Environmental, social and governance (ESG)

	Website What We Do Who We Are Careers

Become a sponsor »

ESG stands for environment, social, and governance (ESG). A company's ESG profile is created by a company's management and board, and its risks are assessed by investors and other stakeholders, through the company's policies and actions related to conservation of the natural world; to human rights and employee diversity; and to the way it governs itself. While ESG focuses on "non-financial" performance indicators compared to classic investor metrics like profit and earnings-per-share, ESG indicators increasingly have material, financial impact on a company's access to capital, operating costs, and long-term competitive standing.

Inherent in ESG is the concept that investors have a fiduciary duty to integrate financially material factors, including environmental, social and governance factors, according to the UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) Legal Framework for Impact. Meanwhile, the Paris Agreement and UN Sustainable Development Goals have ramped up investor awareness about global sustainability challenges. The Legal Framework for Impact seeks to understand and analyse how investors can manage dual duties (their fiduciary duty and sustainability impact duties) and what happens if they are in conflict.

ESG as a capitalist concept

The need for the ESG investment framework in the financial world arises from evidence that current economic pathways are unsustainable.

ESG is a capitalist concept that reflects the idea that capitalism survives by adapting to the times, according to Paul Clements-Hunt, the former head of UNEP-FI credited with coining the term. The next phase of adaptation requires capitalism to price in the risks that ESG issues represent. Key to this is the idea that “extractive capitalism,” in which growth relies on tapping limited resources, can’t compete with “regenerative capitalism,” which pegs economic success to growth that can be sustained. ESG seeks to preserve profits, make money from renewable energy, and avoid losses from corporate governance lapses. In a Bloomberg article, Clements-Hunt is quoted as saying: “Stripping away the white noise and politics, ESG is simply a way to manage new and evolving risks as a result of policy changes, and mitigate them where you can.”

History

The UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative, or UNEP FI, played a crucial role in popularizing the idea of ESG investing. In 2004, a team headed by Paul Clements-Hunt, known as the Asset Management Working Group (AMWG) of the UNEP FI, set the goal of getting investors and bankers to weigh key risks such as the earth’s rising temperatures, labor disputes and corporate malfeasance, and determine their impact on profits. To achieve this goal, they used the language of the capital markets — risks and opportunities — to pivot away from terms like socially responsible investing.

The team’s original intent was to mobilize the world’s largest investors to act on major global issues. In the early 2000s, niche investment companies, religious organizations and other groups offered “socially responsible investment” options, which oftentimes worked by excluding particular sectors, such as weapons manufacturers, from investment funds. The U.N. team sought to break out of this mindset and attract the attention of institutional investors that control trillions of dollars in assets — and are obligated to prioritize financial returns above all else.

The Asset Management Working Group wanted the world’s largest pension funds to understand that considering companies’ records on — and risk management practices around — environmental, social and governance issues, or ESG, can improve investing, not thwart it. They argued that ignoring biodiversity, human rights abuses, planet-warming emissions, supply chains, labor practices and more created an incomplete and inaccurate investment process.

They were in the minority in this thinking. Mainstream finance firms did not embrace the idea that companies’ performance on social and environmental issues could affect their bottom lines. And pension funds cited concerns that their fiduciary duty legally barred them from considering “nonfinancial” factors while investing. To address those concerns, the UNEP-FI team commissioned two research papers from outside firms.

Industry report on materiality

The first was a 2004 report from analysts — including Goldman Sachs Global Energy Research, HSBC Asset Management and Deutsche Bank Global Equity Research — that made the case that long-term financial returns depend on the “rigorous integration of environmental, social and corporate governance issues” into the investment process. The paper was titled “The Materiality of Social, Environmental and Corporate Governance Issues to Equity Pricing.” This paper is thought by some to be the first time the three words were used together in an official UN publication.

Freshfields report

The second was a 2005 report by law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP, "A Legal Framework For Integrating Environmental, Social And Governance Issues Into Institutional Investment." The report found that “integrating ESG considerations into an investment analysis so as to more reliably predict financial performance is clearly permissible and is arguably required in all jurisdictions.”

