We use cookies to support features like login and allow trusted media partners to analyse aggregated site usage.
To dismiss this message and allow cookies to be used, please click "Continue".

Continue

Opinion

Twitter board

Follow us
  • To read LGIM's take on alternative credit click here: https://t.co/UeMKBQuKmd https://t.co/HqpKasST687 days ago
  • Climate change, #MeToo, plastics: ESG in 2019 might sound like a repeat of last year but that is where the similari… https://t.co/JfbVlSHXvs8 days ago
  • Have you seen our latest property roundtable? Click here to read more: https://t.co/Brd4QkMsNk https://t.co/EleMsa1HZz35 days ago
  • Has the direct lending market become a victim of its own success? Read more here: https://t.co/55jXOQqnCr… https://t.co/3rDYQhcbgX38 days ago
  • Have you seen our latest roundtable? An investor sits down with fund managers and advisers to discuss real estate's… https://t.co/DZqJFjnCxP43 days ago
  • Decision-makers at key pension schemes share their views with Mona Dohle on how to pick the right manager and wheth… https://t.co/ZGCHhJMJCu45 days ago
  • Read our latest interview with Mark Mansley, chief investment officer of Brunel Pensions Partnership here:… https://t.co/0fKgRopmsW52 days ago
  • "ESG is a hot topic among investors, but it appears that trustees are yet to catch on. Mark Dunne takes a look at t… https://t.co/pKGoquOCMk58 days ago
  • "@BNPPAM_COM is launching a sustainable SME funding strategy to boost the economy and help investors escape the low… https://t.co/clDIoHPo6P64 days ago
  • "Pension funds, as long-term investors, could find themselves exposed under many of the potential future scenarios… https://t.co/d37su2PwsD65 days ago
  • As LDI strategies are gradually being replaced by CDI approaches, how are pension schemes managing the additional r… https://t.co/rlMnrBmr1d66 days ago
  • Emerging market debt is rapidly becoming a local currency market, but investors are still nervous about a US rate r… https://t.co/3coGF5Dq8n77 days ago
  • Have you seen our latest roundtable? We brought fund managers, consultants and trustees together to discuss emergin… https://t.co/BMLta4c9pm80 days ago
  • Does the turbulence hitting stock markets at a time of rising bond prices mean it is time to ditch multi-asset fund… https://t.co/GiSdFpE01N86 days ago
  • More and more pension schemes are increasing their allocations to private equity, but will the illiquid strategy br… https://t.co/8l8TI75r9v92 days ago
  • Border to Coast Pensions Partnership CEO Rachel Elwell tells Mona Dohle about the challenge of developing a common… https://t.co/nQZfFveQdz93 days ago
  • Out now- The portfolio institutional October issue featuring our cover on ESG and fixed income: Breaking new ground… https://t.co/hnmwYclXS594 days ago
  • Friday View: ESG in fixed income: The new frontier - LGPS bolster infrastructure collaboration - EM Roundtable: The… https://t.co/zxvEKaZkoM97 days ago
  • Local government pension scheme (LGPS) pool Border to Coast has appointed the first external managers for its £1.2b… https://t.co/eBAbx0ubzJ97 days ago
  • "Investors seduced by the impressive growth forecasts for emerging market economies should prepare themselves for a… https://t.co/7nAnrL8s7t98 days ago

Friday View: 8 May 2015

Climate change: the rational approach

By Ian Simm
Friday 8th May 2015

As we learned from the recent financial crisis, systemic issues can wreck portfolios and undermine investor confidence for years.  For many, climate change is emerging as a major systemic issue facing investors: economic damage from extreme weather and shifting climatic belts is likely to get worse, and governments are unlikely to sit on the sidelines.  Investors need to act now, developing a coherent, flexible strategy to manage the risk of intervention.

The “unburnable carbon” issue has become polarised.  Those advocating full divestment are seen by many as extreme, particularly as divestment entails the wilful avoidance of dividend streams and a risk of underperformance if energy prices rise.  However, recent statements from fossil fuel E&P companies to challenge the analysis behind stranded asset risk and/or downplay its significance have been less than persuasive.

