Take Five: Modi Feels the Heat

A selection of the major stories impacting ESG investors, in five easy pieces. 

Climate wasn’t high on the ballot in India’s election, but Modi must soon face uncomfortable truths on coal.

Modi feels the heat – Conducted in record temperatures, the world’s biggest exercise in democracy dealt a blow to the ego of incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but it’s less clear how the outcome of India’s general election will impact its net zero transition. Stock prices were down this week on the assumption that reliance on coalition partners would slow the pace of the infrastructure investment plans of Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The impact of the election on India’s climate policy might be less significant, for a number of reasons. First, other priorities regularly topped polls of voter concerns, notably inflation and unemployment, although this has evolved recently, partly due to increased instances of climate-induced physical impacts, from landslides to floods to severe crop losses. Second, both the BJP and its leading opponent, Congress, are strongly committed to India’s continued adoption of renewables, albeit via different means – with the challenger party promising in its manifesto a new green transition fund and more resources for India’s National Adaptation Fund. A third reason, which leads on from the first two, is that neither major party has been forced to properly address India’s biggest climate problem – vast and rising emissions from coal. Indeed, current policy is for domestic production to increase up to 2040 to reduce reliance on imports. Coal – and Modi’s close relationships with the controversial Adani Group – notwithstanding, the BJP’s record on solar and hydrogen investments, and fossil fuel subsidy reductions is impressive. But regardless of the make-up of the coalition, India’s next government will need to up the ante to have a hope of meeting even its existing climate commitments, such as installing 500GW of renewables, which will handle 50% of electricity demand, by 2030.

Down, not out – Support for climate-related resolutions at the AGMs of US firms has been closely watched this proxy season for further signs of a “stewardship depression” witnessed since 2021. But climate votes only tell part of the story, with a high number of social-themed filings also vying for investor backing. These include four shareholder proposals seeking more action and transparency on pay, working conditions and racial equity by Walmart, the world’s largest private employer. Prior to

Africa’s Untapped Opportunity

Eva Warigia, Associate Director, Investor Relations at New Forests, explains how responsibly-managed plantation forestry in Sub-Saharan Africa is becoming an increasingly attractive asset class.

The African continent hosts 17% of the world’s forests. However, nearly four million hectares of these are lost each year, leading to a 3% loss of gross domestic product associated with soil and nutrient depletion, according to a report by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization. The report points out…

Subscribe

Subscribe to ESG Investor to gain access to the leading platform for news, analysis, and interviews across sustainable investing. Select subscribe below to view our subscription packages or you can email us at subscriptions@esginvestor.net to discuss your options.

Subscribe

Request a Trial

Get in touch today to discuss a trial giving you unrestricted and unlimited access to ESG Investor for you and/or your team(s) for a limited period. Email us at subscriptions@esginvestor.net

Recommended for you

Human Rights as a Basis for Climate Litigation

Olga Hancock, Head of Responsible Investment, Church Commissioners for England, explores the implications for investors of the EHCR decision on Swiss government inaction.

In November 2023, I wrote about the links between human rights and climate change for investors. Since then, there have been significant developments. One in particular stands out.

Last month, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) determined that the Swiss government had violated its citizens’ human rights, due to its lack of action on climate change. The case – Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz v Switzerland – was brought by four women and a supporting association who were concerned about the consequences of climate change on their living conditions and health.

The ECHR ruling is significant because it makes the link between human rights and climate change material for investors – and establishes a legal precedent for climate litigation on the basis of human rights law. And so this ruling inevitably raises the pressure on governments to be more ambitious on climate change. The case is also important for investors because of the implications for private legal actions.

So what happened?

To simplify: the ECHR ruled that the Swiss government had not adequately addressed its climate change obligations and needed to take measures to do so. Significantly, these obligations were defined as alignment around 1.5°C, adequate intermediate reduction targets, and a goal of net zero by 2050. For the 46 member states of the ECHR, that effectively imposes obligations to enhance climate mitigation policies.

Engagement with governments

The decision hands investors an important weapon as they engage with governments to enhance climate ambition. Investor engagement with governments is an increasing area of focus, as investors move from a stewardship approach focused on company engagement to collaborative engagement with governments to address systemic risk – and thus create an enabling environment for sustainable investments.

Governments have to date been able to respond to investors by saying that their requests to create a Paris-aligned enabling environment form part of a broader political process. Now there is a judgment which requires ECHR member governments to comply with the ambition of the Paris Agreement.

This decision will no doubt guide other judicial bodies’ thinking around the world, when considering human rights as the basis for climate litigation. The jurisprudence in EHCR rulings, whilst not binding, is considered ‘persuasive authority’ in other jurisdictions, so the case is also important for engaging with governments outside