Aviva Political Audit

Executive Intelligence Overview

1.1. Audit Scope and Methodology

This report constitutes a forensic audit of the political and ideological footprint of Aviva Plc (“the Entity”), specifically evaluating its complicity in the maintenance, legitimization, and financing of the State of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories, as well as its integration into the broader military-industrial complex. The audit methodology is rooted in a comparative governance analysis, contrasting the Entity’s stated Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) policies with its operational realities.

The core objective is to document and evidence material linkages—whether through direct equity, insurance underwriting, venture capital partnerships, or governance ideology—that connect the Entity to systems of apartheid, surveillance, or militarization. This report adheres to a strict “Safe Harbor” analytical framework, testing the Entity’s “neutrality” by juxtaposing its rapid corporate mobilization regarding the Russo-Ukrainian conflict against its operational inertia regarding the crisis in Gaza.

The findings detailed herein are strictly evidentiary. In accordance with the audit directive, this report aggregates verified data points, governance behaviors, and financial relationships to facilitate a future determination of complicity. No final moral verdict is rendered; rather, the “ideological footprint” is mapped for risk assessment.

1.2. Summary of Key Risk Vectors

The audit has identified four primary vectors of potential complicity which form the structural backbone of this report:

1. Operational Complicity: The provision of essential business-enabling insurance to subsidiaries of Israeli defense contractors (specifically Elbit Systems) within the UK jurisdiction.
2. Financial Complicity: The persistence of equity holdings in financial institutions and industrial conglomerates listed on the UN Human Rights Council database for their involvement in the illegal settlement economy.
3. Ideological Asymmetry (The “Safe Harbor” Failure): A demonstrably divergent corporate response mechanism that affords humanitarian and financial “safe harbor” to victims of the Ukraine conflict while denying the same to Palestinian civilians, enforced through internal disciplinary “neutrality” protocols.
4. Strategic Normalization: Deep integration into the Israeli technology ecosystem through venture capital partnerships (FinTLV), which function as soft-power normalization of the Israeli “Start-Up Nation” economy.

2. Governance Ideology and Leadership Architecture

The governance ideology of a multinational insurer is not merely defined by the personal political cards held by its directors, but by the ecosystem of influence in which it operates. This section audits the proximity of Aviva’s leadership to Zionist advocacy structures and the political pressure mechanisms that shape its strategic decisions.

2.1. The Board and the Political Establishment

While a direct forensic screening of the current Board of Directors for card-carrying membership in Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) or Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) does not yield public disclosures of active officer roles within the Entity’s immediate leadership files ¹, the Entity operates within a tightly coupled political-regulatory nexus where these groups are dominant.

The parliamentary records indicate that the legislative environment governing Aviva is heavily influenced by these advocacy groups. The Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) and Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) are identified as primary vehicles for shaping UK foreign policy and trade relations with Israel.³ The significance of this for Aviva lies in the Entity’s heavy reliance on government engagement.

• Ministerial Engagement: Transparency returns reveal that Aviva’s Group CEO, Dame Amanda Blanc, engages in high-level meetings with senior government figures such as Angela Rayner (Deputy Prime Minister) and Lord Khan. Crucially, these ministerial diaries show that in the same reporting periods, these ministers are actively engaging with the British-Israel Chamber of Commerce, the Jewish Leadership Council, and the United Jewish Israel Appeal (UJIA).⁴ This places Aviva’s leadership in a “lobbying orbit” where the normative baseline for trade and regulation is set by pro-Israel advocacy groups.
• The “Grant Shapps” Intervention: A critical indicator of the political pressure exerted on Aviva’s governance occurred when the then-Defence Secretary, Grant Shapps, explicitly intervened to warn Aviva against divesting from defense companies. Shapps’ intervention was triggered by Aviva’s “Baseline Exclusion Policy” letter, which hinted at excluding companies involved in weapons.⁶ The governance response—a rapid clarification that Aviva had “no plans to change its significant investments in UK defence companies”—demonstrates a governance ideology that is permeable to state-level Zionist and militarist pressure. The Board effectively capitulated to a “national security” narrative that prioritizes the continuity of the arms trade over ESG exclusion policies.

2.2. Lobbying and Trade Normalization

The audit investigated the Entity’s participation in bilateral trade chambers that function as normalization mechanisms for the Israeli economy.