Asset owners are increasingly frustrated, particularly if faced with rising stakeholder pressure to reduce exposure to fossil fuels.  Although there have been a few high profile announcements of wholesale divestment, for the vast majority, the default response is to do nothing and wait for further developments.

Polarised responses are irrational for two reasons.  First, recent developments in science and policy have had a major impact on the climate change issue, recasting it as a risk rather than an uncertainty, thereby facilitating the use of traditional investment management tools, particularly asset allocation.  And second, developments in energy efficiency markets have created options for investors to mitigate some of the risks implied by divestment.

Assessing the risk

Investors struggle to deal with uncertainty, where the magnitude and timing of a potential impact cannot be readily estimated, but are typically comfortable with incorporating risk information into their decisions, particularly the level of allocation to different types of asset.

For many years, the mainstream investor reaction to climate change has been that the science and likely policy response have been too uncertain to justify action.  However, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report of September 2013 reported a strong scientific consensus over the causes of climate change and the likely consequences for the planet of the current trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions.  Subsequent announcements from both the United States and China of specific plans to limit emissions of carbon dioxide have materially raised the chances of policy intervention.  Investors can now legitimately consider scenarios in which major economic blocs pass legislation to restrict CO2 emissions within the next decade, for example through a significant “Carbon Price” which will affect the economics of both energy producers and consumers.

Towards an investment response

Investors generally have three types of response to higher levels of risk: lower exposure to the assets concerned, reduce the risk and/or hedge it.

Faced with a material probability of a Carbon Price within a decade, a timescale that matters for decisions taken today, it is rational for investors to lower their exposure to assets that could be affected.  On the one hand, it is likely that the effect on today’s valuations of these lower wholesale prices is “drowned out” by myriad other drivers of prices, for example political risk. On the other hand, [as shown in Figure 1,] a Carbon Price may render those assets with a higher marginal cost of production “stranded,” or potentially worthless.  It is these assets that should be targeted for selective divestment.

To mitigate risk, investors should challenge the companies whose fortunes could be improved by a change of strategy, for example oil majors that could cut back on capital expenditure into high marginal cost assets, possibly with a commensurate increase in dividend levels.

Although the wholesale energy price is depressed by a Carbon Price, the retail energy price can be expected to rise (Figure 2).  By reinvesting the proceeds of selective divestment of fossil fuel assets into energy efficiency related business opportunities, investors not only hedge the risk that they miss out on future energy price rises, but also create exposure to energy prices that should increase in line with government intervention to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

Divestment in practice

Taking a risk-analysis approach to the impact of future climate change policy, investors may rationally decide to reduce their exposure to fossil fuel assets rather than full divestment.  We recommend that a plan of action includes four components.  First, examine individual assets to determine their marginal cost of production (and thereby their potential exposure to Carbon Pricing); this is likely to be difficult except for discrete assets or for companies with high levels of disclosure.  Second, develop scenarios for the level of Carbon Prices and the probability and timing of their introduction; we recommend a simple model to start with which can be developed further as circumstances change.  Third, divest in line with the probability-weighted loss per asset, i.e. multiply the loss per asset in the scenario by the probability of the scenario occurring; this will be far from an exact science, so it makes sense to start with conservative assumptions, i.e. a relatively low level of divestment.  Fourth, consider reinvesting the divestment proceeds into the energy efficiency sector; this may introduce additional risks, for example exposure to the industrial capital expenditure cycle.

At the heart of this issue is the scarcity of useful data, particularly around marginal production costs.  Alongside their divestment plans, investors should request additional information from the companies they hold and consider supporting wider initiatives to persuade stock exchanges and financial market regulators to oblige companies to provide further public disclosure.

Positioning for outperformance

Policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions isn’t developed in a vacuum.  We won’t wake up one morning and discover a material Carbon Price has been imposed overnight.  Nevertheless, governments have a nasty habit of ratcheting up their intervention to solve important policy problems, so investors who can anticipate government action and take pre-emptive measures to protect themselves are likely to outperform.

Ian Simm is chief executive at Impax Asset Management

0

Leave your comment

View our comments policy

Please login or register with us to leave a comment. It's completely free!

Friday View

Friday View

Shareholder engagement: