read : DONT FALL FOR HALF-TRUTHS - UNDERSTANDING PENSION FUND INVESTMENTS IN MALAYSIA

Clarifying the Facts: Malaysia’s Sovereignty, ASEAN Diplomacy, and Recent U.S. Engagement

Recent public debate following the ASEAN Summit has raised concerns about Malaysia’s engagement with external partners, particularly in relation to trade frameworks and cooperation in critical minerals such as rare earth elements (REE). Issues of national sovereignty, non-alignment, and economic independence are important and should be discussed based on verified facts and Malaysia’s long-term national interest.

First, it is important to clarify that no peace treaty or regional security arrangement contains provisions on trade tariffs, rare earth elements, or joint economic control involving any external power. ASEAN-related peace and stability efforts are separate and legally distinct from economic discussions with external partners. Claims that peace arrangements were used to embed economic concessions are not supported by any official documentation.

Second, Malaysia has not signed any binding agreement that surrenders control over its trade policy, tariffs, or natural resources. What was announced during the summit period consisted mainly of frameworks, joint statements, and Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs). These instruments are non-binding, do not override Malaysian law, and require further domestic processes before any implementation.

Malaysia therefore retains full authority over tariff decisions, trade remedies, mining and processing licences, environmental regulation, and export controls. In relation to REE, existing regulatory frameworks including environmental safeguards and controls on radioactive materials remain fully in force. No foreign party has been granted ownership, exclusive access, pricing control, or veto power over Malaysia’s resources.

Third, engagement does not equate to alignment. Malaysia’s interactions with external partners reflect its long-standing practice of multi-directional diplomacy. Participation in discussions on supply chains, standards, or potential investment cooperation does not bind Malaysia to any geopolitical bloc nor undermine its non-aligned foreign policy.

Concerns about possible future influence are policy considerations rather than evidence of an existing loss of sovereignty. Such concerns should be addressed through parliamentary oversight and informed public debate.

In conclusion, Malaysia remains fully sovereign over its economy, natural resources, and foreign policy. No agreement signed to date transfers control to any external power. Constructive debate is necessary, but it must be grounded in facts, transparency, and a shared commitment to protecting Malaysia’s national interest.

QHSEL CONSULTANCY SDN. BHD.

 

HARD TALK PRIOR TO CLOSING 2025

As 2025 comes to a close, here’s a hard truth, one I believe many professionals quietly experience.

When I prepare project papers, proposals, or documentation for loans, grants, or financing, I often hear remarks like:

“If this is how you do it, I can do it too.”

Efficiency is mistaken for simplicity, and experience is taken for granted.

Another common line is:

“Once the financing is approved, I’ll pay you.”

Professional work is not conditional. Time, expertise, and effort are invested upfront, regardless of whether funding succeeds. Services and commissions must always be treated separately. Sadly, I’ve seen approvals secured, followed by silence and broken promises.

For clarity:

All serious engagements require a mobilisation fee upon agreement, with the balance paid within the agreed invoicing period.

I don’t play the waiting game. Prospects are prioritised, delay means moving on. First come, first served.

Writing and documentation are not “just words.” They involve analysis, structure, regulatory understanding, and foresight built over decades.

My work is experience-driven and properly referenced not copied, not automated, and certainly not improvised.

I write and share knowledge because I’ve been doing so since the late 80s not for validation, but as part of professional responsibility.

As we approach the end of 2025, here’s the reminder:

If you value outcomes, you must value the process and the people behind it.

Respect professionalism. Respect time. Respect expertise.

2026 - HERE WE GO

 

THE WAY WE DRESS DOESN'T DEFINE OUR FAITH

 

I hope I won’t be branded an “infidel” for appreciating the style portrayed in Peaky Blinders, unlike my unfortunate four Afghan brothers, I’m sure me and them weren’t gangsters in the way real history often portrays. The way we wear doesn't define our faith, in some places, I go for prayers with these (So did the Arab Muslims) and as long as my awrat is covered.