Principles for Responsible Investment

Finally, The UN Asset Management Working Group met the challenge of attracting global pension funds to the idea of developing a more sustainable global financial system by developing with industry members six principles for responsible investment (PRI). The Principles for Responsible Investment offer a menu of possible actions for incorporating ESG issues into investment practice.

The Principles for Responsible Investing and ESG were introduced to the financial markets April 26, 2006, when U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan rang the opening bell to start trading on the New York Stock Exchange. At the bell ringing, Annan said the new PRI initiative offers "a path for integrating environmental, social and governance criteria into investment analysis and ownership practices." On that day, the PRI boasted 63 signatories overseeing assets worth $6.5 trillion. In 2021, the respective numbers are 3,826 signatories with $121.3 trillion in collective assets under management.

From the UNPRI Page: The six Principles for Responsible Investment offer a menu of possible actions for incorporating ESG issues into investment practice. Signatories’ commitment: As institutional investors, we have a duty to act in the best long-term interests of our beneficiaries. In this fiduciary role, we believe that environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) issues can affect the performance of investment portfolios (to varying degrees across companies, sectors, regions, asset classes and through time)."

"We also recognise that applying these Principles may better align investors with broader objectives of society. Therefore, where consistent with our fiduciary responsibilities, we commit to the following:"

• Principle 1: We will incorporate ESG issues into investment analysis and decision-making processes.
• "Principle 2: We will be active owners and incorporate ESG issues into our ownership policies and practices.
• "Principle 3: We will seek appropriate disclosure on ESG issues by the entities in which we invest.
• "Principle 4: We will promote acceptance and implementation of the Principles within the investment industry.
• "Principle 5: We will work together to enhance our effectiveness in implementing the Principles.
• "Principle 6: We will each report on our activities and progress towards implementing the Principles.

"In signing the Principles, we as investors publicly commit to adopt and implement them, where consistent with our fiduciary responsibilities. We also commit to evaluate the effectiveness and improve the content of the Principles over time. We believe this will improve our ability to meet commitments to beneficiaries as well as better align our investment activities with the broader interests of society.

We encourage other investors to adopt the Principles.”

Conflating terms: ESG, sustainable development and corporate social responsibilty

In the investment world, terms like ESG, sustainability, sustainable development and corporate social responsibility are sometimes used interchangeably. These terms represent a continuum of thinking and differing outlooks among players with different positions in the financial markets.

An example of this conflation is the confusion about including oil companies in investment indexes. Early sustainability approaches like corporate social responsibility intentionally excluded investment in oil companies. The man credited with coining the term ESG, Clements-Hunt says ESG does not require divesting from industries such as fossil fuels. Carlos Joly, who chaired the United Nations’ Asset Management Working Group for more than a decade, and created one of the first ESG funds in 1996, said no industries were excluded, but only the top third of a specific environmental rating were included, creating a best-in-class portfolio.

In an August 2022 comment letter to Secretary Vanessa A. Countryman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the trade group Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment (US SIF) recommended that the SEC use the term ESG only to refer to the environmental, social and governance factors, saying this would assist end investors who understand what is referenced by the term “sustainable,” but do not understand the term ESG.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015, provides a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet. At its heart are 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are a call for action by all countries in a global partnership. The SDGs recognize that ending poverty and other deprivations go hand-in-hand with strategies that improve health and education, reduce inequality, and spur economic growth – while tackling climate change and working to preserve our oceans and forests.

It builds on early calls to action for sustainable business practices such as a 1987 United Nations report, Our Common Future, now known as the Brundtland Report, named after Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Norwegian Prime Minister and chair of the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. The Brundtland Report defined what is now known as sustainability, concepts from which are now integrated into ESG frameworks. The report posits that global economic development and an increased standard of living cannot occur without a strong, global effort to protect the environment.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is largely an exclusionary process where pioneering investment funds, removed ‘unethical’ firms and funds from portfolios.The UN defines CSR as a management concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and interactions with their stakeholders. It is generally understood as being the way through which a company achieves a balance of economic, environmental and social imperatives known as the “Triple-Bottom-Line-Approach”, while at the same time addressing the expectations of shareholders and stakeholders.

Heightening awareness

Awareness of the importance of ESG in the financial markets gained ground in 2022 and early 2023 at three global events.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP27)

The 27th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) or (COP27) held November 6 through November 20, 2022, in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt. At the onset of COP 27, the report Integrity Matters: Net Zero Commitments By Businesses, Financial Institutions, Cities And Regions, was released by the United Nations’ High-Level Expert Group On The Net Zero Emissions Commitments Of Non-State Entities. A guide to prevent net-zero greenwashing, the report urges near- and medium-term emissions reductions on a path to global net zero by 2050; commitments aligned with actions and investments; transparency in sharing relevant, non-competitive, comparable data on plans and progress; credibility through plans based in science and third-party accountability; and commitment to equity and justice in all actions. On January 24, 2023, New York City Comptroller Brad Lander and three New York City Retirement Systems announced shareholder proposals at Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Royal Bank of Canada calling for the banks to disclose absolute greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets for 2030, saying the shareholder proposals are in line with recommendations outlined in the Integrity Matters report.

UN Biodiversity Conference (COP15)

The 2022 United Nations Biodiversity Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity also known as the UN Biodiversity Conference (COP15) held December 7 through December 19 in Montreal, Canada. On December 19, 2022, nearly 200 nations attending COP15 In Montreal reached an agreement and pledged to protect nearly a third of Earth’s land and oceans as a refuge for remaining wild plants and animals by the end of the decade. The United States was not officially a participant.Some are calling the agreement to jointly safeguard nature, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the "Paris Agreement" for nature.

Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework contains four goals to be achieved by 2030:

• Halt human-induced extinction of species,
• Value, maintain and enhance biodiversity,
• Share the benefits from the utilization of genetic resources,
• Make means of implementing the GBF accessible to developing countries.

World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 23

The World Economic Forum Annual Meeting (WEF), also known as Davos 23, took place January 16 through 20, 2023, in Davos, Switzerland. Citing an overemphasis on measurement, overpromises on goals, and worries about greenwashing, one corporate leader at Davos 2023 gave voice to a common concern for business leaders about the term ESG, saying he wished the term "just goes away."

Challenges of ESG classifications

The CFA Institute, which awards the professional designation of Chartered Financial Analyst, points out the lack of definitive taxonomy, or classification, of ESG factors. Because ESG factors might be interlinked, classification of an issue as being solely an environmental, social, or governance issue can be difficult. For instance, it might be easy to measure employee turnover at a company, but challenging to assign a monetary value to the cost of the turnover. This is true for each of the ESG categories.

Materiality and double materiality

Materiality is an accounting principle that has become increasingly important in sustainability reporting for businesses. Items likely to impact investors’ decision-making are deemed material, and must be included in detail in a business’s financial statements using GAAP standards. The Securities and Exchange Commission defines material as "those matters to which there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would attach importance in determining whether to purchase the security registered."

As new accounting standards are being developed to better measure material information related to sustainability, the concept of materiality itself is being debated. Material items can be financial or non-financial. Ultimately, the type of information that’s material to an organization’s financial statements will vary and depend on the size, scope, and business priorities of the firm.

Double materiality considers both financial and non-financial impacts as important in determining whether to purchase the security. Double materiality acknowledges that a company's non-financial impact on the world can be material, and worth disclosing, for reasons beyond its financial implications. This includes the impact of a firm's activities on human rights, climate change, and other environmental factors.

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) says impact materiality involves information used to qualify "the reporting company's impact on the economy, environment and people for the benefit of multiple stakeholders, such as investors, employees, customers, suppliers, and local communities." Impact Materiality is an analysis of how business operations affect people (workers and society) and the environment. Impacts can be directly or indirectly linked to a business's operations, as a company's value chain is considered during analysis, not just the entity itself. The argument in favor of impact materiality is that non-financial impacts will, over time, become financially material.

