Ethical Finance Round Table: Impact Investing – Can it save capitalism?

The 24th Ethical Finance Round Table was hosted virtually on Wednesday 26th August 2020. Before introducing the session, GEFI Global Steering Group member and event chair Graham Burnside reminded us of the opportunities the virtual round tables have provided us, with the speakers taking part from three different countries.

Entitled ‘Impact Investing – Can it Save Capitalism?’, the session considered the role of impact investing as we shift from ‘shareholder capitalism’ towards ‘stakeholder capitalism’. Impact investing is an exciting and rapidly growing industry powered by 1,300+ investors (such as asset managers, foundations, banks, development finance institutions, family offices, pension funds and insurance companies) who are determined to generate social and environmental impact as well as financial returns. This is taking place all over the world, and across all asset classes.

The first speaker was Dean Hand, Research Director at The Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN). Presenting from New York, Dean introduced GIIN’s 2020 annual Impact Investor Survey report, which places the impact investing market size at roughly $715 bn. She focused on two key findings of GIIN’s research:

  1. The first was that whilst impact management and measures (IMM) practices have matured, opportunities remain for further refinement. Respondents to the survey highlighted substantial progress in research and the sophistication of IMM over the last decade. By far the biggest concern over the next five years, was the threat of “impact washing”. Almost all investors target social impacts (96%) and 60% targeted both social and environmental, which, Dean suggested, demonstrates how interrelated the two are for market investors. The most common SDG targeted was found to be SDG 8 (‘decent work and economic growth’) followed closely by SDG 1 (‘no poverty’). A number of frameworks to measure and manage impact have emerged in response to the growing interest in impact investing. 89% of respondents now use external frameworks, with the UN SDGs the most popular. This could go some way to address the issue of impact washing.
  2. The second key finding Dean covered, was that impact investors hold a positive outlook for the future, despite the headwinds. 99% reported that their impact was in line with or outperformed expectations and 88% also highlighted that this was also true of financial performance. Although many expect a financial underperformance as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, 18% felt that their impact performance will still exceed expectations. The majority plan to maintain their capital commitment plans for 2020.

The next speaker was Tribe Impact Capital’s Amy Clarke. Amy started by posing the question as to whether we should save capitalism and whether it was the right tool for the challenges ahead? She positioned inequality and inequity as unintended consequences of the current financial system and, argued that while impact investing is part of the required system upgrade, it is not the whole solution.

Amy gave examples of several trends she has observed in the impact investing sector. The Make My Money Matter campaign was offered as an example of citizen empowerment where consumers are provided with the knowledge and tools to demand to better influence where their pensions are invested. According to Amy changing human capital is coming in the finance sector and the focus on increasing diversity and inclusion will ensure that financial institutions better represent the societies they serve. One thought that Amy felt would be controversial was that GDP should be laid to rest with real measures emerging as an alternative. Some cities are already transforming using Kate Raworth’s doughnut economy model. Amy concluded with a question around whether capitalism can survive the wave of change coming, or will it emerge as something different?

The third and final presenter, Azman Mokhtar, was speaking from Malaysia and offered his experiences of delivering true value in the wake of the Asian financial crisis. Azman began working at Khazanah Nasional in 2004, developing an investment style called ‘Building True Value’, delivering through financial, economic, and societal returns.

The project ran from 2004 to 2018, with the portfolio increasing in value 3.5 times, despite no inflow of funds. It also saw economic returns through job creation, transformation of strategic companies and knowledge development. Societal returns were improvements in education, poverty alleviation and reskilling. One example of the project’s work given by Azman was after the restructuring of Malaysia Airlines following two high-profile air disasters. The restructure meant laying off 6,000 employees and through the project, $50m was invested in a reskilling centre for those no longer working. To conclude, Azman felt that the project demonstrated that it is possible to deliver ‘true value’ over long periods of time.

As ever there was no shortage of questions during a lively Q&A session. Which covered topics including the drivers behind the confident outlook for the impact investment sector and how to develop an environmental impact investment approach in mature political economies.


