Category Archives: Corporate Sustainability

U.S. Large Cap ESG Progress – Barron’s Magazine Reports the Good News

Posted on by
Reply


March 8, 2023 – by Hank Boerner – Chair and Chief Strategist, G&A Institute

Literally hundreds of thousands of loyal readers closely follow the content of Barron’s magazine, sister publication to The Wall Street Journal — because Barron’s is an important investor-focused publication reaching almost a half-million subscribers each week with keen interest in content about the capital markets.

Six years ago, Barron’s began to focus more intently on ESG and sustainable investment topics.  That was an important signal of the importance of ESG information to capital markets players and a wide range of investors. 

Each year since Barron’s has analyzed the largest U.S. publicly-traded companies and publishes its “100 Most Sustainable U.S. Companies” ranking.

The rankings are done in collaboration with Calvert Research and Management, a major asset manager and mutual fund advisory company that has been focused on sustainable investing for many years.

This year’s results are out; the methodology to rank the 100 most sustainable companies includes:

• Calvert starts with the largest 1,000 publicly-traded U.S. companies by market cap.

• Calvert researchers apply more than 230 ESG performance indicators for these companies using data from seven rating companies, including MSCI, ISS, and Sustainalytics, along with other data and Calvert’s internal research.

• The data is organized into 28 key topics sorted into five categories based on major stakeholder constituencies (Shareholders, Employees, Customers, Community, the Planet). For example, key topics for shareholders included board structure and exec compensation, while key topics for the planet included GHG emissions and water stress.

• Calvert assigned a score of zero to 100 in each category based on company performance and then created a weighted average based on how financially material the category was for that company’s industry. Poor performance by a company in any of the key categories that was financially material would be automatically disqualifying.

The featured story is edited by Lauren Foster, who writes: “ESG may sound like a meaningless acronym. To some politicians, it’s nothing less than a threat to American capitalism, and it needs to be reined in.”

The story goes on to punch holes in the Republican-led arguments that ESG is a threat to capitalism, or to state employee pension funds, or to investing in general.

Barron’s notes for its investment readers that 63 of the 100 ranked companies outperformed the S&P 500 Index® last year and the list overall outperformed the broad index, delivering a negative 9.5% return in 2022 vs a negative 18.1% for the entire S&P 500 Index.

This is an important feature story you will want to read and share with colleagues. The G&A team is pleased and proud to say that a number of our valued clients appeared on the 2022 list, including some for the first time. Onward, sustainable companies, and upward ESG investing!


Top Story:

• https://www.barrons.com/articles/most-sustainable-esg-us-companies-1b5f70fd?mod=Searchresults

Finding a Way Forward So ESG Advocates and Critics Can Get On the Same Page

Posted on by
Reply

March 3, 2023

By Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist, G&A Institute

Woke! Woke!  And Anti-Woke!  The word is now an important part of the political and cultural conversation in such states as Florida, where it is becoming a vigorous political campaign cry.  Woke comes to Florida to die, the present governor eagerly proclaims. 

Where did the expression “woke” come from? Wikipedia offers us this explanation: “Woke is an adjective from African-American Vernacular English meaning [being] alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.”

Think about the impact of the tragedies of the George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Trye Nichols deaths and the founding of Black Lives Matter as importance pieces of the “alerts” to the Black communities across America. But woke moved to the mainstream as well. 

As the use of the term spread to a broader range of topic areas, we could say that more of the population is being “woke” — what this really is about is being “awakened” and “alert” to changes in certain areas of interest and importance in our business and personal lives.

Such as (one example) as the importance of ESG issues to asset managers and corporate leadership.  

Now, unbelievably, embrace of ESG in Corporate America and the financial markets is a “woke” thing  – something to be feared, says the governor of the Sunshine State.

The increasing awareness of the importance of ESG material issues accounts for the shift in focus beyond just the reported financial results by fiduciaries to consider an ever-widening range of corporate governance, environmental and societal issues. (Of course now including diversity, inclusion, equitable treatment for all stakeholders.)

Consideration of ESG is now a fundamental part of asset management and fiduciary duties in the U.S. and in Europe.  But — there is growing opposition to the success of sustainable investors (like asset managers embracing ESG.)  Really. 

We’ve been sharing news and perspectives about ESG and woke and the attacks by certain Red states attacks on both ESG and woke; these are strawmen for public sector leaders who now target and punish those asset managers adopting ESG analysis and methodologies in their management of clients’ assets.  

