ESG Club interview – Church Commissioners for England INTERVIEW – DAN NEALE
“Investors should not see themselves as separate from society.”
The responsible investment social themes lead at the Church Commissioners for England sits down with Andrew Holt to discuss the challenges of promoting the social aspects of ESG, wav- ing goodbye to oil and gas, pushing human rights and the importance of having a plan.
What does the role of social themes lead entail? Within the investment division, I look at social issues in the Church Commission- ers’ portfolio. I look at human rights, slav- ery, ethics, the just transition and ethical screening – and that classes.
covers all asset
The role of social themes lead is a new position: why was it created? I joined in April last year when the Church Commissioners decided to bring in more thematic specialists. This reflected a strat- egy change within the organisation away from having generalists to a focus on spe- cialists in particular areas.
Why is the social aspect so important to the Church Commissioners? At the highest level, the Church of Eng- land’s Marks of Mission include address- ing social structures and social issues. Our role as an ethical investor is plugged into those social structures.
28 | portfolio institutional | October 2023 | Issue 127
The social aspect should be equally important to all investors because funda- mentally, investors are part of society. They are impacted by it; they are not sep- arate from it.
That is an important part of the ESG debate: investors should not see them- selves as separate from society. And our belief is that socially responsible conduct underpins value creation and supports long-term returns.
A good point. Do you think, therefore, that the S in ESG gets neglected by investors in favour of the E? Neglected is a little strong, but the S has been a poor cousin to the E. Although if we go back to when responsible invest- ment and ethical investing was new, a lot of it was people focused. It was about avoiding products that were inherently harmful, like tobacco. We don’t invest in those because they harm people. So there was a starting point with a heavy S as a focus in investment.
The rise of sustainability led to a heavy focus on the E, particularly climate issues. That then received a lot of traction. In part, it reflects that many investors got behind the idea of climate change as a systemic risk. The setting up of frame- works – like the Task Force on Climate-re- lated Financial Disclosures – came with all that and it was driven forward. There is also an argument that the num- bers within the E are easier to wrap your head around, such as the targets. Whereas the S can mean different things to differ- ent people.
Is that why the social part doesn’t get the focus it should?
There are always going to be trade-offs in terms of resources and what to focus on. Seeing what has happened in the past few years, particularly between Covid and social movements in North America, has helped push the S higher up the agenda. But it is steeped in inclusion in some cases. And that doesn’t necessarily trans-
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
