A recent US SIF Foundation report finds strong growth in "Sustainable" Private Equity, Venture Capital, Property Investment and Hedge Funds.
According to Sustainability Trends in Alternative Investments in the United States, $80.9 billion was invested in 375 alternative investment funds incorporating environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria at the outset of 2011, reflecting a 15.9-percent growth in combined assets since the beginning of 2010...
Read more at US SIF:
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Why some leading companies “get it” while others risk green-wash
Sustainabililty leaders "are starting to go one step further than the rest of the pack, such that their machinery for delivering sustainability is becoming part of the way they do business," according to Mark Line, executive chairman of Two Tomorrows Group.
His company's new report, the Tomorrow’s Value Rating 2011, reveals that there is a danger that leading companies are taking existing practices and passing them under the sustainability lens to give a compelling green picture of the company. That's called greenwashing.
As the report states, companies such as General Electric, Nike, Unilever and Nestle have taken the other approach, making sustainability a core business strategy.
Profit-motivated sustainability efforts are laudable, and produce financial benefits. They fail to enhance the company's brand, however, if they are not perceived to be authentically part of the company's DNA. Today's consumers are highly perceptive. When a firm's environmental PR says one thing but their actions often say another, the program is destined to fall short.
Superior share price performance of carbon leaders shows that investors value full disclosure over hidden problems and environmental responsibility over recklessness. That Fortune magazine's Best Places to Work list has performed twice as well as the broader market, indicates a strong connection between employee satisfaction and customer loyalty.
Companies who embody and communicate a core commitment to these business principles are companies that we are more able to trust -- not to be perfect, but to admit their failings and strive for constant improvement.
Read more at Two Tomorrows
His company's new report, the Tomorrow’s Value Rating 2011, reveals that there is a danger that leading companies are taking existing practices and passing them under the sustainability lens to give a compelling green picture of the company. That's called greenwashing.
As the report states, companies such as General Electric, Nike, Unilever and Nestle have taken the other approach, making sustainability a core business strategy.
Profit-motivated sustainability efforts are laudable, and produce financial benefits. They fail to enhance the company's brand, however, if they are not perceived to be authentically part of the company's DNA. Today's consumers are highly perceptive. When a firm's environmental PR says one thing but their actions often say another, the program is destined to fall short.
Superior share price performance of carbon leaders shows that investors value full disclosure over hidden problems and environmental responsibility over recklessness. That Fortune magazine's Best Places to Work list has performed twice as well as the broader market, indicates a strong connection between employee satisfaction and customer loyalty.
Companies who embody and communicate a core commitment to these business principles are companies that we are more able to trust -- not to be perfect, but to admit their failings and strive for constant improvement.
Read more at Two Tomorrows
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
SRI policies take off at European pension funds
A majority of European corporate pension funds have a socially responsible investment (SRI) policy in place, according to a survey by the European Sustainable Investment Forum (Eurosif).
The survey found 56% of funds have such a policy in place, based on 169 responses from funds in 12 member states. Of the remaining funds, around a quarter expect to put such a policy in place in the next year.
Meanwhile 66% of funds feel that having an SRI policy is part of their fiduciary duty and 60% of funds feel that environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors influence their long-term performance.
Read more at Eurosif
The survey found 56% of funds have such a policy in place, based on 169 responses from funds in 12 member states. Of the remaining funds, around a quarter expect to put such a policy in place in the next year.
Meanwhile 66% of funds feel that having an SRI policy is part of their fiduciary duty and 60% of funds feel that environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors influence their long-term performance.
Read more at Eurosif
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Canada’s tar sands could be banned from Europe
Interesting news for investors and environmentalists: The European Union says crude oil extracted from Alberta’s tar sands should be ranked as a dirtier fuel source than oil tapped from conventional oil wells, a move that could effectively ban the import of the controversial oil.
The European Commission endorsed a measure that would essentially rate fossil fuels based on the CO2 emitted during extraction, refining, and combustion. The EU has proposed that tar sands oil be ascribed a greenhouse gas value of 107 grams per megajoule of fuel, compared with 87.5 grams for ordinary crude oil.
“With today’s proposal we send clear signal: as fossil fuels will be a reality in foreseeable future it's important to give them a right value,” said EU Climate Change commissioner Connie Hedegaard.
Sustainable investors such as Boardwalk Capital have viewed the biggest tar sands companies as a riskier investment proposition in a carbon-constrained future. It is distinctly possible that their reserves need to be substantially discounted, reducing asset values and share prices -- a risk that investors need not bear.
The European Commission endorsed a measure that would essentially rate fossil fuels based on the CO2 emitted during extraction, refining, and combustion. The EU has proposed that tar sands oil be ascribed a greenhouse gas value of 107 grams per megajoule of fuel, compared with 87.5 grams for ordinary crude oil.
“With today’s proposal we send clear signal: as fossil fuels will be a reality in foreseeable future it's important to give them a right value,” said EU Climate Change commissioner Connie Hedegaard.
Sustainable investors such as Boardwalk Capital have viewed the biggest tar sands companies as a riskier investment proposition in a carbon-constrained future. It is distinctly possible that their reserves need to be substantially discounted, reducing asset values and share prices -- a risk that investors need not bear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)