GEFI founder appears on Real Leaders podcast

GEFI founder Omar Shaikh joined Kevin Edwards for Episode 108 of the Real Leaders podcast to to interpret Milton Friedman’s essay on the Social Responsibility of Business, explore Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and how it applies to unchecked capitalism today, and ultimately discuss the humbleness and bravery that is needed to rethink today’s GDP construct and enter into the world of the unknown.

Listen now on Apple Podcasts or your favourite podcast provider!


Beyond Climate – Getting Nature on the Finance Agenda to Support a Green Recovery (The Herald)

This article was originally published in The Herald on 8th August 2020.

In November 2021 Glasgow will host the UN climate change summit, known as COP26. This is the most important climate summit since the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015 when heads of state committed to restricting global temperature rise this century to 'well below' 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C. COP26 is first opportunity for nations to come together to review commitments and strengthen ambition.

Scotland is already leading by example with the Climate Change Bill making a commitment to becoming a net-zero society by 2045 – five years before the rest of the UK. The Scottish Government has also responded to the global climate emergency by adopting an ambitious new target to reduce emissions by 75 per cent by 2030. The Scottish National Investment Bank, which will be operational in the second half of 2020, will support the transition to net zero through a range of debt and equity products.

The financial opportunities and risks of transitioning to a low carbon, resilient global economy have catapulted climate change to the top of the agenda for investors, lenders and insurers across the globe. As well as setting ambitious targets to minimise their own greenhouse gas emissions many financial institutions are driving reductions in the climate impact of their financing activity by decarbonising their portfolios and increasing investments in solutions to climate change.

With Earth Overshoot Day looming later this month it is timely to reflect on the key role nature plays in regulating climate as well as helping us to adapt to and mitigate against climate change. By conserving nature and restoring ecosystems we reduce climate vulnerability and increase resilience.

The sustainable management and use of nature can help tackle wider socio-environmental challenges such as water security, water pollution, food security, human health and disaster risk management. However, with ecosystems declining in size and condition by 47 per cent globally, and species populations facing extinction, the wake-up call on nature loss arrived at this year’s World Economic Forum where, for the first time, the Global Risks Report ranked biodiversity loss as one of the top-five global risks in terms of likelihood and impact in the next 10 years.

Around $44 trillion of economic value generation – over half the world’s total GDP – depends on nature and its services and sustainable use of our environment in Scotland accounts for 11 per cent of our total economic output – worth £17.2 billion a year – and one in seven full-time jobs. The global coffee market had retail sales of $83 billion in 2017 but 60 per cent of coffee varieties are at risk of extinction from a combination of climate change, disease and deforestation.

Nature and biodiversity loss therefore represent a significant financial risk. Insufficient accounting for the risks posed by nature loss have unintended consequences, such as short or long-term risk mispricing, inadequate capital buffers, and in extreme cases the potential for stranded assets.

In boardrooms nature loss continues to be largely a hidden risk. This needs to change, and quickly.

The Scottish-based Global Ethical Finance Initiative (GEFI) is working with the United Nations Development Programme and Scottish Government on a 2 year programme of collaboration that aims to raise awareness and position nature at the forefront of the COVID-19 economic recovery and for the long-term well-being of people and the planet.

Within the programme, which forms part of our wider Path to COP26 campaign, we are actively looking to develop a financial instrument that accelerates nature-friendly investments at scale as well as draw upon our extensive global network to support other initiatives such as the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Wildlife Trust’s challenge to unlock £1 billion of new investment for nature conservation in Scotland. We are also looking to explore the feasibility of a global framework for financial institutions measure and disclose nature-based risk.

With Covid-19 exposing the fragility of health security and financial systems there is a pressing need to build social, environmental and economic resilience. At GEFI, as we approach COP26, we are committed to working with our partners ensure nature joins climate at the top of the finance agenda to underpin a green and sustainable recovery. We will also continue to showcase and position Scotland as a leading global centre for ethical finance.

To find out about financing nature, and more, join us on 5-8 October for Ethical Finance 2020. To reserve your free place visit ethicalfinance2020.com


‘Putting the ‘eco’ back in economy’: Finance for Nature Virtual Global Series Kick-off

The kick-off of the Finance for Nature Virtual Global Series on 20 & 21 July brought together industry champions from finance, insurance, consumer goods companies, and standard-setting regulators, to tackle two questions on how to accelerate nature-friendly finance: (1) Why should nature be positioned at the heart of the finance and green recovery agenda? (2) How can private capital and corporations unlock nature’s potential to achieve impact for the planet and prosperity for its people?

