NO.PZ2022120702000027
问题如下：
Daniel Stinner was asked by the head of Research at Lopse Ratings to propose a methodology to rate sovereigns. Lopse Ratings is a well regarded rating agency, but it has been falling behind its peers because, whilst it has integrated ESG within corporate issuers, it has not yet integrated ESG within sovereign issuers.
After a few months of research in the industry and within Lopse, Daniel proposed the following to the Head of Research:
E, S and G weights to a final ESG score reflect the extent that the individual factor is a driver from a credit perspective.
Scores range from factors that individually are adequately managed or contributing to the sovereign’s financial capacity (highest 5) to those which may impose a significant strain on financial streams (lowest 1). They do not make value judgments on whether a sovereign engages in 'good' or 'bad' ESG practices. Instead, they draw out how E, S and G factors are influencing the credit rating decision.
Political risk, rule of law and corruption have been key drivers of rating actions in the past, indicating that governance was already playing a role in the rating model. It should be made explicit that these are governance-related matters, and thus considered as the ‘G’ within ESG. No other governance issue was deemed material across all types of sovereigns. Data could be gathered fromthe World Bank's Governance Indicators (WBGI) and Transparency International.
Social factors also have an important influence on sovereign ratings. Certain factors are related to government’s accountability, while others impact the longer-term productivity, and thus growth (plus indirectly, taxing capability) of the country. These factors are considered as the ‘S’ within ESG. Environmental risks, the ‘E’ within ESG, were identified as more idiosyncratic to each country based on their location and dependency.
The weighted average of the factors within each of the E, S and G pillars provide the score for that pillar, and the weighted average of the pillars provide the final ESG score for the sovereign issuer.
Daniel provided examples of the rating system applied to two different sovereigns, as detailed below.
In order to provide his boss with greater context of the ESG rating for each of the countries, Daniel briefly describes a few characteristics of each.
Which of the below are most likely part of the description for each company?
选项：
A.1 B.2 C.3 D.4解释：
本题需要综合两个国家在E,S,G相关议题下的打分和未来趋势进行判断。通过ESG得分可知A国的得分普遍高于B国，说明A国相比B国更加发达。
在人口结构方面，A国得分低于B国，且A国在这个方面持续恶化，而B国未来趋势更优。这有可能是A国的人口老龄化和B国的劳动力供给增加导致的；另外森林砍伐会引起B国的生物多样性的进一步恶化，因此选项A正确。
其他三个选项的描述均不能体现两国的ESG评分。
A选项说 A国是一个小岛怎么看出来的呀？
