australiaen
Comparing pension funds’ ESG policies in the Nordics and the Netherlands

Comparing pension funds’ ESG policies in the Nordics and the Netherlands

10-12-2020 | Insight
Northern European pension funds are at the forefront of the global move towards more sustainable investing. But while these funds all concur sustainability needs to be taken into account, their ESG policies often vary significantly. A closer look at the policies implemented by large pension funds in the Nordics and the Netherlands shows important differences.
  • Laurens Swinkels
    Laurens
    Swinkels
    Researcher

Speed read

  • Pension funds concur sustainability is important 
  • Significant differences between the funds’ ESG policies 
  • Asset managers must adapt to changing needs 

Sustainable investing, responsible investing or ESG investing has become an important theme in asset management over the past decade, especially among pension funds in Northern Europe. These pension funds’ investment policies typically describe how sustainable investing is put into practice. Yet, these ESG policies can vary significantly from one fund to the next.

To assess the differences, we analyzed the individual policies of the ten largest pension funds in each of the four Nordic countries – Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden – as well as the Netherlands. A prerequisite was that each fund had to manage at least EUR 1 billion in assets. Within these countries, we found strong network effects that were due either to the funds being part of a sustainability initiative or to excluding certain products or company behaviors.

Among the stocks typically considered for exclusion in academic studies – namely alcohol, tobacco, and gambling stocks – only tobacco stocks were shunned on a large scale by the pension funds in our sample. Stocks of alcohol producers and gambling firms were only rarely excluded.

Controversial weapons were by far the most heavily excluded category, sometimes through forced national regulation. The academic literature occasionally mentions adult entertainment and conventional weapons as meeting the criteria for product-based exclusions, but these were rarely excluded by pension funds in our sample.

Stay informed on Sustainable Investing with monthly mail updates
Stay informed on Sustainable Investing with monthly mail updates
Subscribe

Focus on climate in Denmark and Sweden

From an environmental protection perspective, most Nordic countries have excluded investments in (thermal) coal companies, while Dutch pension funds are still not doing this on a large scale. Meanwhile, excluding oil and tar sands has become commonplace in Denmark and Sweden. These two countries’ largest pension funds were actually the first to start excluding oil companies from their portfolios.

There seems to be a great deal of disagreement about which companies should be excluded

An interesting finding from our study is that while pension funds concur on broad topics such as environmental damage, human rights and labor rights, there seems to be a great deal of disagreement about which companies should actually be excluded.

These variations between the exclusion policies reflect a healthy degree of diversity in the different approaches to sustainable investing. Sustainability means many things to many people. But these differences can also create challenges for asset managers. In particular, they ensure managers cannot follow a one-size-fits-all approach when developing sustainable investment solutions for institutional investors.

Subjects related to this article are:
Logo

Disclaimer

BY CLICKING ON “I AGREE”, I DECLARE I AM A WHOLESALE CLIENT AS DEFINED IN THE CORPORATIONS ACT 2001.

What is a Wholesale Client?
A person or entity is a “wholesale client” if they satisfy the requirements of section 761G of the Corporations Act.
This commonly includes a person or entity:

  • who holds an Australian Financial Services License
  • who has or controls at least $10 million (and may include funds held by an associate or under a trust that the person manages)
  • that is a body regulated by APRA other than a trustee of:
    (i) a superannuation fund;
    (ii) an approved deposit fund;
    (iii) a pooled superannuation trust; or
    (iv) a public sector superannuation scheme.
    within the meaning of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993
  • that is a body registered under the Financial Corporations Act 1974.
  • that is a trustee of:
    (i) a superannuation fund; or
    (ii) an approved deposit fund; or
    (iii) a pooled superannuation trust; or
    (iv) a public sector superannuation scheme
    within the meaning of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 and the fund, trust or scheme has net assets of at least $10 million.
  • that is a listed entity or a related body corporate of a listed entity
  • that is an exempt public authority
  • that is a body corporate, or an unincorporated body, that:
    (i) carries on a business of investment in financial products, interests in land or other investments; and
    (ii) for those purposes, invests funds received (directly or indirectly) following an offer or invitation to the public, within the meaning of section 82 of the Corporations Act 2001, the terms of which provided for the funds subscribed to be invested for those purposes.
  • that is a foreign entity which, if established or incorporated in Australia, would be covered by one of the preceding paragraphs.
I Disagree