Do financiers believe in sustainability or not?
Stay informed with free updates
Just sign up to ESG Investments: MYFT DIGEST – Shipped directly to your inbox.
Don’t let a happy smile face in my photo cheat you. I see my job while losing me so far. Stress on my family. Giving up our London house. To break.
The worst is that mine Herbal word Nearly three years ago, in which I am in the cartoon that climate change is not material for portfolios as other risks such as, you know you know. This is because in the conditions of Donald Trump, the financial sector has ever made one of his most hypocritical actions of apostasy. It seems to believe in stability anymore.
Net-Zero Banking Alliance has lost his smell and emissions targets associated with funding reviseto make a friendly. Meanwhile, good luck to find a portfolio manager that is more likely to invest in environment, social and management. They will be too busy Leaving firm liabilities once deviate from fossil fuel companies.
Such is the loss of their faith that the initiative of zero assets managers “stop.”[ed] his activity “in January. The insurance option is also dead. How did they judge me in 2022 when I wrote on these pages that they had written such initiatives? “CLAPTRAP”A number
Was it just a problem with pragmatism? I was a compassionate. The waking pendulum turned around the other way. Business has always followed the money, especially banks. When I made a lot of responsible investments, after a survey, the survey said that customers walked green. One encounter mothers and institutions wanted to “make good luck”. In 2021, the inflows of stable funds reached $ 645 billion, according to Morningstar’s data, including ESG products. It was a quarter of all influx.
Banks also make everything from green bonds to research, as well as index suppliers, consultants, data analysis firms, etc. Yes, the demand was there. And now it’s not the case. Sustainable inflows last year, for example, were $ 36 billion from $ 1.5TN since $ 1.5TN.
But hang out. Zero zero targets or ESG have never been sold as a shareholder friendly, maximum benefits. If they were fair enough. To them – the world has changed. No they have been marketed as basic beliefs from the beginningA number Stability was one of the main values ​​of each bank. Saving our planet was the purpose of the asset managerA number
Such flaws are never cheek. They were really taken seriously, because such skeptics learned about our expenses. But was everything lying? If not, it is pathetic, how easily the financial industry lost its religion. If they never believed in stability in the first place, we all walk. Who would trust the banker or the Portfolio Manager again?
We don’t even say how potential sales damages are. Therefore, in my opinion, the financial industry has no alternative than to find his faith again. It must quickly remind us of the vital role that plays to make the world a better place.
I still believe in it. So do many othersA number of issues are that stable funding 1.0 was flawless. I will never mind. The important thing is that the bankers who are convincing us have become real. And will be again. Thus, the current feedback is an opportunity to pour the wrong fabrics, improve good bits, at the same time preach the message that funding is good.
Let’s start with banks. If I were a global stability leader, I would compare the shareholders that 80 percent of the world’s energy stems from fossil fuels. You really want the lights to go out. Meaningless funding doesn’t make sense to coal, oil or gas companies. It is better to be involved, helping them transition and promote economic growth to invest in renewable energy.
I also mentioned that half of the greenhouse emissions comes from only 30 companies, and 16 of them are state property. Banks, as well as governments and regulators, must focus their efforts where it calculates. Investors too. But the owners and leaders of the assets must first correct another expensive deviation. How I have previously written, they confuse the investment with trade.
Buy or selling shares in the secondary market does not change in itself any other way. The stock is permanent capital, and the buyer must be a buyer and vice versa for each deviation. To influence the company, you need to have its shares to vote. Exception strategy is thus degenerative. They are also immoral because you force someone else to have your stock exchanges. The only “contribution” to the needle takes place in the primary markets: venture capital, private equity, direct lending, etc., where it is real. Sustainable funding 2.0 must start from here.
And finally, what is ESG? Despite being accused of its deathI’m a fan. Not as a stock collection approach, although it is no less legal than any of the active management forms. It sometimes works, mostly not. Instead, ESG is useful as a “goodness” means Out of risk and returnA number of the above, the regulations are needed here. One unit for one company, no argument. Only then will people know what they are going.
Indeed, without confidence-building funding does not have an opportunity. This means being realistic, honest and pragmatic. Fewer trees hugging, more data and consistent solutions. But the first bankers must prove us to believe that.
English