Key takeaways from the series include:

  1. The financial sector is increasingly well informed on the impact of climate, but less so about how to account for biodiversity and nature in its portfolio. Industry champions called for the inclusion of nature and biodiversity loss, as climate change cannot be fully addressed without it.
  2. To move beyond the individual asset-based disclosure requirements, a framework for more systemic nature-related risk disclosure is needed, following the trajectory of mandatory climate disclosure.
  3. The finance community needs a greater focus on traceability of corporate supply chains around climate, deforestation and other nature-related issues. It also needs to build in systems of accountability such as standards, or certifications (e.g. RSPO for palm oil).

What’s the point of my pension fund if it contributes to a dead planet? We’ll finance ourselves into extinction. We need to put the ‘eco’ back in ‘economy- Andrew Mitchell, Global Canopy

Why should nature be positioned at the heart of the finance and green recovery agenda?

Susan Gardner, Director of the Ecosystems Division at UNEP and Omar Shaikh, Founder of the Global Ethical Finance Initiative expressed the urgent need to move nature further up on the finance agenda and to play a core role as part of the green recovery. And the audience agreed, with 87% of respondents to the live poll noting that their organizations consider climate and nature as interconnected in the context of investing. Further, when asked if they have a policy in place that integrates nature-based solutions into decision-making, 52% said Yes, 28% plan to have a policy in the future, and 21% do not have a policy.

Inger Adersen, Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), provided the opening keynote address, highlighting that the Covid-19 pandemic provides a stark reminder of human’s reliance on nature, particularly for health. About half of the world’s GDP is directly or indirectly reliant on nature, and the finance sector’s recognition of the physical risks posed by the destruction of nature is a positive step but more urgent action must be taken. Inger urged governments and the private sector to use the UNFCCC COP26 in November 2021 as a target to steer economies towards a green transition that maximizes growth, employment and resilience.

UNDP Administrator, Achim Steiner, stressed the importance of nature for sustainable and equitable development and recovery from Covid-19, noting that 2.5 billion people depend on nature. Failure to seize the opportunity to place nature firmly on the green recovery agenda could lead to delayed progress by up to 10 years and failure to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Accelerating decision-making and delivering impact at scale will require rebalancing the economic system with incentives and frameworks to ensure nature is not a marginal consideration operating in a parallel economy but a valuable asset that is understood, measured and incorporated into transformational policy strategies.

De Nederlandsche Bank recently published its ‘Indebted to Nature’ report which highlights the Dutch financial sector’s exposure to risks from biodiversity loss. The report estimates that Dutch financial institutions have over €500 billion in exposure to companies with high or very high dependence on ecosystem services, or approximately 36% of the examined portfolio. Executive Director of De Nederlandsche Bank, Olaf Sleijpen, stressed that although the world is in the midst of global health and economic crisis we cannot lose sight of the threat posed by climate change and biodiversity loss. The current situation presents a unique opportunity to take steps towards creating a carbon neutral economy. Olaf called on other central banks to build on the approach taken in the Netherlands to further explore and develop best practice to enable financial services to catalyse change and to promote consistent standards and frameworks for biodiversity risk measuring and reporting.

Biodiversity and nature loss pose major economic, social and environmental threats that we cannot afford to ignore. - Olaf Sleijpen, DNB

The audience also heard from an expert panel, moderated by UNDP’s Head of Climate Promise, Cassie Flynn, with representatives from the banking sector, insurance, asset managers, and leading thinkers on sustainable investing. Speakers included, Philippe Zaouati, CEO of Mirova; Brooke Barton, Vice President of Innovation and Evaluation at Ceres; Stephen Hibbert, Managing Director at ING; Veronica Scotti, Chairperson Public Sector Solutions at Swiss Re; and Diandra Soobiah, Head of Responsible Investment at Nest Pensions. The keynote speakers outlined a vision for a nature-forward future and panelists discussed the key practical solutions needed to position nature in the finance agenda.