Environmental

In the environmental realm, climate change is causing heat waves, rising sea levels, forest fires, hurricanes and other calamities. The environmental portion of ESG considers a business’s performance as a steward of the physical environment. The CFA Institute categorizes "Environmental" as being: Conservation of the natural world. It includes:

• Climate change and carbon emissions
• Air and water pollution
• Biodiversity
• Deforestation
• Energy efficiency
• Waste management
• Water scarcity

Social

In the social realms, a business that falls short on standards related to human rights, gender diversity and labor needs faces protests that will capture the attention of investors and the general public. The social part of ESG, therefore, looks at the behavior of the business as a global citizen. The CFA Institute categorizes "Social" as being: Consideration of people and relationships, including:

• Customer satisfaction
• Data protection and privacy
• Gender and diversity
• Employee engagement
• Community relations
• Human rights
• Labor standards

Governance

Governance looks at the way businesses govern themselves – everything from board composition to executive compensation to lobbying. The CFA Institute categorizes "Governance" as being: Standards for running a company, including:

• Board composition
• Audit committee structure
• Bribery and corruption
• Executive compensation
• Lobbying
• Political contributions
• Whistleblower schemes

Role of regulation in ESG

One important distinction between ESG and sustainability frameworks is that ESG frameworks are based on standards set by lawmakers, investors, and reporting organizations while sustainability standards are usually science-based. The goal of ESG standards is to encourage businesses to transition into models that operate sustainably, are socially responsible, and are managed in an inclusive and honest manner. The challenge in this transition is to understand how to encourage the players in the financial systems to adapt more sustainable and just business models while fostering continued economic growth.

Emerging to address this challenge are governmental regulations and standards-setting groups.

Regulation in the United States

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) created the Climate and ESG Task Force on March 4, 2021 to identify ESG related misconduct.

In 2022, the SEC proposed two sets of ESG rules. The first, proposed on March 21, 2022, would require mandatory climate risk disclosures by all public companies in their SEC filings. The second set, which was announced on May 25, 2022, would curb the practice of "greenwashing," and would add amendments to rules and reporting forms that apply to registered investment companies and advisers, advisers exempt from registration, and business development companies. These rules could possibly be finalized in 2022.

A special role in carbon markets

In September 2020, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission released a report, “Managing Climate Risk in the US Financial System." In this, the CFTC notes the key role of the derivatives markets in providing risk mitigation instruments. Non-binding recommendations include:

• That the US establish a price on carbon;
• That financial regulators should include climate-related risks in their monitoring and oversight activities;
• That regulators pilot climate-risk stress-testing; and
• That material climate risks be disclosed.

Enforcement actions by the SEC

In early 2022, the SEC took two enforcement actions related to ESG disclosure. On April 28, 2022, the SEC’s action against Vale S.A., a Brazilian mining company, alleged that Vale made false and misleading claims about the safety of its dams before its Brumadinho dam collapsed, killing 270 people and causing more than a $40 billion loss in Vale's market capitalization. On May 23, 2022, SEC took enforcement action against BNY Mellon Investment Advisors, finding that company statements implied funds had undergone an ESG quality review, even though that was not always the case. BNY Mellon agreed to pay a $1.5 million penalty.

EU and global regulations

In March 2021, the European Union instituted rules known as the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) that require more stringent ESG disclosure and reporting requirements for financial services participants, including investment firms and fund managers.

The new ESG rules apply to all asset managers that raise money in the EU, wherever their companies are based, from March 10, 2021. According to an analysis published by the National Law Review, the SFDR has significance at both the firm and product level. The rules require asset managers to disclose how sustainability risks are incorporated in their decision making, disclose the "principal adverse impact" of investments on external sustainability factors, and make product-level disclosures when they have ESG as a stated objective.

On July 25, 2022, Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) were published in the Official Journal with no material changes. This means from January 1, 2023, onward, financial market participants will be subject to the provisions under the SFDR and Taxonomy Regulation which are already in force.

