New financial instruments designed to support climate, green economy,and social goals have taken various forms to reflect national or regionalpolicy priorities and regulatory frameworks since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015. However, the lack of clear, consistent, and credible information related to these instruments, as well as limitations in terms of the comparability and interoperability of different frameworks, risk hindering the achievement of sustainable development. To support the transition to a low-carbon economy, address information gaps, and reduce the risks of greenwashing, there has been growing recognition of the need to strengthen frameworks that effectively enable the transition. These imperatives have been driving the development of sustainable taxonomies around the world. Establishing eligibility criteria and setting requirements in terms of environmental and social (E&S) risk management and disclosures are common features of the taxonomies emerging in the market. Taxonomies involve a process for implementation with defined screening criteria, which often includes safeguards that intend for activities with a positive substantial contribution to an objective of the taxonomy to avoid negative impacts on other objectives. This principle, known as “do no significant harm” (DNSH), often complemented by “minimum safeguards”(MS) requirements, has been integrated into several national or regional taxonomies developed in the past years, including the European Union (EU) Taxonomy Regulation 2020/852. To support the implementation of sustainable taxonomies and leverage existing E&S risk management frameworks, financial institutions and other market participants subject to the EU Taxonomy, together with international networks and industry associations, have been calling for clarification of alignment between the EU Taxonomy requirements and pre-existing international standards. In response to these increasing demands, IFC has partnered with the Equator Principles Association to conduct this research, leveraging the combined expertise and experience of IFC as a standard-setter in E&S risk management and investor across emerging markets, and 138 Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EPFIs) operating globally. Over the past decades, the IFC E&S Performance Standards (PSs) and the World Bank Group (WBG) Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Guidelines, have provided guidance to companies and financial institutions on how to identify, assess, avoid, mitigate and manage E&S risks and impacts as a way of doing business in a sustainable way. The PSs and EHS Guidelines have influenced many E&S policies adopted by financial institutions – such as the Equator Principles which are used by EPFIs – and constitute an internationally recognized framework for E&S risk management, particularly for activities in emerging markets and developing economies. Companies and financial institutions have embedded these standards (PSs) and technical reference documents (EHS Guidelines) into their decision-making frameworks and have built significant experience and expertise over the years.This report examines the interoperability between the EU Taxonomy’s DNSH and MS criteria, on the one hand, and the PSs and EHS Guidelines, on the other, each of which, for the purpose of this analysis, are considered a “Framework.” The intention of this study is to establish whether and how compliance with the PSs and EHS Guidelines may satisfy the EU Taxonomy’s DNSH and MS criteria, with particular relevance to activities outside the EU, as the EU Taxonomy looks to expand its remit to emerging markets in the coming years with progressive requirements for non-EU entities to report on their taxonomy alignment.