• British-Israel Chamber of Commerce (BICC): While direct corporate membership lists are often opaque, the BICC serves as a central node for connecting UK corporations with Israeli markets. The BICC’s historical and current role involves hosting “image of Israel” seminars to counter negative PR arising from the occupation, specifically targeting the business sector.⁸ Aviva’s engagement with government officials who concurrently meet with the BICC suggests the Entity functions as a cooperative actor within this trade corridor.
• Trade Association Memberships: Aviva maintains memberships in broader industry bodies (Association of British Insurers, etc.) that advocate for “free trade,” often opposing Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) measures under the guise of anti-discrimination or free market principles.

2.3. The “Neutrality” Doctrine as Governance Tool

Aviva’s governance employs a doctrine of “corporate neutrality” to insulate the Board from taking positions on the occupation. However, this neutrality is applied selectively.

• Mechanism: The Board utilizes “neutrality” to deflect calls for divestment from Israel, framing such actions as “political” and therefore outside the fiduciary mandate.
• Contradiction: This stance is contradicted by the Board’s highly political stance on Ukraine (see Section 3), where the Entity abandoned neutrality to become an active participant in economic sanctions. This inconsistency suggests that “neutrality” is not a fixed governance principle but a flexible shield used to protect commercial interests in controversial zones like Israel.

3. The “Safe Harbor” Test: Comparative Crisis Response Analysis

This section constitutes the core “Double Standard” audit. It rigorously documents the disparity in corporate mobilization between the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) and the Israeli bombardment of Gaza (2023-present).

3.1. Case Study A: The Ukraine Response (Mobilization)

Upon the commencement of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, Aviva Plc activated a “Total Corporate Mobilization” protocol. The response was characterized by speed, moral clarity, and financial volume.

Analysis: The Entity’s response to Ukraine established a precedent: Aviva is capable of acting as a geopolitical moral agent. It proved that the company has the logistical and financial capacity to divest rapidly and fund humanitarian relief when the victimhood aligns with Western foreign policy.

3.2. Case Study B: The Gaza Response (Inertia)

In stark contrast, the response to the Gaza crisis—marked by a death toll exceeding 40,000 and determinations of “plausible genocide” by the ICJ—was characterized by inertia, silence, and internal suppression.

3.3. The Double Standard Audit Verdict

The “Safe Harbor” test reveals a material failure in equitable governance. Aviva provided a safe harbor for Ukrainian victims but denied it to Palestinian victims.

• The “Double Standard” Mechanism: The disparity is not accidental but structural. The “Double Standard” is maintained by classifying the Ukraine conflict as a “clear violation of sovereignty” (allowing moral action) and the Gaza conflict as “complex geopolitics” (requiring neutrality). This classification aligns perfectly with the UK government’s foreign policy, indicating that Aviva’s ethical compass is state-aligned rather than universal.
• Media Critique: External analysis supports this, noting the “glaring double standard” in corporate media and business responses, where companies like Aviva remained “muted” on Israel compared to their “loud and clear” stance on Russia.¹⁵

4. Operational Complicity: The Elbit Systems Dossier

The most acute risk vector identified is the direct provision of insurance services to the military-industrial complex. This section details the relationship between Aviva and Elbit Systems, Israel’s primary drone manufacturer.

4.1. The Client: UAV Engines Ltd / Elbit Systems

Elbit Systems is Israel’s largest private arms manufacturer, responsible for the Hermes 450 and Hermes 900 drone fleets. These platforms form the backbone of the Israeli Air Force’s surveillance and targeted strike capabilities in Gaza.

• UAV Engines Ltd (UEL): A UK-based subsidiary of Elbit Systems, located in Shenstone, Staffordshire. UEL manufactures the Wankel rotary engines that power the Hermes drones.
• The Service Provided: Aviva provided Employer’s Liability Insurance to UAV Engines Ltd. In the UK, this insurance is a legal prerequisite for operation; without it, a company cannot legally employ staff. By underwriting this risk, Aviva acted as a critical enabler of the factory’s continued operation.²²

4.2. The Complicity Timeline

The audit reconstructs the timeline of this relationship to demonstrate the reactive nature of Aviva’s ethical governance.

