search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Industry view – Pension Protection Fund


struggle to meet their ESG requirements because of several roadblocks. Trustees are often told by fund managers that they are unable to offer bespoke voting policies or direct shareholder votes, offer fund- specific


reporting and convey


Claire Curtin, head of ESG at the Pension Protection Fund, and member of the Pensions Climate Risk Industry Group


UK PENSION SECTOR’S ROLE IN DRIVING FORWARD ESG ADOPTION


The UK pensions sector plays a signifi- cant and unique role in our society. Not only must it safeguard and grow the pen- sion savings belonging to millions of UK workers, but collectively, as one of the world’s largest investors, it also has the obligation to invest its £1.6trn in assets responsibly. With the Department for Work and Pen- sions’ enhanced regulations coming into force last year, the UK has demonstrated leadership in directing UK pension schemes to explicitly consider material environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks, including climate change. In practice though, there are a plethora of issues for asset owners delivering on these requirements. While it is clear that asset owners can be the driving force for further ESG integration and adoption, we should acknowledge that this isn’t some- thing that can happen overnight. As a key investment vehicle choice for many schemes, trustees who invest in pooled or commingled funds especially


trustee


expectations through fund terms and investment restrictions. There is also the issue that fund managers, depending on their domicile, are subject to differing regulations and interpretations of fiduci- ary duty.


There is also an issue in the breadth of products


available to match trustees’


nuanced beliefs relating to ESG, as well as sufficient liquidity in these products. Cur- rently, ‘ESG labelled’ products tend to exclude such a range of activities that it limits the investment universe materially which ultimately could affect the expected return profile or overall characteristics of the fund. Trustees therefore often find themselves having to compromise between investing in an ‘ESG labelled’ product which may avoid investments in lucrative products they have no issue in investing in, or investing in a mainstream fund where they will need to accept that their ESG expectations cannot be met.


Another significant challenge faced by trustees’ is the lack of internal resource and budget constraints required in order to digest ESG data. At present, the level of fund-specific reporting provided by man- agers is sparse; often asset owners are told that ESG reporting is only available on ‘ESG labelled’ funds, so if trustees still wish to have a thorough oversight of non- ESG labelled portfolios in relation to ESG risks and opportunities, they currently


need to monitor these portfolios them- selves. This requires extensive resources in terms of time, experience and costs which many schemes are not set-up to do. With the current focus on short-term reporting and performance, it is difficult for trustees and fund managers to look to the future and make costly pre-emptive steps as addressed in Mark Carney’s ‘Tragedy of the Horizons’ speech. However, the UK pensions sector collec- tively has the ability, as such a significant investor, to push the fund management industry for solutions which will allow their assets to be invested responsibly.


Publisher portfolio Verlag Office 5.05 – 5th floor Fleet House 8 –12 New Bridge Street London EC4V 6AL +44 (0)20 7822 8522 london@portfolio-verlag.com


Editor Mark Dunne m.dunne@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


Deputy editor Mona Dohle


m.dohle@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


Journalist Catherine Lafferty c.lafferty@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


16 | portfolio institutional March 2020 | issue 91


Publisher John Waterson


j.waterson@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


Head of sales Clarissa Huber


c.huber@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


Head of roundtables Mary Brocklebank m.brocklebank@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


Sales and marketing executive Will Brown w.brown@portfolio-institutional.co.uk


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  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48