Firstly, as we have now reached a tipping point where the impacts of deforestation and climate change may be irreversible, deforestation must be recognised as a risk that is embedded across commodities, asset classes and industries. Ceres presented the Investor Guide to Deforestation and Climate Change: a tool which provides timely guidance for financial institutions to divest from deforestation and to engage with their portfolio.

Secondly, there is a need to build robust impact measurement indicators that could address the complexities in measuring biodiversity. Mirova is currently joining forces with other partners to develop a tool that includes impact measurement on biodiversity for listed companies, which could help reduce the risk of greenwashing in the industry.

Thirdly, coordinated efforts across asset classes will be essential to improve the existing toolkits and develop new methodologies, metrics and taxonomies to integrate nature into financial decision-making. As noted by Swiss RE, insurers have a key role to play in leading this movement: they understand risk and invest in the long term, so they are well placed to embrace finance for nature. Building from the TCFD experience for climate, ING highlighted that this collective effort for nature also needs to involve actors from the scientific and data communities, who can support the financial sector to address this challenge with greater confidence. Civil society and global investor movements are already calling asset owners to redirect finance flows to nature-friendly investments. Among them, NEST Pensions supports the Make My Money Matter campaign that is calling on pension providers to think of the planet and its people alongside making a profit.

Audience Q&A topics:

    • Best practice in communicating effectively with customers
    • Obstacles to achieving a pipeline of investable projects
    • The role of central banks in the green recovery
    • Ensuring that no one is left behind through the protection and creation of livelihoods.

How can private capital and corporations unlock nature’s potential to achieve impact for planet and prosperity?

The second day of the series focused on the financial risk of biodiversity loss and the role of the private sector to take action. Midori Paxton, Head of Ecosystems and Biodiversity at UNDP and Andrew Mitchell of Natural Capital Finance Alliance and Global Canopy facilitated the discussion. Elizabeth Mrema, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), opened the session with an uplifting reminder that 2020 is still the ‘Super Year’ for nature. Now is the time to reassess human’s relationship with nature and to recognize that nature is a public good which has been over-exploited. $44 trillion of economic activity is largely dependent on nature, providing the economic case for increasing nature-friendly finance and since the private financial sector is a critical enabler of markets it can contribute positively to halting biodiversity loss. Ms. Mrema urged the financial sector to ensure that financial disclosure initiatives contribute to the 2030 Biodiversity Framework to protect 30% of earth’s lands and seas.

A new reporting framework called the Task Force for Nature-related Financial Risk Disclosure (TNFD) was announced by Minister Zac Goldsmith, UK Minister of State for the Pacific, International Environment, Climate and Forests, and Animal Welfare. Ten financial institutions, the World Business Council For Sustainable Development and the UK and Swiss governments have backed the initiative, supported by UNDP, UNEP, Global Canopy, and WWF. It aims to increase financial flows at scale towards nature-positive investment and lending opportunities to allow people and the planet to flourish. In an audience poll, 89% of participants voted ‘Yes’ that disclosure of nature-related risk can drive real change and is not just a mere box-ticking exercise.

The pandemic is one symptom of our dysfunctional relationship with the natural world and we need to reset the relationship with nature. - Zac Goldsmith, UK

The expert panel included industry champions from private financial institutions like banks and insurance, and experts in private sector nature-related risk disclosure, including, Adam Kanzer, Head of Stewardship at BNP Paribas; Sonja Gibbs, Sustainable Finance Working Group at the Institute of International Finance (IIF); Mark Kenber, Managing Director at Climate Advisers; Rowan Douglas, Head of Capital Science & Policy Practice at Willis Towers Watson; and Bas Rüter, Director of Sustainability at Rabobank.

The three leading experts from the financial sector - BNP Paribas, Willis Towers Watson, and Rabobank - shared their insights on a private sector perspective of nature-related risk. They recognize the role of increased accountability to drive action and noted the role of government to provide the necessary enabling conditions but also of banks to fulfill their obligation to deliver valuable, long-term investments to clients and investing in nature is a valuable, long-term investment. They urged that climate risk disclosure should go further to account for nature as a climate change adaptation, not just mitigation. For example, Willis Towers Watson noted the importance of accounting for the physical risk of coral reefs or mangroves degradation which protect coastal communities and ecosystems from storm surges. When this risk is valued, there is much higher incentive to address it and prevent it.

