Take Five: Balance of Power

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

A stark message in Bonn underlined the tensions between electoral cycles and long-term sustainability.  

Climate “collusion” – Republican politicians faced off against US institutional investors on Capitol Hill this week, in the latest round of the war on ‘woke’ capitalism. Having published a report claiming “bullying” of members by the investor-led Climate Action 100+ (CA100+) coalition, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Anti-trust heard from investor network Ceres, shareholder advocacy group As You Sow and CalPERS – the US’s largest public pension fund. Ceres CEO Mindy Lubber opened her testimony asserting: “Climate change, water scarcity and pollution, and nature loss … pose material financial risks to investment portfolios, business operations and supply chains, thus to the long-term stability of our markets and the economy.” As a member of its global steering committee, Lubber was also representing CA100+, which insisted its members “act as independent fiduciaries, responsible for their individual investment and voting decisions”. The stated purpose of the hearings was to decide whether current laws are sufficient to “deter anti-competitive collusion” to promote ESG-related goals in the investment industry. A legal memo recently secured by the US Sustainable Investment Forum found that firms and investors acting in concert on climate risks “are not violating fiduciary duty and are at negligible risk for anti-trust claims”. Even so, the hearings could be contributing to rising outflows from sustainable investment vehicles, with investor behaviour in the US diverging from elsewhere. Among the evidence cited for reduced appetite was the closure of several funds by BlackRock, some sustainability focused, others – less so, including one targeting opportunities arising from remote working. But it’s far from clear whether the world’s largest asset manager has given up on sustainable investing, given its launch this week of a series of climate transition-focused exchange-traded funds.

Slightly right – The rightward shift of the European Parliament following last week’s elections has prompted divergent views on its implications for the Green Deal that MEPs spent much of the past five years constructing. Centre- and far-right parties swelled their presence largely at the expense of the Greens and the moderate liberal Renew grouping – albeit with voting outcomes contrasting vastly across member states. There is scope for this new cohort to weaken some measures that are still being finalised, such as the

Options Still Open for Fossil Fuel Engagement

Patience is a virtue when engaging with the oil and gas industry on climate, but opinions are mixed on whether investor efforts are paying off. 

It’s no secret that the oil and gas industry has been slow to act on the climate crisis.   But with the sector accounting for around 15% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and science dictating that oil and gas demand must peak by 2030, the need for drastic action to…

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

Related Items:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , Recommended for you

Banker Bonus Cap Removal Bursts Fair Pay Bubble

Academics question logic behind higher pay for talent retention, as further pay votes are set for AGMs later this month.

HSBC’s decision to scrap a cap on bankers’ bonuses at last week’s AGM could open the floodgates for rising executive pay, further aggravating investor concerns around fair pay.

The vote to remove the cap received 99.3% shareholder support, allowing the bank to set a new limit for bonus and significantly increase payouts. HSBC paid its top investment bankers an estimated average bonus of US$771,700 last year, while median employee pay at the bank sits at £63,000 (US$79,000).

“It’s reflective of the general direction of travel with senior management pay in the UK,” Lindsey Stewart, Director of Investment Stewardship Research at Morningstar, told ESG Investor. “There’s a conviction, certainly among companies, boards and management, that higher pay has to be part of the equation for talent attraction and retention.”

Before the meeting, Stewart suggested the vote would “likely become a focal point for the UK’s conversation on executive pay”.

Overall trend

Under the previous legal cap, an employee’s bonus could not exceed 100% of their annual pay, or 200% with shareholder approval. These limits were scrapped from 31 October 2023 by then-Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini budget.

Similar votes are due to take place at Barclays’ AGM on 9 May and Lloyds’ on 16 May. Beyond the UK, proxy advisor Glass Lewis has urged Morgan Stanley shareholders to vote against an executive pay proposal at its AGM on 23 May.

“The overall trend is going to be preserved,” said Stewart. “With HSBC is having approved this, it’s unlikely that we’ll see a rejection of those decisions at Lloyds or Barclays.”

Last week, Goldman Sachs removed its bonus cap for UK bankers, meaning they can now earn more than the previous limit of double their base pay. The decision was criticised by British trade unions.

The median pay for S&P 500 chief executives rose 9% to US$15.7 million in the year to April 15, increasing the gap between top management salaries in the US and UK. UK executives have complained they are underpaid compared to US peers, with several warning of a talent exodus without more competitive pay.

Last year,

Take Five: Coal in the Whole

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

This week’s G7 commitment on coal will have insufficient impact without a global response.

Coal in the whole – The Group of Seven committed to phasing out unabated coal by 2035, but was criticised for allowing continued use of the fuel in power plants that deploy carbon capture technology, as well as for the flexible deadlines it gave to Japan and Germany. The announcement came in response to the COP28 pledge for all parties to transition away from fossil fuel usage. G7 countries said they would submit nationally determined contributions (NDCs) that “demonstrate progression and the highest possible ambition”, including 2030 targets and demonstrating alignment with net zero by 2050 goals. But the Turin communiqué offered precious little detail on the elimination of oil and gas from the energy systems of G7 countries. There has been some action at the individual country level, admittedly, with the US Environmental Protection Agency last week outlining requirements for coal and gas-fuelled plants to capture 90% of emissions, among other measures. While the G7 stressed its adherence to the International Energy Agency’s Net Zero by 2050 scenario, members are not fully aligned with its ban on new oil and gas exploration or development. G7 environment ministers also encouraged other countries to follow their lead on NDCs, and stressed their continued support for Just Energy Transition Partnerships. Given the latter are focused on effecting the clean energy transition of intensive coal users such as South Africa and Indonesia, it is likely that getting these stalled decommissioning initiatives back on track will have more impact on the decarbonisation trajectory than the domestic actions of leading economies. China, it should be noted, added the most coal capacity last year, followed by Indonesia and India.

Plastic progress? – The fourth round of UN-sponsored negotiations on the Global Plastics Treaty were hampered by an inability to agree on all-important production cuts. As a result, “intersessional work” will be needed if a final draft text is to be ready ahead of the last planned round of discussions in Busan in November. Most progress was made on developing a global approach to extended producer responsibility, but reports suggested developed countries fought shy of committing to binding targets for lower production levels. Prior to the talks, 160 financial institutions called for binding rules and obligations to address plastics’