The issue now is front and center in the halls of Congress as well. 

The encouraging news there is that state pension fund managers are pushing back, recognizing that in their states ignoring ESG issues will cost their fund (with lower returns on investment). 

In the Harvard Business Review, Two authors put many of the issues in perspective for us as they offer possible solutions to rescue ESG from the Culture Wars. They are well versed in the many aspects of ESG, sustainable investing, and corporate sustainability.

One is former Harvard B-school professor Robert Eccles (now visiting professor of management practice at Said Business School, and a lifelong Democrat) and, Daniel Crowley, a long-time GOP leader who served as general counsel to House Speaker Newt Gingrich and who now leads the global financial services practice as K&L Gates LLP.

Bob Eccles is a founder of the Sustainable Accounting Standards Board (SASB); Daniel Crowley lead government relations efforts at the Nasdaq Stock Exchange and National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD). They speak about ESG from a deep and varied background in financial, business, research, and public policy.

A few highlights of their shared perspectives in the HBR piece:

• The planned congressional hearings on ESG presents opportunity to put facts on the record and begin the process of working toward a bipartisan consensus to take the “political passion” out of ESG discussions. (The 2024 president and congressional contests are just getting underway.)

• The key will be to bring ESG definitions back to an original intention, “as a means for helping companies identify and communicate to investors the material, long-term risks they face from ESG-related issues”.

• Climate change is such a risk; fossil fuel companies for whom future revenues would be greatly reduced if governments start to tax carbon.

• For capital markets to properly allocate capital, investors need companies to disclose material investment risks. ESG, they write, is simply about identifying material risk factors that matter.

• The coming House hearings on ESG could be political theater — or a learning opportunity to clarify what ESG is/isn’t.

This HBR feature article is compelling reading for those on both sides of the ESG equation, for both ESG advocates and critics. Framing the hearings as explorations of not about being “woke” but on the importance of materiality is the way forward, the authors posit.

We urge your reading and sharing of Bob Eccles’ and Daniel Crowley’s enlightening perspectives.

It is unfortunate that the U.S. Culture Wars now drag anti-ESG views into the vital conversations and political theater about addressing the climate change crisis.

The team at G&A Institute will continue to monitor and share top-line results with you as these vital conversations (and shouting matches) focus on the importance of ESG. 


The Harvard Business Review article for your reading – tune in to the “hopes” and solutions of the authors:

Rescuing ESG from the Culture Wars (Harvard Business Review)

https://hbr.org/2023/02/rescuing-esg-from-the-culture-wars


Beware, The Culture Warriors Have New Strawmen: Dangers of “ESG” and “Woke Capitalism”

Posted on by
Reply

End of February 2023

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

New threats to ESG detected in America’s Red-controlled states:  The internal culture wars now include an unlikely frontal assault on the alleged “dangers” posed to institutional investors (state and city pension funds and the states; public financing) by professional asset managers who embrace sustainable investing approaches and who factor ESG analysis for their portfolio decision-making (in the management of client assets).  

Corporate sustainability leaders and savvy investment managers are asking, “huh?  “why”?

The threat of “ESG” joins such current strawmen as Critical Race Theory, “Woke” Capitalism, Don’t Say Gay (in the State of Florida), the allegations of certain “grooming” books being found in school libraries, and other specious arguments set up by political conservatives and Red state public sector leaders to gain points with the Republican base.  And with right-wing media outlets. 

The assault on ESG is mainly focused on the prominent asset management firms that serve state and city public employee pension plans and healthcare plans. These asset management firms are told to abandon ESG principles (and their focus on the risks brought by the climate change crisis to investments) and related portfolio management approaches — or lose the state and/or city investment and capital raising client.

Political leaders in such states as Florida, Texas, West Virginia, Louisiana, and Missouri are openly opposed to “woke capitalism” as they see it and have targeted BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard, and other large asset management firms embracing sustainable investment.  (Consider that these three organizations have significant levels of investments in many publicly-traded companies.)

The leading ESG ratings firms are also in the cross hairs; 20-plus Republican state attorneys general also challenged ISS and Glass Lewis as both advisory firms expanded their traditional governance work to including “S” and “E” issues through a more comprehensive ESG lens. (These firms advise and provide services to public sector pension plans.)

Some Red state leaders are cutting ties with BlackRock and other firms and moving to prohibit the Wall Street organizations from management of state monies (such as their public employee pension systems).