The risk the world faces is not just biodiversity loss but the collapse of nature all together...We cannot preserve shareholder value without preserving nature and biodiversity.- Adam Kanzer, BNP Paribas

Deforestation is a major threat to biodiversity loss, mainly driven by cleared land for industrial agriculture and urgent action is needed to divest from deforestation. Banks have a role to play by providing the right incentives working with companies to create a better market price for sustainably-produced goods. One example is Rabobank’s efforts to offer lower interest rates for sustainable production in Brazil, where deforestation rates are high. Direct engagement with clients to ensure soft commodity supply chains are nature and climate-friendly, through a regional approach that fits the local context, is an impactful way investors can take action. However, there is a gap in knowledge on deforestation in supply chains - few investors are aware of the deforestation risk in their investment portfolio and the financial cost of that risk is high.

According to Orbitas Finance, presented by Climate Advisers, 44 financial institutions each have over $300million invested in palm oil alone and investors in 13 companies have at least $23 billion at risk. Orbitas provides a tool to assess deforestation risk in investor portfolios. Other related resources for assessing supply chain natural capital risk, noted throughout the series include: Encore and Gist Impact. A trend towards increased supply chain transparency, where companies are required to show where their assets are located, is helping to put pressure on companies to take action. Willis Towers Watson noted that the emerging use of spatial data to assess financial risk can help accelerate that pressure. Other examples of financial products and investor actions, as noted by IIF include, social bonds, debt for nature swaps, and biodiversity offsets and all rely on proactive and consistent measurement and reporting of risk. Ultimately, to account for nature loss, a collaborative and common approach to natural capital risk reporting and disclosure is needed and panelists underscored that a nature-related financial disclosure system like TNFD is a promising step. Just as the climate change financial risk task force helped channel private sector behavior through the TCFD overarching framework, this is what is needed for nature, and it must use the TCFD momentum.

Nature to be embedded into classic macroeconomic analysis...[We need] a nature-equivalent of scope 3 emissions for climate, e.g. ‘scope 3 depletions’ - Sonia Gibbs, IIF

Audience Q&A topics included:

    • the methodologies for putting an economic value on nature assets and potential externalities
    • the gaps in understanding nature-related risk and implementing actions to avoid it
    • the role of governments to regulate nature-related risk

Finally, Nigel Topping, UK High-Level Climate Action Champion, expressed hope for a nature-related financial risk disclosure platform as the next big step for finance and invited the audience to join the Race to Zero November Dialogues, where discussions about finance for nature will continue and hopes that these discussions will influence positive outcomes for finance for nature at the UNFCCC COP 26 in November 2021.

The two inaugural sessions of the Finance for Nature Virtual Global Series laid the groundwork for future discussions that aim to advance the integration of nature-related risks and considerations in the international financial policy and regulatory agenda. Covid-19 presents a unique opportunity to build back an economy that repairs our relationship with nature and addresses biodiversity. The evidence is clear - $3.6 trillion in business opportunities from sustainable food, land and ocean use, representing 191 million new jobs over the next 10 years, and more than half the world’s GDP and 2.5 billion people depend on nature - Nature-friendly investments must be scaled up to protect people, planet, and prosperity and to ensure a green economic recovery.

 

More sessions in the Finance for Nature Series will be announced soon. You can view the full event report and recordings from the sessions on the event web page here.

About The Finance for Nature Virtual Global Series: Designed as a series of high-level, quarterly, virtual dialogues leading up to COP26, the Global Series will look to advance the integration of nature-related risks and considerations in the international financial policy and regulatory agenda. It brings together industry champions from finance, insurance, consumer goods companies, and standard-setting regulators, and aims to drive practical commitments on investing in nature. This series is organised by UNDP, UNEP, the Scottish Government backed-Global Ethical Finance Initiative, Climate Advisers and partners of the New York Declaration on Forests.