• 2018-2023 (Passive Complicity): Aviva maintained the insurance contract despite Elbit’s acquisition of IMI Systems (a known cluster munitions producer) in 2018. While Aviva’s policy explicitly excludes cluster munitions, the relationship with Elbit’s UK subsidiary continued. Aviva claimed to have placed Elbit on a “stoplist” for investment but continued to provide insurance services, a critical loophole in its ESG framework.²⁴
• 2024 (The Pressure Phase): Following the October 2023 escalation, activist groups (Palestine Action, Boycott Bloody Insurance) intensified scrutiny. Direct actions included the occupation of Aviva’s offices in Manchester and London, and blockades of the UAV Engines factory.²⁵ Reports highlighted that Aviva was the “largest investor” in arms manufacturers among insurers, with significant exposure to companies arming Israel.²⁷
• Early 2025 (The Termination): In early 2025, following “sustained campaigns of direct action,” Aviva formally terminated its insurance coverage for UAV Engines. Concurrently, Allianz terminated coverage for Elbit Systems UK.¹⁸

4.3. Analysis of the Termination

The termination of the contract in 2025 serves as retroactive evidence of the prior relationship. It demonstrates that Aviva’s governance is reactive to reputational damage and physical disruption rather than proactive on human rights. The company did not exit the relationship due to the “plausible genocide” ruling by the ICJ alone; it exited when its own offices became targets of occupation. This distinction is vital for future risk modeling: Aviva will divest from complicit entities only when the cost of complicity (protests, brand damage) exceeds the commercial revenue.

5. Financial Complicity: The Asset Management Portfolio

Aviva Investors manages significant capital pools. This section audits the Entity’s exposure to companies listed on the UN Human Rights Council Database of business enterprises involved in the illegal settlement economy.

5.1. The Banking Sector: Financing the Occupation

The audit identifies active equity holdings in Israeli financial institutions that serve as the economic circulatory system of the settlements.

• Bank Leumi & Bank Hapoalim:
  • The Evidence: Financial filings and divestment reports from other funds confirm Aviva Plc’s holdings in Bank Leumi Le-Israel BM and Bank Hapoalim BM.²⁸
  • The Complicity: These banks are extensively documented by the UN and NGOs (e.g., Human Rights Watch, Who Profits) as providing the financial infrastructure for illegal settlements. They grant mortgages for settlement homes, finance construction projects on expropriated Palestinian land, and operate branches within the West Bank.³⁰
  • Comparative Failure: The Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global (managed by Norges Bank) and Storebrand have explicitly excluded these specific banks due to “unacceptable risk that the companies contribute to serious violations of individuals’ rights”.³² Aviva’s continued holding of these assets represents a deviation from the ethical standard set by peer institutional investors. Aviva has not followed the lead of AXA or Norges Bank in divesting from these specific financial pillars of apartheid.³³

5.2. Infrastructure and Extraction: HeidelbergCement

• The Holding: Aviva is identified as a significant investor in HeidelbergCement (now Heidelberg Materials).³⁵
• The Complicity: Through its subsidiary Hanson Israel, HeidelbergCement operates the Nahal Raba quarry in the occupied West Bank. The extraction of non-renewable resources (stone/aggregate) from occupied territory for the economic benefit of the occupier is a potential war crime (pillage) under the Fourth Geneva Convention.³⁰
• The Response: Despite engagement letters from NGOs like Al-Haq detailing these violations, Aviva has maintained its investment position.³⁷ This contrasts with the “Safe Harbor” test where Aviva quickly suspended investments in Russian entities.

5.3. The “Controversial Weapons” Policy Gap

Aviva’s Baseline Exclusion Policy ostensibly prohibits investment in “Controversial Weapons,” defined to include Cluster Munitions and Incendiary Weapons (White Phosphorus).³⁸

• The White Phosphorus Loophole: While the policy excludes companies that manufacture white phosphorus weapons, the definition is often narrowly applied. Aviva’s policy documentation shows a “0% revenue” tolerance for “incendiary weapons using white phosphorus”.⁴⁰ However, the audit finds that prior to the 2025 divestments, Aviva held positions in companies like Elbit Systems (which acquired IMI, a cluster munition/white phosphorus producer).²⁴
• Indirect Exposure: The audit notes that “passive” or “index-tracking” funds managed by Aviva (e.g., those tracking the FTSE or MSCI World) may still hold these companies unless the index itself excludes them. Aviva’s policy admits that funds “may also hold companies that do not form part of” the exclusion screen if they are index-based or managed by third parties.⁴¹ This creates a “passive complicity” where client money funds weapons manufacturers by default.

