switzerlandde
Greenwashing leads ICGN corporate governance debate

Greenwashing leads ICGN corporate governance debate

09-10-2019 | Einblicke
The danger of greenwashing is rising up the sustainable investing agenda, corporate governance experts believe.
  • Carola van Lamoen
    Carola
    van Lamoen
    Head of Sustainable Investing

Speed read

The issue was the main takeaway from a debate entitled ‘The future beyond 2020’ at the International Corporate Governance Network’s (ICGN) annual conference in Tokyo. The plenary was chaired by Carola van Lamoen, Robeco’s Head of Active Ownership.

The need to avoid greenwashing – the practice of only paying lip service to environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors with token gestures – has become more important as more investors start embracing sustainable investing, speakers at the debate said.

“We can’t avoid greenwashing – we’ve got to try and climb through and work out what’s going on and ask the right questions,” said Sacha Sadan, Director of Corporate Governance at Legal & General Investment Management in the UK. “We need to look at the ownership of some of the asset owners and see what they’re doing.”

“We’ve seen it here in Japan with companies that have said they’re going to take mandates away from people based on ESG considerations. That’s proper leadership – not just talking about it, but actually moving the money out. As an asset manager, I can assure you that you jump when you’re under threat, otherwise you will just carry on doing what you’re doing.”

Zu den aktuellen Einblicken
Zu den aktuellen Einblicken
Anmelden

Action, not words

Clients will increasingly refuse to put up with greenwashing, as they want to see the fruits of ESG factors actually being integrated into an investment process, warned Emily Woodland, Co-Head of Sustainable Investment at AMP Capital in Hong Kong.

“Clients are increasingly demanding evidence of the non-financial outcomes of their investments across their existing portfolios,” she said. “This isn’t just about measuring a carbon footprint, which is reasonably straightforward to do, and is becoming a lot more common. There’s also a range of other potential key performance indicators to demonstrate and differentiate your portfolio’s ESG performance against your peers or your benchmarks.”

Common framework call

However, a common framework is needed, said Charles T. Canfield, Principal Corporate Governance Officer at IFC Corporate Governance Group in the US. “The sustainability standards need to converge,” he said. “I feel like I’m in the 1990s, when the International Accounting Standards were being pushed as the global standard, and a lot had to happen for the convergence. They transformed themselves and now we have the IFRS, which are more globally accepted.”

“The same is going to have to happen with sustainability reporting. All these frameworks out there are going to have to either be consolidated or maybe another player is going to have to take up the charge. The International Accounting Standards Board itself has made ESG reporting an agenda item. Investors looking at financial information need to be looking at the same thing whether they’re in Japan, or Brazil, or the UK.”

Beware of ‘impact washing’

Greenwashing also affects another hot topic – that of investing in the UN”s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – when misuse of the goals turns into “impact washing”, said Woodland. “A lot of people are using the SDGs as the language to measure and report non-financial impacts,” she said. “The problem with the SDGs is that they weren’t really devised with the investment community in mind, so they don’t fit that neatly into this reporting box.”

“They’ve been subject to a little bit of misuse as a result. There genuinely are some credible efforts out there, no doubt about that, but some people are using it as a marketing tool to rebadge traditional funds that were never really constructed as any kind of ESG, sustainability or impact fund.”

Naming and shaming

Taking engagement to the next level by ‘naming and shaming’ energy companies that are either denying climate change, or lobbying against it, is another hot topic for active owners, the plenary heard. “We rank the biggest companies in the world on their climate disclosure, their policies, their statements, their targets, and their reputation,” Sadan told delegates.

“Are they paying political lobbyists? Are they paying people USD 14 million to say it doesn’t exist, it’s not manmade? Some companies are, and now we’re naming them.”

“We named 11 of the largest companies, including a few oil and gas companies and two Japanese companies. All of them have now come to us to ask how they get back on our better list. We want those companies to do better. It’s not about divesting, it’s not about just going away. If we want to deal with climate change, we have to get the largest companies in the world to do something.”

Logo

Zugangsbeschränkung / Haftungsausschluss

Die auf diesen Seiten enthaltenen Informationen dienen Marketingzwecken und sind ausschliesslich für (i) qualifizierte Anleger gemäss dem Schweizer Bundesgesetz über die kollektiven Kapitalanlagen vom 23. Juni 2006 („KAG“), (ii) Professionelle Kunden gemäss Anhang II der Richtlinie über Märkte für Finanzinstrumente (2014/65/EU; „MiFID II“) mit Sitz in der Europäischen Union oder im Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum mit einer entsprechenden Lizenz zur Erbringung von Vertriebs- / Angebotshandlungen im Zusammenhang mit Finanzinstrumenten oder für (iii) solche, die hiermit aus eigener Initiative entsprechende Informationen zu spezifischen Finanzinstrumenten erfragen und als professionelle Kunden qualifizieren.

Die Fonds haben ihren Sitz in Luxemburg oder den Niederlanden. Die ACOLIN Fund Services AG, Postanschrift: Affolternstrasse 56, 8050 Zürich, agiert als Schweizer Vertreter der Fonds. UBS Switzerland AG, Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zürich, Postanschrift: Europastrasse 2, P.O. Box, CH-8152 Opfikon, fungiert als Schweizer Zahlstelle. Der Prospekt, die Key Investor Information Documents (KIIDs), die Satzung, die Jahres- und Halbjahresberichte der Fonds sind auf einfache Anfrage hin und kostenlos im beim Schweizer Vertreter ACOLIN Fund Services AG erhältlich. Die Prospekte sind auch über die Website www.robeco.ch verfügbar.

Einige Fonds, über die Informationen auf dieser Website angezeigt werden, fallen möglicherweise nicht in den Geltungsbereich des KAG und müssen daher nicht über eine entsprechende Genehmigung durch die Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht FINMA verfügen. Einige Fonds sind in Ihrem Wohnsitz- / Sitzstaat möglicherweise nicht verfügbar. Bitte überprüfen Sie den Registrierungsstatus in Ihrem jeweiligen Wohnsitz- / Sitzstaat. Um die in Ihrem Land registrierten Produkte anzuzeigen, gehen Sie bitte zur jeweiligen Länderauswahl, die auf dieser Website zu finden ist, und wählen Sie Ihr Wohnsitz- / Sitzstaat aus.

Weder Informationen noch Meinungen auf dieser Website stellen eine Aufforderung, ein Angebot oder eine Empfehlung zum Kauf, Verkauf oder einer anderweitigen Verfügung eines Finanzinstrumentes dar. Die Informationen auf dieser Webseite stellen keine Anlageberatung oder anderweitige Dienstleistung der Robeco Switzerland Ltd dar. Eine Investition in ein Produkt von Robeco Switzerland Ltd sollte erst erfolgen, nachdem die entsprechenden rechtlichen Dokumente wie Verwaltungsvorschriften, Prospekt, Jahres- und Halbjahresberichte konsultiert wurden.

Durch Klicken auf "Ich stimme zu" bestätigen Sie, dass Sie resp. die von Ihnen vertretene juristische Person eine der oben genannten Kategorien von Adressaten fallen und dass Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen für diese Website gelesen, verstanden und akzeptiert haben.

Nicht Zustimmen