 


The Radical Old Idea with Prof. Alex Edmans: Responsible Business in a Time of Crisis

The Global Ethical Finance Initiative’s inaugural Radical Old Idea virtual event took place on 23rd June 2020. Professor Alex Edmans of London Business School discussed how to be a responsible business in a time of crisis in a session chaired by Eva Cairns, ESG Investment Analyst – Climate Change at Aberdeen Standard Investments.

The COVID-19 pandemic has seen some inspired corporate responses, such as Unilever donating €100 million of food and sanitizer, and guaranteeing the jobs of all 150,000 workers including contractors. But what if you’re a small business without millions to donate? Or in an unrelated industry without relevant products to give? Professor Edmans discussed what it means to be a responsible business, for companies of all sizes and in all industries. He also explain the business case for responsibility in normal times as well as crisis times, and how companies can ensure that responsibility is consistent with long-term shareholder value. Professor Edmans drew on rigorous academic research, real-world examples, and his new book, “Grow the Pie: How Great Companies Deliver Both Purpose and Profit”.

Professor Edmans was introduced by the session chair Eva Cairns and he started his presentation with an interesting example as to the role the media plays in informing the public’s perception of responsible business. In 2007, Vodafone created the innovative M-Pesa mobile money service that, through a mobile phone, provides access to financial services to over 37 million people who previously had only limited access to bank accounts, while in 2012, they were the first telecoms company to release a tax transparency report highlighting its contributions to the public finances in the countries of operation. Professor Edmans posed two questions:

  1. Which of these decisions created most value for society?
  2. Which of these decisions, if not taken, would have led to most public outrage, or worsened Vodafone’s CSR rating / reputation?

Public and media anger was focused on the issue of tax – relating to the fair division of the pie. Whilst this is important, Professor Edmans proposes that it is time to change the thinking about responsible business and move from a “doing no harm” approach to “actively doing good” by growing the pie with socially beneficial projects like M-Pesa.

Professor Edmans then introduced the concept of “pieconomics” where companies seek to create profits only through creating value for society, rather than simply extracting value from other members of society such as employees.

What is the evidence for this? Employee satisfaction studies have shown that over 1984-2011 the “100 Best Companies to Work For in America” beat their peers by 2.3-3.8% / year. Professor Edmans suggested that qualitative factors (such as trust in management, camaraderie etc) are as important as quantitative factors (such as pay and benefits) in successful companies.

For companies, creating stakeholder value is therefore an issue for CEOs, not CSR departments, and for investors, a company’s stakeholder capital is a financial issue for all investors, not a non-financial issue for “socially responsible” investors.

To make decisions under ‘pieconomics’ Professor Edmans cited three principles:

  • Multiplication
  • Comparative advantage
  • Materiality

He focused on materiality. To introduce the topic, he discussed the meaning of purpose. The common perception is that purpose is about altruism and serving society. Some companies have a purpose that aims “to serve customers, workers, suppliers, the environment, and communities while generating a returns to investors.” However, Professor Edmans contends that purpose is about being targeted, focused and deliberate – focusing on the most material stakeholders rather than trying to be all things to all people. Purpose is the answer to the question: “how the world is made a better place by my company being here?”.

The importance of materiality was demonstrated through the work of Khan, Serafeim, and Yoon (2016) who found, through analysing ESG data, that firms that score high on all issues outperform by 1.5% / year, which is statistically insignificant. However, firms that score high on material issues and low on immaterial issues outperform by 4.83% / year. This research highlights the importance of having clarity in purpose.

Professor Edmans then applied the insights to the pandemic. Some companies have responded by splitting the pie differently – giving up profits to pay furloughed workers and or donate products to customers. These actions are laudable, but not every company can split the pie – they may be small companies that don’t have millions to donate, or large companies in unrelated industries. This highlights the importance of viewing responsibility as growing the pie through innovation – for example, a perfume company pivoting to make sanitizer.

To conclude the formal presentation Professor Edmans made a passionate call for to support companies that do no harm AND do good. There is a lot of energy around responsible business and to grow the pie, rather than being viewed as the enemy, investors and profit have the greatest role to play in repurposing businesses and creating a sustainable economy.