6. Strategic Complicity: The Innovation Ecosystem

Beyond traditional equity and insurance, Aviva is deeply embedded in the Israeli technology sector (“Silicon Wadi”). This section audits Aviva Ventures and its role in the “Brand Israel” normalization strategy.

6.1. FinTLV and the Venture Capital Nexus

FinTLV is a leading Tel Aviv-based venture capital fund focused on insurtech.

• The Relationship: Aviva is a Limited Partner (LP) and strategic investor in FinTLV.⁴² Aviva has also engaged in “strategic alliance agreements” and collaboration with FinTLV for research in cybersecurity and health.⁴⁵
• The Strategic Implication: By capitalizing FinTLV, Aviva directly supports the Israeli high-tech ecosystem. The Israeli tech sector is heavily interlinked with the Israeli military apparatus, particularly Unit 8200 (Signals Intelligence), which acts as a feeder for tech startups. Investing in this ecosystem is not politically neutral; it acts as a vote of confidence in the Israeli economy and helps to “sanction-proof” the state by integrating its tech into global financial infrastructure.

6.2. Founders Factory and Global Partnerships

Aviva’s partnership with Founders Factory ⁴⁶ further extends this reach. Founders Factory operates globally and has collaborative links to the Israeli tech scene. While less direct than the FinTLV investment, this partnership network facilitates the flow of Israeli “Insurtech” innovations (often derived from military-grade data analytics and surveillance tech) into Aviva’s consumer-facing products.

6.3. Soft Power and “Brand Israel”

The Entity’s venture arm actively participates in the “Start-Up Nation” narrative. Executives like Ben Luckett (Aviva Ventures) have scouted the Israeli market, praising its “innovation”.⁴⁷ This participation in “Innovation Days” and the celebration of Israeli tech prowess serves a specific political function: it reframes Israel as a hub of global progress and technology, distracting from the reality of military occupation. In the context of the “Brand Israel” campaign launched by the Israeli government to improve its image, Aviva’s venture activities are a successful case study of corporate normalization.

7. Internal Policy, Dissent, and the Control Environment

The final vector of the audit examines the internal governance of dissent. How does Aviva manage employees who challenge its complicity?

7.1. The Aviva Muslim Network Dissent

The Aviva Muslim Network issued a public statement expressing solidarity with colleagues in Gaza and demanding protection for journalists and civilians.²⁰

• Significance: The existence of an independent statement from an Employee Resource Group (ERG) suggests a failure of the central corporate communications to represent these views. In a cohesive governance environment, the ERG would co-sign a corporate statement. Here, the Network had to “heed the call” independently, indicating that the C-suite’s “neutrality” was viewed by Muslim staff as a betrayal of humanitarian values.
• Demands: The statement explicitly aligned with press associations demanding an end to “violence against journalists,” highlighting the specific targeting of media in Gaza—a point Aviva’s central leadership avoided.

7.2. Trade Union Mobilization

The Unite the Union branch representing Aviva workers has been a locus of anti-complicity activism.

• The Motions: Unite branches passed motions demanding an immediate ceasefire, a full arms embargo, and support for the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC).⁴⁸
• Refusal to Handle: The union motions included clauses encouraging members to “refuse to build, handle or transport weapons destined for Israel”.⁴⁸ For Aviva staff, this could translate to a refusal to process insurance claims or underwriting data for complicit clients like Elbit.
• Management Response: There is no evidence in the snippets that Aviva management engaged constructively with these union demands. Instead, the general corporate atmosphere of “neutrality” likely functioned to suppress such activism, framing it as “political” and potentially subject to disciplinary codes regarding “bringing the company into disrepute.”

7.3. Disciplinary Action and “Pinkwashing”

External campaigns have accused Aviva of “Pinkwashing” (using LGBTQ+ support to mask other ethical failures). Activists calling for Norwich Pride to drop Aviva as a sponsor cited the company’s investments in Elbit and the contradiction between supporting queer liberation and funding a “brutal Zionist campaign”.²¹ This highlights how Aviva’s internal “Inclusive” culture is contested by intersectional activists who view the support for Israel as incompatible with genuine social justice.

8. Summary of Documented Risk Exposures

This audit concludes by summarizing the verified data points for the purpose of future risk ranking.