NAK CARI SALAH MEMANGLAH SENANG

Sejarah hubungan Aceh–Tanah Melayu tidak boleh dilihat secara satu hala. Aceh pernah bertindak keras terhadap beberapa kerajaan Melayu, namun tindakan itu berlaku dalam konteks menentang penjajahan Portugis dan mempertahankan pengaruh Islam di rantau ini.

Dalam masa yang sama, Tanah Melayu juga mempunyai sejarah gelap terhadap Aceh, termasuk sikap bersekutu atau berdiam diri ketika kuasa Barat melemahkan dan akhirnya menundukkan Aceh.

Jika hanya kesalahan Aceh dibesar-besarkan tanpa membuka peranan dan pilihan politik kedua-dua pihak dalam tekanan zaman penjajahan, maka penilaian itu bukan sahaja cetek, malah tidak adil dan berat sebelah.

Kita perlu belajar dari sejarah lampau untuk mengelakkan kita dari mengulangi kesalahan yang sama bukan menggunakan sejarah untuk memutuskan silaturrahim dan ukhuwah. Kita juga belajar dari sejarah lampau untuk kita mencontohi perkara yang baik yang mungkin kita sudah lupa di zaman moden ini.

From Production to Knowledge: Why Malaysia and ASEAN’s Digital Economy Is Still Stuck and What Policy Must Change - By Nik Zafri

Read this article as well : 

SHARING ECONOMY VS TRADITIONAL BRICK AND MORTAR IN THE 21ST CENTURY – BY NIK ZAFRI

By Nik Zafri

Summary

Malaysia and ASEAN have made significant strides in digitalisation, from e‑government services and fintech adoption to AI roadmaps and smart cities. Yet beneath this progress lies a structural contradiction: our digital economy largely operates on a production‑based (P‑based) capitalist logic, rather than a true knowledge‑based (K‑based) economy that digital technology promises.

This article will try to address the constraint is not technological capability, but policy design, governance frameworks, and legacy measurement systems. Without deliberate reform, digitalisation will continue to amplify consumption, inequality, and environmental stress rather than generate shared intelligence, resilience, and long‑term value.

1. THE ASEAN-MALAYSIAN DIGITAL PARADOX

Malaysia’s digital agenda supported by initiatives such as #MyDIGITAL, #Industry4WRD, National AI Roadmaps, and various smart city programmes emphasises:

• Platform growth,

• Startup ecosystems,

• Cashless payments

• E‑commerce expansion

Across ASEAN, similar patterns emerge in Singapore, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Thailand.

However, most digital success is still measured by:

• Gross transaction value (GTV),

• User acquisition numbers,

• Platform scale,

• Contribution to GDP

These are P‑based indicators, not K‑based ones. The result is a digital economy that sells more efficiently, but does not necessarily think better.

2. WHY P-BASED LOGIC PERSISTS IN POLICY

2.1 GDP and Fiscal Metrics Dominate

Public policy continues to rely on GDP growth, consumption, and investment flows as primary indicators of success. Knowledge creation, prevention of loss, environmental preservation, and social trust, all critical in ASEAN’s climate‑vulnerable context remain largely invisible to national accounts.

2.2 Investment and Incentive Structures

Government grants, tax incentives, and venture funding prioritise:

• Scale,

• Speed,

• Monetisation

Rarely do they reward:

• Knowledge transfer,

• Skills deepening,

• Open data contribution,

• Reduction of systemic risk

This biases innovation toward platforms that extract value rather than systems that distribute intelligence.

3. P‑BASED VS K-BASED ECONOMY (Policy Lens)

4. THE ASEAN CONTEXT : Why This Matters More Here

ASEAN economies face overlapping challenges:

• Climate vulnerability (floods, heat, food security),

• Ageing infrastructure,

• Youth underemployment,

• Skills mismatch,

• Environmental degradation

A P‑based digital economy worsens these by encouraging over‑consumption and resource strain. A K‑based economy, by contrast, prioritises:

• Predictive systems,

• Preventive policy,

• Skills intelligence,

• Regional knowledge sharing

For Malaysia, this aligns directly with national aspirations on sustainability, ESG leadership, and high‑income status.