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink fired back at the annual Davos gathering to say that his firm, while losing about $4 billion in the public sector pullback of funds to be managed, has seen the flow of new money into BlackRock to manage dwarfing that – new funds to be managed by BlackRock topped $200 billion in year 2022, he told the Davos crowd.

In his annual letter to corporate CEOs, Larry Fink wrote in 2022 that “stakeholder capitalism is not about politics, it is not ‘woke’, it is capitalism….” Helping clients transition their investments toward a lower-carbon economy is helping BlackRock (with $9 trillion-plus AUM) to attract new assets to manage, CEO Fink explained.

The underlying concern of the Red state officials is really about protecting fossil fuels interests  – like their home states” oil, natural gas, and coal assets. Texas and Louisiana economics are heavily dependent on production of fossil fuels and that no doubt leads to  the political opposition to ESG and minimizing recognition of the dangers posed by the climate crisis.

While BlackRock and other asset managers may not yet eliminating fossil fuels from the assets managed, or in products offered to investors, there is trimming going on (at other major asset management firms and in a number of state investment funds).  There is also pressure being applied to traditional oil & gas firms to innovate and invest in renewable energy production. 

Consider:  in 2022, renewable sources accounted for 22 percent of energy production while coal accounted for 20%. 

Responding to the misguided opposition to ESG in nine states, Democrats in the House of Representatives formed a sustainable investment caucus to advocate for ESG policies and actions.

Said caucus chair Sean Casten of Illinois to The Hill editors: “Given the significant growth of AUM in funds that prioritize ESG factors, Congress has a duty to craft policies that provide investor protection and transparency ofd information to market participants.”

In an opposition move, House Republicans at month’s end moved to block the Biden Administration action on “allowing” pension plan administrator’s to consider ESG factors in their management of fiduciary funds.  The Republicans passed a resolution that would reverse the U.S. Labor Department rule that allows such consideration.  

This is a see-saw event; depending on which party is in the White House, under ERISA rules, fund managers have been allowed to consider ESG/and prevented from using ESG considerations in fund management.  

The House Republicans claim that using ESG would results in higher fees for “less-diversified” investments in “lower-performing” fund portfolios. (Read:  less fossil fuel investments in sustainable funds.)  

The Securities & Exchange Commission has a rule under consideration to mandate disclosure of GHG emissions by publicly-traded companies. It is expected that the Final Rule could be issued sometime in Q1 2023.

This move no doubt will set off a firestorm in Red state territory, and among the congressional delegations from those states. For public companies operating in those states that have, with sizeable operations in the European Union, new ESG disclosure rules are also being put in place in the EU.  

This year we will see significant conflict in the culture wars over climate change measures at the national, state and even city levels. 

The Federal government leads now in addressing the climate crisis, and Red state congressional leaders could challenge to the SEC’s legislative authority (to enact corporate ESG disclosure rules) when the Final Rule is issued (bringing legislative and judicial action).

The G&A team selected the Top Stories (below) on these conflicts.  We’ll keep you updated throughout 2023 on the culture war battles focused on climate change.

We are at an important inflection point in the effort to seriously address the climate crisis, and in ultra-partisan power circles now, the question posed is: which side are you on?

Top Story/Stories

• This group is sharpening the GOP attack on ‘woke’ Wall Street (The Washington Post) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/01/30/climate-change-sustainable-investing/
• House Democrats launch sustainable investing caucus (The Hill)  https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/3830314-house-democrats-launch-sustainable-investing-caucus/
• Disclosure Rules On Track for Issuance by June (Thomson Reuters) https://tax.thomsonreuters.com/news/new-climate-and-sustainability-disclosure-rules-on-track-for-issuance-by-june/
• Politicians Want to Keep Money Out of E.S.G. Funds. Could It Backfire? (The New York Times – subscription required)  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/30/your-money/red-states-esg-funds-blackrock.html
• What’s Behind The ESG Investment Backlash (Forbes)  https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinero/2023/01/29/whats-behind-the-esg-investment-backlash/?sh=5929816c3158
• Davos 2023: BlackRock U.S. inflows dwarf $4 bln lost in ESG backlash -CEO (Reuters)  https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/davos-2023-blackrock-us-inflows-dwarf-4-bln-lost-esg-backlash-ceo-2023-01-17/

It’s 2023 – What Will We See in Climate Crisis Action in the Public Sector? Stay Tuned!