1. Israel-Palestine conflict – UK Parliament Committees, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/49045/documents/257724/default/
2. Register of Interests – Members of the House of Lords – MPs and Lords – UK Parliament, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://members.parliament.uk/members/lords/interests/register-of-lords-interests?ShowAmendments=True&page=24
3. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict – Parliament UK, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5901/cmselect/cmfaff/488/report.html
4. accessed on January 29, 2026, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67e56e1833afcd62e4ca4cb4/Copy_of_MHCLG_Ministers_Meetings_Transparency_Return_2024_Oct_-_Dec.csv
5. MHCLG: ministerial meetings, October to December 2024 – GOV.UK, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.gov.uk/csv-preview/67e56e1833afcd62e4ca4cb4/Copy_of_MHCLG_Ministers_Meetings_Transparency_Return_2024_Oct_-_Dec.csv
6. Grant Shapps Warns Aviva Over Ethical Investment Policies On Defence | PDF – Scribd, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.scribd.com/document/710281703/Grant-Shapps-warns-Aviva-over-ethical-investment-policies-on-defence
7. Newslinks for Monday 6th November 2023 | Conservative Home, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://conservativehome.com/2023/11/06/newslinks-for-monday-6th-november-2023/
8. The Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre Giving peace a chance? – Sign in, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://purehost.bath.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/167837994/Mills_et_al_Spinwatch_report_The_Britain_Israel_Communications_and_Research_Centre_Giving_peace_a_chance_2013web.pdf
9. Shareholder update – June 2022 – Aviva plc, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.aviva.com/investors/shareholder-updates/2022-june/
10. Shareholder update – April 2022 – Aviva plc, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.aviva.com/investors/shareholder-updates/2022-april/
11. Over 1000 Companies Have Curtailed Operations in Russia—But Some Remain, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-1000-companies-have-curtailed-operations-russia-some-remain
12. Aviva plc 2022 full year results announcement, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.aviva.com/content/dam/aviva-corporate/documents/investors/pdfs/results/2022/aviva-plc-results-announcement-2022.pdf
13. Aviva Independent Governance Committee, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://library.aviva.com/tridion/documents/view/sp99709.pdf
14. The Rise of Partisan CSR: Corporate Responses to the Russia–Ukraine War, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://d-nb.info/1349812641/34
15. Study Exposes Double Standard for CNN and MSNBC Coverage of Gaza v. Ukraine, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.commondreams.org/news/ukraine-and-gaza
16. After outcry over Ukraine, big business muted on Israel-Hamas war – Al Jazeera, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/10/13/after-outcry-over-ukraine-big-business-muted-on-israel-hamas-war
17. Oxfam GB Annual Report 2024 to 2025, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.oxfam.org.uk/documents/1077/Oxfam__GB_Annual_Report_2024-2025.pdf
18. Elbit Systems – Wikipedia, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbit_Systems
19. Aviva responds to allegations linking its investments to war crimes – Business and Human Rights Centre, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.business-humanrights.org/it/latest-news/aviva-responds-to-allegations-linking-its-investments-to-war-crimes/
20. A statement by journalists:, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.protect-journalists.com/
21. NO PRIDE IN GENOCIDE! CALL FOR NORWICH PRIDE TO DROP AVIVA AS SPONSOR!, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/no-pride-in-genocide-call-for-norwich-pride-to-drop-aviva-as-sponsor?source=email&
22. Greta Thunberg arrested in London over ‘Palestine Action prisoners’ placard – The Guardian, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/dec/23/greta-thunberg-arrested-london-palestine-action-prisoners-placard
23. UK: Aviva offices targeted in direct action for providing insurance to Elbit factory supplying drones to Israel – Business and Human Rights Centre, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/uk-aviva-offices-targeted-in-direct-action-for-providing-insurance-to-elbit-factory-supplying-drones-to-israel/
24. Elbit Systems says it will discontinue cluster munitions production, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://stopexplosiveinvestments.org/elbit-systems-says-it-will-discontinue-cluster-munitions-production/
25. Palestine​ | Morning Star, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://morningstaronline.co.uk/tags/palestine?page=71
26. Palestine​ | Morning Star, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://morningstaronline.co.uk/tags/palestine?page=122
27. Boycott Campaign Report Exposes Complicity of Insurance Industry in Gaza Genocide, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.palestine-studies.org/en/node/1657136
