The first choice for people in pensions

Pensions Age has been designed to provide pensions professionals with a single and authoritative source
of information.

Growing green money

Ethical investment is on the rise – a business estimated to be worth £300 billion. Shifa Rahman finds out why green money is becoming fashionable

The future of Socially Responsible Investments (SRI) lies in the recognition that appropriate reporting of ethical, social and environmental concerns are necessary to protect the branded product. Recently, information about a company’s environmental and social performance has become just as important as data on its financial performance. The question of transparency, monitoring how well fund managers follow ethical parameters, does not yet seem to have been tackled by most trustees.

The UK Social Investment Forum surveyed the top 500 pension funds and their Statement of Investment Principles (SIP), part of the trustees’ statement of disclosure require-ments, and found that the extent to which engagement and reporting took place remained unclear. The survey showed that accountability mechanisms were not in place.

The Social Investment Forum further found that of the top pension funds surveyed 48 per cent of the fund managers consider the financial impact of an organisation’s social responsibility. Only 14 per cent of funds specifically stated that concerns about social responsibility will not be taken into account.

With the passing of the Statement of Investment Principles legislation effective 3 July 2000, trustees have an obligation to state their investment principles. This statement sets out in broad terms the investment policy, indicating the extent to which social, environ-mental or ethical considerations are taken into account in the selection, retention and realisation of investment principles.

Penny Shepherd, the executive director of the UK Social Investment Forum concludes that industry interest in SRI products is there, but it is now time for: “the fund management industry to respond. Fund management needs to develop greater expertise in assessing companies’ social and environmental performance.”

Friends Provident launched the first ethical fund in 1983 as part of its stewardship range. Since then the number of ethical funds on the market has grown considerably so that today the 55 ethical funds available are worth £300 billion. Henderson Global Investments estimate that ethical investments account for about 1-2 per cent of the retail market, with the potential to grow by as much as 15 per cent as seen in the US market.

The terms SRI and ethical investment, for the most part, are the same as far as they both aim to consider social and environmental factors in their investments in addition to financial criteria. But, Rachel Crossley, senior analyst on the governance and SRI team at Friends Ivory & Sime makes a distinction between the two terms: ethical investment is associated with the screening process and SRI with engagement.

Crossley explains: “Ethical investment is associated with the older process of screening, where, for example, fund managers are prohibited from investing in tobacco companies. SRI is commonly associated with the engagement process which is the inverse of screening. Here fund managers have intense discussions with companies to encourage good practice.”

Engagement refers to areas where a company can improve its record on ethical, social and environmental issues. The encouragement to make and sustain improvements is derived from producing a quarterly environmental management report.

Crossely says that about £200 billion is invested in engagement, and only £3 billion is involved in screening. So as the engagement process is increasing, many have raised concerns over the level of regulation in this area.

So who does the regulating? No one as such. The Association of British Insurers (ABI) is conscious of the need for new types of information about company performance as investors become more aware of ethical issues. Peter Montagnon, head of investment affairs, says: “We want to promote engagement and avoid the blacklisting of companies. We believe that the way to achieve this is is by introducing more transparency in reporting. This will help everybody understand the issues better, lead to a greater focus on the nature of risk involved and help raise standards.” The requirement is not to prescribe specific behaviour but to ensure that risks affecting both companies and shareholders are recognised and managed. It is increasingly accepted that a failure to take these risks into account can lead to long-term loss of reputation and company value.

The position most commonly found in pension schemes is that trustees delegate their voting rights to the investment managers, normally with the proviso that if they wish to vote on any particular issue they can direct the investment managers. With SRI, most believe it will be necessary for trustees to establish what the investment manager’s attitude to corporate governance is, to obtain a statement from them and incorporate suitable words from them. Trustees have a duty to exercise their investment powers in the best interests of the beneficiaries of the trusts.

Julia Dreblow, SRI development manager, at the Ethical Unit at Friends Ivory & Sime says: “It doesn’t work to have one standard for everyone, as different fund managers have different ethical agendas. However, we have been campaigning for the last three to four years for an increase in the reporting for larger companies providing a statement of their progress in environmental issues.”

Dreblow finds that investors are increasingly asking for more information, so that they have a range of investors to match different clients’ ethical opinions.

But is progress in ethical issues connected to financial performance? Dreblow says: “The model is quite complex. We are convinced that the ethical side of SRIs drives share value. It is however, difficult to track exactly what is the driver for share value change.” She adds that the future of SRI, is heading towards increased pressure on trustees to develop greater reporting criteria, especially from larger companies who have a substantial impact on the environment.

Consistent reporting required
Research conducted by Science and Technology Policy Research at Sussex University shows that reporting on environmental performance is extremely patchy. EU and national level policy play a critical role in encouraging and mandating better reporting. The variations in environmental performance within sectors is often as much as ten-fold. The report on corporate governance reporting shows that environmental performance management was greatly strengthened by benchmarking between companies but the evidence linking better environmental performance to enhanced profitability was mixed. The relationship is strongest where the environmental impact has direct financial costs, such as waste generation.

It is widely held that the best use of indicators is to benchmark performance, set targets and measure progress toward greater eco-efficiency. Common standards will enable more rapid diffusion of best practices.

Duncan McLaren, policy director at Friends of the Earth says that: “This new research emphasises the need for Government action to ensure that environmental reporting happens and creates a driver for improved performance. These new findings clearly show that voluntarism alone is not working, and adds yet more urgency to Friends of the Earth’s call for consistent mandatory environmental reporting by companies.”

Morley Fund Management, in response to the issue of reporting standards, has revised its voting policy to introduce a requirement for large UK companies to publish environmental reports. Toby Belsom, an analyst on the SRI team at Morley Fund Management says that from the FTSE 100, 41 companies produce reports, 30 have no intention of publishing reports, and 26 have no statement of intentions.

“Legislation and ethical directives are driving the world of corporate business to its knees. It is no longer seen as taking the moral high ground, with a negative screening process which excludes companies, but is looking at rather at a strong robust form of investment,” says Paul Moody, head of business development at SRI Morely Fund Management.

The benchmark, the FTSE4Good, set to go live this month, has been designed to provide steps toward setting a global standard in the growing area of SRI. The benchmark works in such a way that it provides a best practice standard, where each company must meet selection criteria and SRI principles.

Regulation for reporting, bench-marking and trustee transparency all lends weight to improving mandates on how ethical investments can be regulated. Current research by FTSE indicates that over 50 per cent of constituents within each region may not be included in the FTSE4Good indices due to a lack of publicly available SRI information on company performance.

Friends of the Earth’s McLaren thinks this is far from adequate. “There is a lack of consistency in reporting which results in a difficulty to make judgments on relative strategies and performance,” he says. Corporate strategies and the company’s actual performance are the two issues that are critically important for McLaren in reducing the impact of environmental and social damage in the future.

Going forward
Targets vary greatly. In the next 50 years, Friends of the Earth say they would like to see a 60-90 per cent reduction in emissions. According to their research, approximately 15 per cent of companies have a target of ten per cent reductions and 64 per cent of companies have no targets whatsoever. Ways of addressing the problems of standardisation could be having a Co2 indicator, encouraging wide-scale corporate monitoring of omissions.

There is a need for more information, and the right type of information. The next step for SRI will be an increase in the number of published reports with the aim to raise awareness on a larger scale in the SRI field. Companies are also going to have to take the long-term view of proving that they do succeed in the environmental and social sectors, which will mean making public the research they diligently compile.

– Pensions Age June 2001–

BACK TO JUNE FEATURES
BACK TO FEATURES ARCHIVEE
BACK TO HOME PAGE