Posted on by
Reply

January 2023

by Hank Boerner – Chair and Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

Here we are weeks into Year 2023 – and so as we plunge into the new year, we could ask, what is in store for public sector action to address critical climate change challenges?

To remind us, we are now in year three of the Biden-Harris Administration’s “Whole of Government” strategies (they took office January 2021).

Upon settling in the Oval Office President Joseph Biden quickly returned to the historic Paris Agreement that was abandoned by his predecessor.

In just a few more days, the president’s Executive Order (issued January 27 2021) created a sweeping approach to aligning Federal government strategies, action, finances and more — formalized in an Executive Order titled, “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad”.

Main sections with volumes of details for actions included:

• “Putting the Climate Crisis at the Center of US Foreign Policy and National Security”;
• “Taking a Government-Wide Approach to the Climate Crisis;
• “Use of the Federal Government Buying Power and Real Property and Asset Management”;
• “Empowering Workers Through Rebuilding Our Infrastructure for a Sustainable Economy”;
• “Empowering Workers by Advancing Conservation, Agriculture, and Reforestation”;
• “Empowering Workers Through Vitalizing Energy Communities”;
• “Securing Environmental Justice and Spurring Economic Opportunity”.

The introduction to this sweeping Executive Order stated: “The U.S. and the world face a profound climate crisis. We have a narrow moment to pursue action at home and abroad in order to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of that crisis and to seize the opportunity that tackling climate change presents.”

President Biden enlisted all of the cabinet agencies and many important organs of the Federal government in the effort, and instructed that “the buying power of Federal procurement and real property, public lands and waters, and financial programs” be aligned to support robust climate action. 

Keep in mind the Federal government of the United States of America is the largest buyers of goods & services in the nation.  Just think about all of the government vehicles on the road today – and the EV’s that could replace them.  And the many buildings that the Federal agencies lease, rent or own.  (These will have to meet new climate resilience measures.)  Think about the huge purchases by the Department of Defense.  And on and on!

The President explained in 2021:  An “immediate, clear, and stable source of product demand, increased transparency and data, and robust standards for the market…will help to catalyze private sector investment into, and accelerate the advancement of America’s industrial capacity to supply, domestic energy, buildings, vehicles, and other [necessary] products and materials.”  The stuff of the American nation’s sustainability efforts. 

The power and prestige of the United States would be a priority in relations with other nations and such multilateral organizations as the G7, the G20, and other forums on climate change actions. In focus: clean energy, aviation, shipping, the oceans, the Arctic, sustainable development, and migration (a 2023 critical issue for sure).

How are we doing?  We’ve selected for you a few timely updates on “how we’re doing” with the very comprehensive Biden climate crisis plan.

The recent storms battering California, the Heartland states, and coastal areas, are constant reminders of how serious the climate crisis has become. Snow, volumes of rainfall, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes (cyclones), high winds, fires and more fires — all signs the climate is changing (for the worse). 

We are seeing public sector action increasing along the same lines on the European continent as well, and European Union climate change actions that will affect many U.S. multinational companies,

As we think about all of this, despite political pushback in 2032 we should not lose sight the sweep of the January 2021 Executive Order issued as the very first days of the Biden Administration.

Here’s the document for you: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/27/executive-order-on-tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad/

And here is a brief example of the kinds of follow up f- rom July 2021:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/07/20/fact-sheetpresident-bidens-executive-actions-on-climate-to-address-extreme-heat-and-boost-offshore-wind/

Top Stories – Focus on the U.S.

Biden-Harris administration releases first-ever blueprint to decarbonize America’s transportation sector (US Department of Transportation)

What to expect on climate change from the New US Congress (Brookings Institution)

Inflation Reduction Act will see US get serious on climate action in 2023 (New Scientist)

Davos 2023: EU to counter U.S. climate game changer with own green deal (Reuters)


Here’s the Details on USA Corporate ESG Reporting Trends

Posted on by
Reply

December 1, 2022

by Hank Boerner – Chair and Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

In the early issues of our company’s newsletter (G&A Institute’s Sustainability Updates) more than a decade back, we had a feature that seems quaint today: we published the list of U.S. corporate ESG reports that we had found in manual searching for that issue.

The reports we “captured” required considerable time and effort to find.

You see, most companies would publish their “corporate social responsibility”, “corporate environmental”, and (a few) “sustainability” reports with no fanfare, no announcement, no call to readers to come look at the report.

