Feature


Elton John probably wishes that everything in life is as easy as making music. Enter- taining millions of people with a songbook that took 50 years to write is more black- and-white than trying to save the planet, a task that is littered with grey areas. In August, the Candle in the Wind, Rocket Man and I’m Still Standing singer claimed that he had paid into a fund to offset the carbon footprint of a private flight he arranged for two of his royal guests. The effectiveness of this payment in fighting climate change has been disputed by Greenpeace, an environmental pressure group. Who is right and who is wrong? When it comes to some areas of the environmental, social and governance (ESG) sphere, it is difficult to know. Yet it used to be so simple. Most investors added a company to their portfolio in the belief that its profits would rise and that they were comfortable with the risks taken for the price paid. They may even have received a share of the spoils in the form of dividends and hoped that the size


of those payments would


increase year after year. To confirm that a company was meeting these objectives, all an investor had to do was read the audited annual report. Obvi- ously, these motivations still lie at the heart of buy and sell orders, but today other fac- tors are also influencing investment deci- sions, the results of which can rarely be found in an annual report.


BENEATH THE SURFACE Investing in assets that make a positive impact on society and avoiding badly-be- haved companies was once considered a niche strategy. Not anymore. At the beginning of 2018, $30.7trn (£25.2trn)


was invested in sustainable


assets globally, a 34% rise in two years, according to the Global Sustainable Invest- ment Alliance.


“Demand for ESG analysis is going through the roof across our client base,” says Tim Manuel, Aon’s UK head of responsible investment. “Increasingly schemes are ask-


ing for assessments of what it is that their portfolios are achieving, what is the differ- ence that they are making.”


David Czupryna, head of ESG client portfo- lio management at Candriam, added: “Investors are eager to get evidence that ESG


is contributing to financial


performance.” But can asset managers and consultants meet demand? Attitudes towards the non- financial risks facing corporates have changed and the investment industry is struggling to keep up. “ESG data is still a developing area,” Manuel says. “Investors rely on data which is not always available.”


that the industry is characterised by differ- ent approaches and that ESG rating provid- ers are using a “high degree” of estimation. Not every company publishes its emissions data, for example, so providers work it out for themselves.


“What that leads to is data that can be quite substantially different with a low correla- tion between providers,” Manuel


adds.


“The quality of ESG analysis is only as good as the data and the data continues to evolve and improve,” he says. “Levels of disclosure from companies will make the biggest dif- ference to data quality.”


And corporate disclosure is improving We certainly need more standardisation


because today we are not comparing apples with apples and pears with pears. Helena Viñes Fiestas, BNP Paribas Asset Management


The lack of robust information in this area from companies and independent bodies is causing problems. For instance, how can an investor know for sure that a company has hit its greenhouse gas emission reduc- tion target, is using less water, has no chil- dren working in its supply chain and is keeping the personal information of its customers secure? Without robust data to assess the perfor- mance of their assets, investors run the risk of gaining a false sense of confidence that they are doing their bit to improve society, whereas in reality they could be doing little more than running a public relations campaign, otherwise known as “greenwashing”.


GUESSING GAMES


ESG is a broad church. It is not just about being kind to the environment. Leadership diversity, how the board makes decisions, the use of resources and staff welfare are among the aspects that appear on sustaina- ble investing checklists. Yet measuring the success in areas such as this is not an exact science. Manuel says


32 November 2019 portfolio institutional roundtable: Responsible investing


thanks to regulation, but it is still early days. From October,


for example, the


revised EU Shareholder Rights Directive came into force requiring pension scheme trustees to explain how they are protecting savers from the impact of climate change. Lloyd McAllister, a responsible investment analyst


at Newton Investment Manage- ment, welcomes this regulation as a “move in the right direction”, but he is concerned that it is “three or five years behind where the market is”. He points to the EU’s ESG definitions as an example, describing them as too “simplistic”.


The problem for him is that the EU defini- tions lead with the term “environmental solutions” which is then followed by a list of distinct areas such as renewables. “This is sustainability investing from five to 10 years


ago, rather than focusing on an


industry’s value chain or externalities, which is where things are today,” McAllis- ter adds.


HOME GROWN To fill the void, several ESG assessment methodologies have been created by con-


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