On July 28, 2022, the Joint Committee of the three European supervisory authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA – ESAs) published its first annual report on the extent of voluntary disclosure of principal adverse impact under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation. The report found that compliance with voluntary disclosures varied significantly and in general the first disclosures were not very detailed. There was a low level of disclosure related to alignment with the Paris Agreement and when offered, disclosure was vague. Financial market participants in general did not disclose details required to explain why they did not take into account the adverse impact of their investment decisions.

Evolution of standards

As clear laws and regulatory requirements are emerging, third party standards bodies provide recommendations, frameworks, and suggested metrics for reporting and disclosure. In 2020, major players came together to create a unified framework and prototype for global financial reporting, and in turn the Value Reporting Foundation (VRF) was created. The VRF, which includes the boards for the International Integrated Reporting Framework and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board, was consolidated into the IFRS Foundation August 1, 2022. The IFRS Foundation is now charged with developing IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards.

Stock exchanges and ESG

Stock exchanges have an important role in promoting the transition of businesses into models that operate sustainably, are socially responsible, and are managed in an inclusive and honest manner. Research by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNCTAD and World Federation of Exchanges WFE identified main mechanisms through which stock exchanges can contribute to development. Two of these are mobilizing resources for sustainable economic growth and development and promoting good governance in business practices. Chief among these is offering small and medium companies access to finance.

To facilitate an active role for stock exchanges in the ESG transition, the UN Sustainable Stock Exchange (SSE) initiative was created in November 2009. A UN Partnership with several organizations, the SSE initiative provides a global platform for exploring how exchanges, in collaboration with investors, companies, regulators, policymakers and international organizations can encourage sustainable investment. As of July 2022, 116 stock exchanges belonged to the UN SSE.

Derivatives exchanges and ESG

The role of derivatives exchanges in this complex financial landscape is just emerging. The risk management products and forward price discovery that derivatives exchanges bring to the table could allow cost efficiencies and facilitate greater ease into this transition to a more sustainable future..

On June 1, 2022, FIA President and CEO Walt Lukken discussed how the futures industry markets can be a helpful tool for meeting the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement in 2050, as well as how the history of the futures industry in the carbon markets illustrates the potential of the futures markets to address climate issues in an interview on SSE TV.

FIA's Lukken discusses role of derivatives markets in meeting sustainability goals: An interview with SSE TV focuses on carbon markets and risk-management

Steven Kennedy, global head of public policy at the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), discussed the role of derivatives markets in the transition to a green economy in a February 2021 video.

The paper, "How Derivatives Exchanges Can Promote Sustainable Development – An Action Menu," was published in 2021 by the SSE. Julie Winkler, Chief Commercial Officer, CME Group, and Owain Johnson, Global Head of Research, CME Group and Vice-Chair of the WFE’s Sustainability Working Group, chaired the Derivatives Advisory Group that included derivatives exchanges around the globe and the World Federation of Exchanges (WFE).

Derivatives exchanges are part of a broader ecosystem that makes the market function. The participants in this ecosystem are: the central counterparty (CCP), the brokers, and the clearing members. When discussing commodities markets, warehouse operators are essential. Price reporting agencies (PRAs), index operators, independent software vendors (ISVs) and data providers round out the ecosystem. . All these participants could have a role to play in the derivatives market transition to ESG.

Sustainable Trading, a membership group dedicated to transforming ESG practices within the financial services industry, launched on Feb. 22, 2022. Those engaged in trading or providing trading-related services can join as members.

Exchange-traded ESG market

It is challenging to estimate the scope of the ESG market. In 2022, US SIF modified its methodology and changed asset manager reporting as well. Sustainable investment AUM became $8.4 trillion, significantly lower than in past years. In 2022, Bloomberg Intelligence and GSIA estimated the global ESG market for all ESG assets at around $40 trillion, and see it rising to $50 trillion by 2025. Investment research firm Morningstar says the figure for ESG funds is just $2.7 trillion. The number of financial products tied to ESG investment strategies has grown steadily in recent years.