5. GOVERNANCE GAPS HOLDING BACK THE TRANSITION

• Policy Silos : Digital, climate, education, and economic policies operate independently,

• Outdated Accounting : Intangible assets and avoided losses are not recognised,

• Platform Regulation : Focused on competition, not knowledge responsibility,

• Public Procurement : Rewards lowest cost, not highest intelligence,

• Data Governance : Treats data as commodity rather than public infrastructure

6. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MALAYSIA AND ASEAN

6.1 Redefine National Success Metrics

• Complement GDP with knowledge, resilience, and risk‑reduction indicators,

• Integrate ESG, SDG, and climate intelligence into fiscal planning

6.2 Reform Digital Incentives

Tie grants and tax incentives to measurable knowledge transfer

Reward platforms that reduce systemic costs (energy, fraud, waste)

6.3 Treat Data as Strategic Infrastructure

(which is the very reason why we need a real working Data Centers not for fancy but what works and benefits us)

• Establish trusted data commons for climate, health, and finance
• Encourage cross‑ASEAN data interoperability

6.4 Embed Knowledge in Public Procurement

• Prioritise solutions that improve decision quality, not just cost savings,

• Value learning systems, not one‑off deliverables

6.5 Strengthen Regional Knowledge Cooperation

• ASEAN‑level platforms for shared intelligence on climate, supply chains, and security,

• Reduce duplication through collective learning

7. REFRAMING DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION

Digital transformation must shift from:

• Faster consumption to Smarter decisions,

• Platform scale to System intelligence,

• User capture to Capability building

AI, analytics, and automation should be deployed to prevent harm, optimise resources, and raise collective competence, not merely to increase sales.

CONCLUSION : A POLICY CHOICE, NOT A TECHNOLOGY PROBLEM

Malaysia and ASEAN do not lack digital infrastructure, talent, or ambition. What is missing is policy alignment with a knowledge‑based future.

The continued dominance of a P‑based digital economy is a governance choice,  reinforced by outdated metrics, incentives, and power structures. Transitioning to a K‑based economy requires courage to redefine value, patience to invest long‑term, and humility to share intelligence across institutions and borders.

We are not constrained by technology. We are constrained by how we choose to measure success.

The digital future will not be decided by how much we produce or consume but by how well we learn, adapt, and govern together.

Kerajaan tetap had umur minimum 16 tahun bagi akses media sosial

Credit : 

thenews

 -

 December 3, 2025

Link Asal : https://thenews.com.my/kolumnis/kerajaan-tetap-had-umur-minimum-16-tahun-bagi-akses-media-sosial

Kuala Lumpur: Langkah menetapkan had umur minimum 16 tahun dan mewajibkan pengesahan identiti mampu menangani peningkatan ancaman bahan eksploitasi seksual kanak-kanak (CSAM)

Pendekatan tegas berkenaan bagaimanapun memerlukan sokongan ibu bapa, sekolah dan industri teknologi agar keselamatan kanak-kanak dapat dijamin secara menyeluruh.

Presiden Persatuan Wanita Dalam Urustadbir & Teknologi (WIGTA), (Puan Hajjah) Tetty Henney binti Zulkifli berkata, langkah ini melebihi prosedur teknikal  sebaliknya menjadi benteng pertahanan baharu melindungi golongan rentan daripada eksploitasi dalam talian kian sukar dibendung.

Katanya, golongan remaja khususnya berusia 13 tahun hingga 15 tahun secara psikologi masih belum memiliki kematangan penuh untuk mengenali taktik manipulasi dalam talian seperti ugutan seksual atau pemalsuan identiti.

“Kajian antarabangsa menunjukkan kumpulan umur ini kerap berkongsi maklumat peribadi tanpa sedar, sekaligus membuka ruang kepada eksploitasi.

“Penjenayah siber sangat licik. Mereka memanipulasi emosi, rasa ingin tahu dan keinginan untuk diterima.

“Kanak-kanak bawah 16 tahun paling mudah percaya dan paling cepat terdedah,” jelasnya.