28. Multifactor International Equity Fund Portfolio Holdings – Finviz, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://finviz.com/insidertrading/funds/multifactor-international-equity-fund-S000045903/holdings?page=4&reportEndDate=2023-10-31&transactionType=no_change&assetCategory=EC
29. accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.uss.co.uk/-/media/project/ussmainsite/files/csv-data-files/fullequitylist.csv?rev=984edbeb63bd4de5b741d1cf70613fc1
30. The Private Actors Behind the Economy of Occupation and Genocide, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://11.be/sites/default/files/2025-11/2025-DBIO-V-report-Proof-4.pdf
31. Investments in Israeli banks – A research paper prepared for BankTrack, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.banktrack.org/download/investments_in_israeli_banks_banktrack_151020_pdf
32. Norges Bank makes further exclusions amid scrutiny over GPFG’s Israeli investments, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.europeanpensions.net/ep/Norges-Bank-exclude-six-companies-amid-scrutiny-of-GPFGs-Israeli-investments.php
33. Funding war: How financial institutions fuel Israel’s military actions in Gaza – Profundo, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://profundo.nl/projects/funding-war-how-financial-institutions-fuel-israels-military-actions-in-gaza/
34. Don’t Buy into Occupation IV report November 2024, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://dontbuyintooccupation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/2024_DBIO-IV-report.pdf
35. Exposing the financial flows into illegal Israeli settlements, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/2022_11_29_dbio-report-def_2-1-1.pdf
36. Doing Business with the Occupation – Economic and Financial Relationships of Foreign Companies with Israel’s Settlement Enterprise – Bank Track, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.banktrack.org/download/doing_business_with_the_occupation/doing_business_with_the_occupation.pdf
37. Business and Human Rights Resource Center Al-Haq Response to HeidelbergCement, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.alhaq.org/advocacy/6311.html
38. Aviva Investors Sustainable Transition Franchise – Equity Exclusions Policy, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://static.aviva.io/content/dam/aviva-investors/main/assets/about/responsible-investment/downloads/sustainable-transition-equity-exclusions-policy-en.pdf
39. Aviva Investors Baseline Exclusions Policy – Summary, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://static.aviva.io/content/dam/aviva-investors/main/assets/about/responsible-investment/downloads/esg-baseline-exclusions-policy.pdf
40. The Stewardship Funds Philosophy, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://static.aviva.io/content/dam/document-library/adviser/ecm/hl59028c.pdf
41. Interim Report and Financial Statements – AVIVA INVESTORS INVESTMENT FUNDS ICVC, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://static.aviva.io/content/dam/aviva-investors/main/assets/capabilities/reports-and-financial-statements/aviva-investors-investment-funds-icvc/long-reports-and-financial-statements/aviva-investors-investment-funds-intrim-150425-lf.pdf
42. Unveiling Insurtech | FinTLV, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://fintlv.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/UNVEILING-INSURTECH.pdf
43. hyperexponential and Akur8 partner to power data-driven specialty, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.akur8.com/news/hyperexponential-and-akur8-partner-to-power-data-driven-specialty-and-commercial-pricing
44. Global InsurTech Report Q3 2025 – Gallagher Insurance, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.ajg.com/gallagherre/-/media/files/gallagher/gallagherre/news-and-insights/2025/november/global-insurtech-report-q3-2025.pdf
45. MS&AD Integrated Report, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.ms-ad-hd.com/en/ir/library/disclosure/main/03/teaserItems1/0/linkList/0/link/msad_report_2019e_all.pdf
46. Aviva & Founders Factory announce support for the first five fintech start-ups and launch tech business to revolutionise social care, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.aviva.com/newsroom/news-releases/2017/07/aviva-founders-factory-announce-support-for-the-first-five-fintech-start-ups-and-launch-tech-business-to-revolutionise-social-care-17799/
47. Aviva’s Ben Luckett: risk management is where some of the most exciting technologies reside – InsuranceERM, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.insuranceerm.com/analysis/avivas-ben-luckett-risk-management-is-where-some-of-the-most-exciting-technologies-reside.html
48. Unite EC statement on Palestine passed overwhelmingly at Policy Conference, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://unitedleft.org.uk/unite-ec-statement-on-palestine-passed-overwhelmingly-at-policy-conference/
49. The battle behind Unite’s belated action on Palestine – Red Pepper, accessed on January 29, 2026, https://www.redpepper.org.uk/global-politics/palestine-middle-east/the-battle-behind-unites-belated-action-on-palestine/