BBBD3123 ESG & Sustainability Individual Assignment: Analysis of the Malaysian Government’s Green Technology Financing Scheme

Assignment Type

Individual Assignment

Subject

BBBD3123 ESG & SUSTAINABILITY

Uploaded by Malaysia Assignment Help

Date

08/11/2025

Assignment Questions

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT : ANALYZING MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT GRANTS FOR ESG INITIATIVES

Objective:

The objective of this assignment is to conduct an in-depth analysis of one grant from the provided list of Malaysian government grants aimed at promoting ESG and sustainability initiatives among SMEs.

Assignment Tasks:

1. Grant Selection

Select one grant from Image 1.0 below that focuses on ESG and sustainability. Ensure that your selection is informed and relevant to your interests or field of study. Image 1.0 – List of Local Funding

BBBD3123 ESG & SUSTAINABILITY

2. Grant Description

Illustrate the chosen grant, including its name, purpose, and what it specifically funds or supports.

3. Background of the Grant

Investigate the background of the grant by outlining why the grant was established, its historical context, and the need it aims to address within the sustainability sector.

4. Target Beneficiaries

Explain who the grant is targeting and the types of businesses or projects that are intended to benefit from the grant.

5. Eligibility and Application Process

Identify the eligibility criteria required for applicants to qualify for the grant and the application process (in flow chart format), including necessary documentation, deadlines, and any assessment criteria used to award the grant.

6. Student’s Opinion

Analyse the potential impact of the grant on promoting ESG and sustainability initiatives and relate your own opinion regarding the effectiveness of the grant, including its strengths and potential areas for improvement.

7. References and Citations

All sources used for researching the grant must be cited using a consistent citation style. Provide the origin of the information, including any official government pages, reports, or publications that detail the grant. Use of at least THREE (3) different sources, including at least one government source or official publication related to the grant.

Stuck in This Assignment? Deadlines Are Near?

Submission Requirements:

A written report of 1000-1500 words covering all the sections listed above.

Others:

1. Plagiarism/collusion:

a. Plagiarism occurs when a person copies or reproduces another person’s words and ideas and presents them as his or her own without proper acknowledgment. Thus, plagiarism can take the form of reproduction without acknowledgment from published or unpublished works of others including materials downloaded from computer files and the Internet.

b. Students’ work submitted for assessment is accepted on the understanding that it is the student’s effort without falsification of any kind. Cheating or plagiarism will not be tolerated. Any student found to plagiarise or cheat in any part of their assignment will cause their assignment to be rejected and further be subject to appropriate punishment.

c. Students must submit a digital copy of their assignment to the Turnitin systemfor plagiarism assessment. If the assignment draft exhibits a plagiarism rate exceeding 24%, students are obligated to make the necessary revisions.

2. Submission Deadline

a. The written assignment must be submitted on Week 11 to your tutor. Failure to comply with the deadline would cause the assignment to be rejected.

b. Turnitin submission will be available on Week 10.

c. Marked assignments will be returned by Week 14.

d. Except for extenuating circumstances, students who FAIL TO SUBMIT their coursework by the stipulated deadline shall be subject to the late submission penalty.

(a) Late 1 to 3 days after the deadline of submission: minus 10 marks
(b) Late 4 to 7 days after the deadline of submission: minus 20 marks
(c) Late more than 7 days after the deadline of submission: 0 marks

APPENDIX 3 – INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

No. Criteria Excellent Good Average Poor Marks
1 Description and Background (20 marks) Provides a comprehensive description and in-depth background of the grant with exceptional clarity. (16-20 marks) Provides a clear description and background with minor gaps in detail. (11-15 marks) Provides a satisfactory description and background with some relevant information. (6-10 marks) Provides a vague or incomplete description and background of the grant. (0-5 marks)
2 Target Beneficiaries (20 marks) Precisely identifies and thoroughly describes the target beneficiaries of the grant. (16-20 marks) Identifies and describes the target beneficiaries with minor inaccuracies. (11-15 marks) Generally identifies and describes the target beneficiaries with some gaps. (6-10 marks) Fails to accurately identify or describe the target beneficiaries. (0-5 marks)
3 Eligibility and Application (20 marks) Detailed analysis of eligibility criteria and a comprehensive outline of the application process with outstanding clarity. (16-20 marks) Clear analysis of eligibility criteria and a solid outline of the application process with slight omissions. (11-15 marks) Adequate coverage of eligibility and application process with noticeable gaps. (6-10 marks) Poor or incorrect details on eligibility and application process. (0-5 marks)
4 Critical Analysis and Opinion (20 marks) Insightful and well-supported analysis and opinion of the grant’s potential impact with strong reasoning. (16-20 marks) Good analysis and opinion with some supportive reasoning and evidence. (11-15 marks) Basic analysis and opinion with generalized reasoning and minimal evidence. (6-10 marks) Little to no critical analysis or opinion, or it is unsupported or irrelevant. (0-5 marks)
5 References and Citations (10 marks) Uses a diverse range of relevant sources effectively, with all citations in the correct format. (9-10 marks) Uses a good range of relevant sources with minor citation errors. (7-8 marks) Uses an adequate range of sources with some citation errors. (5-6 marks) Uses insufficient or irrelevant sources with numerous citation errors. (0-4 marks)
6 Writing Quality (10 marks) The report is exceptionally well-written, organized, and free of errors. (9-10 marks) The report is well-written with good organization and few errors. (7-8 marks) The report has a satisfactory structure and writing, with some errors. (5-6 marks) The report is poorly written, disorganized, and filled with errors. (0-4 marks)

Total Marks 100

Get 30% Discount on This Assignment Answer Today!

Get Help By Expert

Do you require professional help with your sustainability and ESG assignments? You can get thorough assistance from Malaysia Assignment Help in analysing government grants such as the Green Technology Financing Scheme. Our Report Writing Help guarantees that your work will stand out, regardless of whether you require thorough research or impeccable formatting. Get expert advice now to easily submit reports of the highest calibre!

Answer

UP TO 15 % DISCOUNT

Instant Paper Writing Services by Native Malaysia Writers

Plagiarism Free Solutions
100% Original Work
24*7 Online Assistance
Native PhD Experts
Hire a Writer Now
Convincing Features
BBBD3123 ESG & Sustainability Individual Assignment: Analysis of the Malaysian Government’s Green Technology Financing Scheme
Plagiarism Free Report
On-Time Delivery
Native Writers
A+ Quality
100% Confidential
24*7 Online Assistance

Get these features included in Your Assignment

Facing Issues with Assignments? Talk to Our Experts Now!Download Our App Now!

Have Questions About Our Services?
Download Our App!

Get the App Today!

QRcode

Get Assistance for Assignments, online Exam, and Projects Writing