The sustainable funds landscape in the United States grew in 2021, Morningstar research found. At year end 2021, investors added nearly $70 billion into open-end and exchange-traded funds. During the same period, the number of sustainable open-end funds and ETFs available to U.S. investors had risen to 534, with more than $350 billion in assets. In 2021, 121 new funds launched and 26 existing funds took on a sustainable investment mandate. At year-end 2021, U.S. investors had 5 times as many sustainable funds available to choose from vs. a decade ago, and 3 times more than five years ago.

While ESG investments took hold in Europe earlier than in the United States, in part because of the EU's goal to be carbon neutral by 2050 ("The European Green Deal"), ESG-related investing had gained ground in the U.S. at year end 2020. That year, the number of sustainable open-end funds and ETFs available to U.S. investors rose to 392, up 30 percent from 2019 and nearly a fourfold increase over the past 10 years, Morningstar said.

ESG index derivatives

Institutional investors hedge price risks in their equity portfolios using index derivatives. ESG index derivatives are used in the same way but they are tied to an ESG index, targeting investors who have an ESG mandate or preference. The first ESG index was the Domini 400 Social Index, created in 1990. The number of ESG Indexes has grown to more than 1,000 as of August 2022..

How exchanges are addressing ESG

The first ESG index (the Domini 400 Social Index) was created in 1990. Since then, data availability, technological advances and increased investor demand have spurred growth in the numbers of indices to more than one thousand, with new indices being introduced on a regular basis. Companies in markets from around the world are included in these indices, which all take different approaches, some screening out companies with negative factors and others including only those companies following ESG best practices, for example. In 2018, several exchanges including Cboe, CME, Euronext, ICE and Nasdaq responded to investor demand for ESG-adjusted index products by launching futures and options on indices.

In the listed derivatives space, Eurex was the first exchange to establish a successful suite of ESG futures contracts, STOXX® Europe 600 ESG-X Index Futures (FSEG), EURO STOXX 50® Low Carbon Index Futures (FSLC) and STOXX® Europe Climate Impact Index Futures (FSCI). Introduced in February 2019, its ESG Index futures track a group of companies that are filtered to meet ESG criteria. The STOXX® Europe 600 ESG-X Index Futures are based on socially responsible investment criteria. The EURO STOXX 50® Low Carbon Index Futures are based on a benchmark index which includes lower carbon emitting companies. And the STOXX® Europe Climate Impact Index Futures are based on an index of companies adhering to Climate Disclosure Project guidelines and excludes companies in tobacco and weapons manufacturing. In its first six months of trading, the ESG futures suite traded 243,000 contracts with an open interest value of EUR 786 million.

In 2022, Eurex ESG derivatives offered 34 ESG products, of which 32 cover equity indices. The total volume of Eurex's ESG derivatives across equity index and fixed income totals exceeded 35 EUR billion in 2022. At the end of July 2022, total open interest stood at 4 billion EUR and 1.2 billion EUR, respectively. Traded contracts in 2022 reached over 1.6 million contracts. This amounts to an overall Average Daily Volume (ADV) of EUR 237 million. Eurex's most successful segment remains the STOXX Europe ESG-X Index family, which reached a combined ADV of 8k lots in 2022, equivalent to 123 million EUR notional. ESG exclusionary methodologies have dominated the segment.

Investor voting for environmental and social resolutions

In a report, shareholder advocacy group ShareAction looked at how 68 of the world’s largest asset managers voted on 252 shareholder resolutions to address environmental and social issues. It found that that BlackRock, Vanguard Group, Fidelity Investments and State Street Global Advisors - the four largest asset managers - supported only 20 per cent of resolutions, compared to 32 per cent in 2021. It also said that commitment from the US and UK is weak compared with 66% overall support for environmental and social resolutions from the rest of the asset management community. European asset managers back 81% of these proposals on average, up from 69% in 2021. The exchange, Euronext, explained the gap, saying that in Europe clients expect, and climate and reporting rules require, asset managers to report on their shareholder engagement strategies.