Kanak-kanak bawah 16 tahun paling terdedah kepada manipulasi dan eksploitasi digital- Tetty Henney

Tetty Henney berkata, ambang umur 16 tahun ditetapkan sebagai langkah pencegahan berdasarkan data risiko dan tahap kematangan

Penetapan umur 16 tahun dibuat berdasarkan beberapa faktor termasuk tahap perkembangan kognitif remaja lebih cenderung memahami implikasi privasi dan risiko dalam talian.

“Statistik data CSAM turut menunjukkan peningkatan ketara insiden melibatkan pengguna bawah 16 berbanding kumpulan umur lebih tinggi.

“Keupayaan kanak-kanak pada usia 13 tahun hingga 15 tahun juga masih di tahap perkembangan impulsif dan lemah dalam pertimbangan.

“Jadi, kita mahu memastikan apabila remaja melangkah ke dunia media sosial, mereka sudah cukup matang dan dilindungi,” katanya lanjut.

Beliau berpendapat, pengesahan umur untuk membuka akaun media sosial bukan bertujuan menyekat kebebasan digital sebaliknya menjadi lapisan keselamatan kanak-kanak.

Ujarnya, pengesahan berkenaan mampu menghalang akses bawah umur ke ruang berisiko tinggi.

“Secara tidak langsung, akaun palsu tidak lagi digunakan oleh kanak-kanak untuk memintas syarat umur

“Pemangsa dewasa yang menyamar sebagai remaja juga lebih mudah dikesan mengikut kesahihan undang-undang,” ujarnya.

Kerajaan dijangka mengumumkan garis panduan teknikal serta pelaksanaan fasa pertama dasar ini dalam masa terdekat.

Langkah ini diumumkan selepas satu siri perbincangan antara agensi keselamatan siber, Kementerian Komunikasi, serta pakar perlindungan kanak-kanak.

DIGNITY IS TOO IMPORTANT TO BE SAFEGUARDED

Walau sesulit mana sekalipun hidup kita, maruah diri dan keluarga tetap perlu dijaga. Jangan sekali-kali menggadaikan harga diri hanya kerana kita diuji dan berada dalam kesempitan. Yakinlah pada nasihat mereka yang pernah melalui kepayahan kata-kata mereka lahir daripada pengalaman.

No matter how difficult life becomes, we must always safeguard our dignity and that of our family. Never sacrifice your self-respect just because you are being tested or going through hardship. Trust the advice of those who have endured struggles their words come from experience.

A LOT HAS CHANGED SINCE 1989

To many who may not know, my journey after 1989 took a very dynamic path. I ventured into Business Management, ICT, and Programming, and along the way I earned various skills and competency certifications. I continued expanding my horizons through multiple courses in Construction, Economics, the Stock Market, and Quality/Safety/Environment assessment and auditing both locally and internationally.

This continued until 2007, when I refocused on professional upgrades, especially in risk assessment and civil engineering. From 2018 onwards, my interests evolved further into AI and ESG, and most recently into Anti-Bribery, Anti-Corruption, and advanced ESG frameworks.

My quest for knowledge has never stopped. A lot has changed since 1989 and I’ve grown with every step.

And I’m not the only one on this journey. My wife has been walking her own path of growth too - she’s now a postgraduate. We’ve worked hard to get where we are today, and we believe in continuous self-improvement, making changes, and rebranding ourselves when necessary. DON'T LET THE TOXIC PEOPLE GETS YOU

Have we been belittled by our own kind during our journey? Yes and I know how deeply it hurts. Jealousy has existed since the days of Abel and Cain, and it still shows itself today. But you learn to manoeuvre through it, to keep going, and to never give up. Some of those who once belittled me now claim that their ‘criticism’ was the reason we succeeded. I’m sorry - it was our hard work. I never depended on anyone’s toxic opinion of me. We moved on, stayed focused, and simply ignored the noise.

I AM NIK ZAFRI AND I AM A KELANTANESE AND A MALAYSIAN

 

My name is Nik Zafri, and I’m from Kelantan - proudly Kelantanese. My family stands proud of me too, regardless of what others may say. And above all, I am a Malaysian.