The formal presentation was followed by a question and answer session that was moderated by Eva Cairns. Topics covered included:

Professor Edmans motivation for the writing “Grow the Pie”

  • Huge movement against business and view that business not serving wider society
  • Business can be a big force for good so important to work with and not against business
  • Much of the research had already been done so it was timely to write it up

Challenges of change mindsets

  • The pie splitting mentally is engrained in us from childhood (win / lose games). Indeed, one of the most successful manufacturing innovations is Ford’s assembly line, which aimed to extract as much effort as possible from workers
  • Whilst investing in employees reduces short term profit we need to extend the horizon to consider the long term benefits of growing the pie

Role of climate change in responsible business

  • Environmental factors have a weaker link to long-term profit than Social and Governance factors
  • However, investors (such as pension funds) may have goals other than pure profit. Thus, even if combating climate change does not improve profit, even in the long-run, doing so can still be in shareholders’ interest

Surprising results from the book

  • As the book was based on research conducted over the last 13-15 years there were no major surprises
  • The popularity of responsible business means that lots of talking heads now want to write about it, even if they have not conducted rigorous research on this topic. In contrast, the book is based on decades of rigorous research by Professor Edmans and others

Approach to remuneration

  • We need to be careful about linking pay to measuring things like climate impact, gender diversity etc as by focusing on specific outcomes may come at the expense of others
  • It is better to align pay over the long term (5-7 years) to allow companies to best serve society (this can include investing in intangible assets)

Assessing stakeholder value

  • SASB recognises metrics around stakeholder values and launched a Materiality Map that identifies sustainability issues that are likely to affect the financial condition or operating performance of companies within an industry
  • It is important to have boots on the ground as this provides greater context to the measures
  • The Blueprint for Better Business provides 8 questions that should be asked to get beneath the skin of whether a company is genuinely pursuing a purpose beyond profit

Role of Government

  • Requirement to address three sources of market failure:
  1. Lack of competition (employees / customers are locked into purposeless companies)
  2. Lack of information (investors and stakeholders cannot hold firms accountable, e.g. for environmental impact)
  3. Externalities (companies’ impact on society that does not affect profits, even in the long term).

The Friedman Doctrine

  • Friedman’s article, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits” is widely misportrayed. It does not advocate exploiting stakeholders; instead, it stresses that investing in stakeholders can increase long-term profit
  • However, Friedman’s approach to investing in stakeholders is instrumental – you do so only if you can calculate the impact on profits. Pieconomics’ approach is intrinsic – you do so in order to create social value; profits are a by-product

Purpose driving performance mechanism

  • Human capital is the most important asset of the modern firm an a critical success factor to motivate, reward and retain
  • Google provide intrinsic motivation by encouraging employees to spend 20% of their time working on what they think will most benefit Google
  • The profits of responsible businesses systematically beat analyst expectations as they do not incorporate culture measures

Data

  • The 100 Best Companies to Work For was initially published in a book in 1984. In 1998 it was published in Fortune Magazine. If markets were efficient, then the returns to investing in the Best Companies should be lower after 1998, as the information is more public
  • Instead, the returns increased after 1998, suggesting that markets are not efficient – they ignore intangible information. Instead, the increase could be because the world is changing, with human capital particularly important in the 21st century firm

Good media attention

  • There is a tendency to focus on failures, which are commonplace when innovating, and the media thrive on negative stories
  • Instead of “naming and shaming” companies that make mistakes, the media should “name and fame” companies that innovate courageously

Shareholder primacy

  • Many writers on responsible business (e.g. Bower and Paine in the Harvard Business Review) pit businesses against investors. They argue that companies focus too much on shareholder value and that we need to radically reform business away from shareholder primacy. These views are often accepted uncritically given “confirmation bias” – people often like to think that shareholders are greedy terrorists, and pundits who suggest radical changes are seen as revolutionary.
  • However, these views are often not backed up by rigorous research. It is critical to focus on the highest-quality evidence, rather than articles that confirm what we think to be true. Harvard Business Review is a media outlet rather than a research publication; it is not peer-reviewed.
  • A decade of evidence, published in the most stringent academic journals, finds that hedge fund activism increases stock prices in the short AND long term. This was not down to tax savings or cutting wages, but instead increases in productivity and innovation.