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".



Twitter board

Follow us
  • My week on Twitter 🎉: 2 Mentions, 3.3K Mention Reach, 5 Likes, 6 Retweets, 7.76K Retweet Reach. See yours with… https://t.co/IZfviidt4H11 hours ago
  • Friday View: Trustees feel the heat over climate change - bankers' pensions back in black - TPR suspends trustee -… https://t.co/kUKa8QUF9w2 days ago
  • Increased regulatory oversight will be risk-based, TPR keyperson will meet schemes deemed riskier several times a y… https://t.co/wUiKPGESaU4 days ago
  • Lesley Titcomb, TPR chief executive says change is on its way, the regulator will increase oversight between valuat… https://t.co/Wu8Pv6TfqS4 days ago
  • Join us and @AonRetirementUK on the 4th of July at the luxurious Victorian Bath House featuring educational presen… https://t.co/r1abr8Qls05 days ago
  • DWP wants trustees to feel the heat over climate change https://t.co/bs25DvyWGF #ESG #climatechange https://t.co/dZEXB0g8a45 days ago
  • My week on Twitter 🎉: 3 New Followers. See yours with https://t.co/mCw3VcMQGw https://t.co/3kEHNr3xyz7 days ago
  • Friday View: Heathrow's ÂŁ325 million buy-in - Auto enrolment for the gig economy - Brunel opts for ACS structure -… https://t.co/vsnML1Vzb59 days ago
  • Pimlico Plumbers- Could gig economy workers be auto enrolled? https://t.co/qgrlWxMUW8 #gigeconomy #autoenrolment… https://t.co/wnDH18iPxG10 days ago
  • RT @eVestment: Workers in the #UK are open to increasing their retirement savings and tend to place greater emphasis on workplace #pensions…11 days ago
  • The June issue of portfolio institutional is now out: Featuring our take on #carillion and lessons for trustees as… https://t.co/yC2PNgoaPr12 days ago
  • RT @PensionsSion: Aon's very own John Belgrove shares his views in this piece. Worth reading... https://t.co/VYEJWjAU3z12 days ago
  • My week on Twitter 🎉: 2 Mentions, 3.29K Mention Reach, 2 Retweets, 3.27K Retweet Reach. See yours with… https://t.co/MeoES7Ch3L14 days ago
  • Friday View: South Yorkshire hedges pension risk- Recruitment execs face prison over pension scam - Johnston Press… https://t.co/9fV8Z48WtF16 days ago
  • RT @cfjescott: A recent piece of mine on the @CMAgovUK investigation into investment consultants in @portfolio_inst #investment https://t.c…19 days ago
  • Our ESG Roundtable: Better Long-term outcomes? Available to download now https://t.co/o7T8kWSwWY https://t.co/oHs4VlRK9E20 days ago
  • Active vs Passive : In 2016 investors withdrew around $285bn from active funds and pumped almost $429bn into passiv… https://t.co/tjpxhTxW5Z20 days ago
  • RT @WhtstheDiehlio: .@AitkenRL spoke with @graniteshares CEO Will Rhind about the ongoing active vs. passive debate. Check out their though…20 days ago
  • Green is the new black. A record sum is expected to be raised under the green bond banner this year, but is it doom… https://t.co/JYP8k0ZfZk23 days ago
  • Our Cover Story! Property: Solid Returns - Low gilt yields are forcing schemes to pile into bricks and mortar. Mark… https://t.co/9nyjFp0Z4R23 days ago

Friday View: July 12 2013

Climate change: Beliefs no longer matter

Climate change: Beliefs no longer matter

Emma Cusworth
Tuesday 23rd January 2018

Whether you believe in climate change or not, Emma Cusworth explains that investors can no longer ignore its impact on portfolios.

Does it matter anymore if you don’t buy the science behind climate change? Is it possible anymore to ignore climate change and still claim to be doing your fiduciary duty? There are plenty of investors who still do not integrate climate policies into their portfolios.

The trouble is, the world is already changing regardless of what individual investors believe or don’t believe. And that means certain risks and opportunities are coming down the pipeline at you whether you’re ready or not.

With every big climate conference that goes by, it becomes more and more clear the direction of global policy is already set when it comes to protecting the environment.

COP 21 in 2015, which resulted in the Paris Accord, marked a turning point in global policy. Since then, governments, states, cities, businesses and many investors have taken steps, or announced plans to, that are designed to increase transparency around carbon emissions and cut them.

In December 2017 – the second anniversary of COP 21 – there were a string of meaningful announcements made that will change the course of many companies in the coming years. The World Bank, for example, will no longer finance upstream fossil fuel projects from 2019. The same event saw California and Washington join Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Colombia and Chile in agreeing to use a carbon emissions price as a central economic policy.

Europe reached a similar point shortly before when member states came to a landmark agreement on the European Emissions Trading System that is expected to increase the price of carbon on the continent to the point where it becomes investment relevant.

President Macron’s Paris conference also saw the launch of Climate Action 100+, an investor initiative aimed at engaging with the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters to improve governance on climate change, curb emissions and strengthen disclosure. The group includes Candriam Investors, the Church Commissioners for England, the Environment Agency Pension Fund and the BBC Pension Trust among its long and prestigious list of members.

On the same day the initiative was formally launched, Exxon announced it would begin publishing details about how climate change could affect its business.

What is really interesting about these developments is that they underline a structural and secular shift in global policy towards a low-carbon future. That is going to have an impact on how assets are valued. And that, in turn, has investors worried. Hence the need for initiatives like Climate Action 100+, who will continue to pressure the companies they own to change their policies.

Can any individual investor choose to ignore this? It’s increasingly difficult to see how they could defend such a stance as being within their fiduciary duty.

Consider, for example, the movement to phase out the internal combustion engine in the UK, France, India, Norway, China and the state of California. This has significant implications for the valuation of automakers over the next five, 10, 15 years. The share prices of companies that are not well prepared for the move will struggle to keep up.

The same will be true of their suppliers. Commodity allocations will also need to be adjusted to reflect, for example, the expected 300% increase in demand for lithium from the mid-2020s. Mines are not that easy to open. Metal prices will change meaningfully as this legislation starts to bite. And then there are all the service stations on every road in every one of those countries. It will take massive infrastructure spending to get enough charging points in place and to decommission the thousands of petrol pumps that will be displaced.

What this all means is risk. Real risk to financial returns. And massive opportunity of course, but it is the risk that really bites when it comes to fiduciary duty. Can a fiduciary really ignore the consequences of this secular shift in global policy when they are so clearly linked to financial performance? The question of whether environmental or governance considerations are part of fiduciary duty is now a mute point.

So it really doesn’t matter whether you believe the science or not anymore. So many people do now believe that the impact on portfolios will be profound whether you agree or not.


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

How investor action helps cut CO2 emissions