CONTRACTOR IGNORING CLIMATE CHANGE? WHAT SHOULD AUTHORITY AND CLIENT DO

In my experience, I found it that many contractors don’t intentionally ignore climate change but several structural, economic, and behavioural factors often push them into treating it as a secondary concern, even though it is undeniably real and already affecting projects. 

1. Cost Pressure and Thin Profit Margins

• Construction margins are tight,

• Climate-resilient materials, design adjustments, and environmental safeguards usually cost more upfront,

• When contractors are already struggling to win tenders at the lowest price, sustainability measures get sidelined.

Mindset: “If the client doesn’t pay for it, why should we include it?”

2. Short-Term Focus vs Long-Term Impact

Contractors generally operate on short project cycles.

Climate impacts  : flooding, rising temperatures, soil movements, extreme storms are long-term issues.

They prioritise:

• completing the job fast,

• avoiding delays,

• meeting immediate specifications

Long-term climate resilience is seen as the consultant’s or client's problem.

3. Lack of Awareness or Outdated Knowledge

Some still rely on old rules of thumb:

• historical rainfall data,

• traditional soil assumptions,

• old drainage standards

But climate patterns have shifted drastically, and old assumptions no longer hold. Not all contractors keep up with new guidelines.

4. “Not My Responsibility” Mentality

A mindset common in the industry:

• Designer handles design,

• Client sets requirements,

• Contractor just builds according to drawings

If climate adaptation isn’t explicitly written in the contract, many won’t consider it.

5. Pressure to Meet Deadlines

Weather delays already cause friction between contractors, consultants, and clients. Ironically, instead of planning for more extreme weather, contractors often:

• rush work,

• cut corners,

• ignore environmental protocols

to maintain the schedule.

6. Insufficient Enforcement

Even when climate-related regulations exist (e.g., flood mitigation, erosion control, stormwater management), enforcement on-site varies.

• limited manpower in local authorities,

• inconsistent monitoring,

• penalties too low to deter non-compliance

This encourages a "deviate a little from the specs" approach.

7. Culture of Reactive, Not Preventive, Action

In many places, people only take climate change seriously after a flood, slope failure, or structural issue happens.

The construction ecosystem often mirrors this culture:

• Fix after failure,

• No prevention before failure,

• Risk Assessment didn't seem not to identify such long term risk,

8. Competitive Tenders Reward the Cheapest Bid

If tenders do not explicitly require climate-resilient design and construction:

• bidders who include climate provisions will look more expensive,
• bidders who ignore them win the job

So the system itself "encouraging" ignorance of climate risks.

9. Lack of Training in Climate-Resilient Construction

Many site teams and subcontractors have limited exposure to:

• climate adaptation engineering,

• sustainable material choices,

• biodiversity considerations,

• hydrological risk forecasting

Without training, they default to outdated practices.

10. Human Bias (“It Won’t Happen to Us”)

A psychological factor:

People underestimate risks they have not personally experienced,

Until:

• a site gets flooded,

• a retaining wall fails,

• temperatures cause material expansion issues

…climate change remains abstract.

Summary

Contractors often ignore climate change because the industry system encourages short-term savings over long-term resilience.

But climate change is already affecting:

• soil behaviour,

• stormwater flows,

• concrete curing,

• material durability,

• worker safety,

• scheduling and costs

Ignoring it will cost more later than preparing now.

SO, THEN, WHAT SHOULD THE AUTHORITIES, CLIENTS OR CONSULTANTS DO?

1. Authorities (Government, Regulators, Local Councils)

Authorities have the biggest influence because they set the rules everyone must follow.

A. Strengthen regulations and standards

• Update earthworks, drainage, flood mitigation, stormwater, river buffer, slope, and coastal protection guidelines to reflect today’s climate data not 20-year-old data,

• Make climate-resilient design mandatory in all planning approvals.

B. Strict enforcement

Conduct frequent site inspections, especially during earthworks and foundation stages.

Enforce stricter penalties for:

• poor erosion/silt control,

• incomplete drainage,

• unsafe temporary works,

• environmental non-compliance,

When compliance becomes expensive to ignore, contractors will comply.

