Why investors should collaborate to tackle climate change - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT商学院

Why investors should collaborate to tackle climate change

Capital allocation must be aligned with tackling environmental risks

The writer is a portfolio manager and chair of sustainable investing at Brown Advisory

COP26 is under way, generating debates around the investor role in tackling climate change. Many are focused on ferreting out virtue-signalling imposters among asset managers on environmental, social and governance issues.

This is important, but a bit distracting at a time when our existential dependence on a stable climate must be matched with climate solutions at scale. This requires capital and the asset management industry is in a privileged position to bring that capital along.

We can start as an industry by acknowledging the urgency. Even if we stop burning fossil fuels, global warming will cause disruption that we can adjust to only if we preserve and restore our planet’s richest natural carbon sinks (tropical and old growth forests, peat lands, etc).

Government and non-profit funding does not come close to supporting the $4tn per year the International Energy Agency estimates will be needed by 2030 to keep global emissions in check. Without new financing, natural resources may become too scarce and too expensive to support many business models.

The world of investing and the lexicon of nature, conservation and competition have typically clashed. However, climate change requires us to align capital with solutions to tackle it.

Security analysis is not indifferent to nature. Consider a company’s cost of goods sold: building materials, food and beverages, semiconductors, reagents for recent vaccine innovations. Peel back a layer and we are talking the language of nature: trees, palm oil, coffee, gold, copper, biodiversity. It has been estimated that more than half of the world’s gross domestic product — $44tn of economic value — is at moderate or severe risk due to nature loss.

Take-and-deplete is the assumption of traditional financial models. Today, it is more practical for investors to understand the risks to our “natural capital”.

An emerging success story is how increased investor scrutiny of palm oil production has decoupled some supply chains from environmentally-destructive sourcing practices. The majority of suppliers and purchasers now pledge zero deforestation. According to the World Resources Institute, 2020 is the fourth straight year that palm oil deforestation has been trending down. It’s a win for investors and businesses as well. The conservation group WWF reports that many sector companies benefited significantly through price premiums for sustainable sourcing.

Companies will find it easier to compete and differentiate themselves once they collaborate on some new ground rules to refocus them on longer-term interests.

For example, under the UN Global Compact CEO Water Mandate, more than 200 companies participate in collaborative efforts with civil society, intergovernmental organisations and affected communities to advance water sustainability.

No company can survive without water and it’s estimated that half of the world’s population will reside in water-stressed areas by 2025. Investors should increasingly take note of the businesses sharing the burden of investing in water security and other natural resources to protect their bottom lines. These are the companies better prepared for a day when new rules, price signals, scarcity or reputational risks incentivise replenishment, rather than depletion of resources.

New collaborative financial structures have emerged that unlock climate solutions and strong risk-adjusted returns. “Blended finance”, for example, takes development finance and improves a project’s risk/return profile through co-investments, technical assistance, incentives or guarantees.

In Nigeria, for example, public money from the World Bank’s Nigeria Electrification Project plus philanthropic dollars from the Rockefeller Foundation provided support for structuring a private investment from CrossBoundary Group, a partner of Brown Advisory. This financed solar mini-grids that will provide clean electricity to 55,000 rural homes. Early results show strong internal rates of return in the mid-teens.

While blended finance projects are designed to create environmental or social impact, there’s a lot for financial investors to like as well, such as an inflation hedge and exposure to returns that are uncorrelated with public equities and bonds.

Investors can further be enticed by using our own jargon: the promise of an asymmetric upside, because most natural resources outside fossil fuels will be more valuable tomorrow than they are today. If asset managers signal a willingness to learn, participate and bring other stakeholders along, the opportunity is an asymmetric upside for us all.

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

FT社评:美国生活成本挤压将长期存在

对于战争的冲击,美国经济仍比多数经济体更具韧性,但中低收入家庭将最容易受到影响。

美国将同样面临石油冲击风险

在全球原油市场上,亚洲买家正大量收购供应,推高欧洲和美国的价格。

战争导致的税收政策收紧将俄罗斯中小企业推至崩溃边缘

随着莫斯科将增值税提高至22%并大幅削减对中小企业的税收减免,小企业主难以维持运营。

投资者质疑OpenAI的8520亿美元估值

投资者担心,OpenAI的战略调整可能让该公司在准备上市之际更容易受到Anthropic和谷歌的冲击。

伊朗外交使命是万斯的“金杯毒酒”

长期以来一直抨击美国在海外军事干预的万斯,如今已成为推动结束这场冲突的代表人物。

历经二十年协议受挫,伊朗核僵局进一步恶化

上周末举行的直接会谈,依旧没有跳出华盛顿与德黑兰二十多年来反复上演的曲折而令人沮丧的谈判轨道。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×