C. Require Climate Risk Assessments

Before approving a project, require:

• Flood risk study,

• Updated hydrological modeling,

• Soil movement/expansion due to temperature and rainfall,

• Heat stress assessment,

D. Incentives for climate-resilient construction

• Fast-track approvals for green/resilient projects,

• Tax incentives or grants for climate-adaptation technologies,

• Encourage use of permeable pavements, green roofs, detention ponds, etc.

E. Digital Enforcement

Require contractors to submit real-time photos, drone data, or IoT rainfall logs for monitoring,

Use digital systems (GIS + satellite overlays) to track compliance in flood zones or sensitive areas

2. Clients (Developers, Government Agencies, Property Owners)

Clients drive the direction of the entire project. If they don’t prioritise climate resilience, nobody else will.

A. Specify climate-related requirements clearly

Include in tender documents:

• Erosion/sediment control measures,
• Flood mitigation systems,
• Heat-mitigation design (reflective materials, shading, green areas),
• Resilient drainage solutions,
• Stronger structural specifications for extreme weather

If it's not in the drawings, the contractor won’t do it.

B. Accept realistic budgets

Climate-adapted construction costs more upfront but saves millions later. Clients must avoid forcing contractors into the cheapest bid.

C. Avoid rigid timelines that create risky shortcuts

Extreme weather will cause delays that’s normal now.

Clients must allow for

• rain delays,

• high-wind shutdowns, and

• access road deterioration

These factors should be properly reflected in the project’s critical path scheduling. Failing to build these climate-related risks into the timeline forces contractors to rush, cut corners, and compromise both safety and quality.

D. Engage specialists early

Bring in:

• hydrologists,

• geotechnical climate specialists,

• coastal/marine engineers,

• sustainability consultants

Don’t wait until the problem appears on-site.

E. Implement long-term asset management

Clients should plan for:

• future maintenance,

• floodproofing,

• structural upgrades,

• adaptation over the building’s lifespan

Climate change doesn’t stop after the project is completed.

3. Consultants (Engineers, Architects, Planners, QS/PMC)

Consultants are the guardians of quality but many still design based on outdated assumptions.

A. Update technical calculations

Use:

• the latest rainfall intensity curves,

• current soil behaviour data,

• updated wind loads,

• revised temperature expansion factors,

• existing climate adaptation guidelines

Old data = future failure.

B. Incorporate climate resilience into design

Examples:

• higher drainage capacity,

• deeper footings in flood-prone areas,

• retaining walls with increased surcharge,

• materials suitable for extreme heat,

• wind-resilient roof and façade designs

C. Educate the client

Many clients don’t understand climate risks.

Consultants must explain:

• Why we need bigger drains,

• Why slopes need proper geotextile,

• Why river setbacks must increase,

• Why detention ponds cannot be shrunk for “extra land”

If consultants don’t defend technical integrity, contractors will exploit the silence.

D. Be stricter during supervision

Consultants must:

• Reject shortcuts,

• Insist on proper implementation,

• Document non-compliance,

• Enforce contractual penalties,

• Refuse to certify work that ignores climate adaptation

E. Integrate multidisciplinary collaboration

Climate change is not a single-discipline issue.

Structural + geotech + hydrology + M&E + landscape architects must all align.

Conclusion: Everyone Has a Role

Climate change is no longer theoretical, it affects:

• construction cost,

• scheduling,

• durability,

• safety,

• structural behaviour,

• environmental damage

BIGOTRY - IT SHOULD REDUCE NOWADAYS BUT GETTING WORSE

When it comes to bigotry, some stand firm while others don’t. Many blame upbringing, but today politics divides us more than religion. Whatever said is easily misread, and even facts spark anger. Those who reject racial issues show respect, yet things grow more painful each day.

ANOTHER BASELESS CLAIM

The claim that a discharged bankrupt in Malaysia must continue paying old debts is legally incorrect. Under the Insolvency Act 1967 (Sections 33(4) and 35), once the Director General of Insolvency or the court grants a discharge, the individual is released from all provable debts except for limited categories such as fines, maintenance, government debts, or fraud-related liabilities. After discharge, creditors cannot demand repayment or take legal action. Any claim suggesting otherwise is a misinterpretation of Malaysian insolvency law.

DONT FALL FOR HALF-TRUTHS - UNDERSTANDING PENSION FUND INVESTMENTS IN MALAYSIA - Nik Zafri's Personal Opinion

 

(This is my personal opinion based on publicly available information)

I’ve worked on major projects funded by pension funds, and in most cases these funds earned above-market, long-term returns. That’s why we shouldn’t react to politically charged claims without context.

Why Pension Funds Invest in Climate & Infrastructure Projects

Globally, pension funds invest in long-term assets - infrastructure, energy and climate-related projects. These allocations are small, controlled, and designed for stable returns.

Some foreign renewable energy companies have faced financial stress due to overleverage or heavy reliance on subsidies. So concerns about exposure are valid, but must be assessed through proper due-diligence safeguards.

How FDI Energy Projects Actually Work in Malaysia

Malaysia requires extensive checks before approval:

Full due diligence & risk assessments, investment committee approvals, protections like minimum guaranteed returns, performance bonds, PPAs, and oversight by MOF Inc, BNM, SEDA, Energy Commission (ST), TNB, MITI. (International green projects often have World Bank/ADB/AIIB partial guarantees) These are step-in rights apply if a company fails to perform.

Pension funds use strict risk frameworks: minimum IRR, senior-secured positions and long-term PPAs, not blind investments based on third-party guarantees.

About Foreign Companies “Going Bankrupt”

Most foreign renewable firms here operate via Malaysian SPVs with separate assets and liabilities. Even if a parent restructures overseas, the Malaysian SPV remains protected under local law and project contracts.

Claims that “many foreign renewable companies have gone bankrupt” are largely unsubstantiated. True bankruptcy requires proof through regulatory filings, insolvency notices, stock-exchange announcements, liquidation records and verified media reporting.

Without such evidence, the claims may be defamatory. And if a company genuinely collapsed, Malaysian regulators would intervene immediately.

Pension Funds Don’t Invest Blindly

Before investing, they conduct credit-rating analysis, legal and financial due diligence, project modelling, viability studies and risk assessments. A bankrupt entity would never pass these filters.

Recognizing the Fear Narrative

Many recent claims appear structured to create fear among civil servants and contributors, implying their savings are misused or at risk. This misinformation mixes partial facts with speculation, leveraging:

• Emotional triggers (“fear of losing savings”),

• Confusion between restructuring and bankruptcy,

• Global headlines misapplied to Malaysia,

• Political framing to undermine trust in institutions

This is why context matters. Pension fund investments follow strict processes, regulatory oversight and strong contractual protections far from the reckless risk-taking portrayed in viral narratives.

BETTER A CRIMINAL GOES FREE

BETTER A CRIMINAL GOES FREE

The Thin Blue Line, one of my favorite sitcoms, skillfully blends comedy with serious themes. In this episode, Inspector Fowler (Rowan Atkinson) faces a dilemma when CID officers, lacking evidence, plant drugs to arrest a dealer.

During the operation, Constable Goody wears an unapproved police uniform. Fowler uncovers the misconduct and discreetly informs the Queen’s Counsel (his ex-girlfriend - also the Mayoress defending the accused) about the unauthorised uniform. This leads to the case being dismissed, as the fake uniform invalidated the operation.

The episode illustrates the principle: “Better a criminal goes free than the police become criminals themselves.” It underscores that law enforcement must operate within legal and ethical boundaries. Key ideas include:

• Rule of Law: Everyone, including the police, is accountable under the law,

• Due Process: Legal rights must be respected to ensure fair treatment,

• Legitimacy and Trust: Police misconduct erodes public trust and the justice system’s integrity.

Allowing the state to bypass the law for convictions risks systemic injustice, which is a greater threat than a single offender escaping justice.

Thin Blue Line

Created by Ben Elton | Directed by John Birkin | Composer: Howard Goodall | Tiger Aspect Productions | BBC1 | 1995–1996