And so we had to look here, there and everywhere to find a new corporate report to share with our newsletter readers.

The percentage of reports published compared to the total universe of large caps that could have published reports was tiny – very tiny, indeed.

But we noticed in our constant monitoring that the number of such reports published by U.S. headquartered companies while small was steadily increasing.

We wondered then, what was happening in the universe of S&P 500 Index© firms, representing a huge part of the available equity investments on stock exchanges.  The S&P benchmark represented more than 80 percent of large-cap publicly=traded companies (to invite in). 

In those early days of what is now ESG reporting the European peers of U.S. companies published many more reports – so when a US company published a report, that was news we wanted to share!

We began a thorough examination of U.S. corporate ESG disclosure, looking at calendar year 2010 reporting to share in our first trends reports that we published in 2011. We found that just under 20% of U.S. firms included in the S&P 500 Index had published a report. That was encouraging, right?  A good sign for the future!

The following year (for our trends report of 2012, for 2011 corporate reporting) we were quite surprised to find that now more than half of the S&P 500 firms were publishing reports. And that volume rapidly increased to almost three-quarters of the firms by the next trends report (in 2013 for 2012 reporting).

And soon enough we were at nine-out-ten of the index companies were publishing ESG reports (far too many to list in the newsletter!).

Many readers of the annual trends report began to regularly ask us about the reporting activities of the next batch of publicly-traded companies large caps – those companies included in the Russell 1000 Index®.

We expanded the S&P 500 research four years ago to all of the R-1000 companies. Over the years we’ve seen U.S. corporate ESG/sustainability reporting become more sophisticated, more in-depth, and the content more valuable to stakeholders seeking ESG data sets and other information.

Today we devote many months of the year to in-depth research and analysis on corporate ESG reporting for these trends reports. This has become our signature research effort.

A talented team of G&A team members work with a highly-qualified team of analyst-interns (most of them participating in Master’s degree studies in sustainability topics) who scour corporate reports for details that we share in the trends report. You’ll see their names and backgrounds in the trends report.

From the beginning of this exercise in 2010 we have invited the best-of-the best of advanced sustainability academicians to be part of the journey. (We started with two outstanding analyst-interns that year for the first trends report – Dr. Michelle Thompson and Natalia Valencia).

Over the following years we’ve had an outstanding team each year to develop the contents of the trend report – and they’ve gone on from G&A internships to great careers in various sectors, we’re proud to say.

We always made the trends report available to all (at no cost) in the belief that the more information and intelligence on corporate ESG reporting that is available the more that stakeholders will use the information — and pass on their expectations to companies to provide more details in their periodic ESG disclosures.

That has worked, we’re told by a number of experts, to help encourage still more ESG disclosures by U.S. companies and to encourage asset owners and managers to look closely at the data and narratives disclosed by publicly-traded enterprises.

Over time, the content examined and data/narrative captured has become a powerful resource for the G&A team as they assist publicly-traded and privately managed firms with their ESG disclosure and reporting.

We have more to say about the trends report project in the 2022 edition.for 2021 reporting).  Here’s the link to the Trends report if you have not read it yet: https://www.ga-institute.com/research/ga-research-directory/sustainability-reporting-trends/2022-sustainability-reporting-in-focus.html

Our Honor Roll of present and past analyst-interns is here: https://www.ga-institute.com/about/careers/internship-honor-roll.html

COP 27 in Egypt: The United States Got Back To the Table

Posted on by
Reply

November 2022

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist – G&A Institute

The top stories in ESG and sustainability in November included the coverage of the annual global climate meetings that took place in Egypt – COP 27 (the Conference of Parties), convened by the United Nations.

These meetings of about 200 sovereign nations’ leaders and other global influentials began in Rio de Janiero in 1992 (President George H.W. Bush was in his last year in office).

The position of the United States in the global talks (and the agreements that result) have see-sawed over the years in terms of staying at the table, and exerting leadership or not. The welcome news for 2022 is that the U.S. is back at the table. And at least for now, attempting to lead. 

This year’s meetings saw President Joseph Biden drop in to address the gathering. ormer Secretary of State John Kerry, now the U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, appeared to be playing a much more visible role than was the case during prior years (during when the Trump Administration was in charge and moving away from the COP talks and the Paris Agreement of 2015).  

It is fitting for the United States of America attempting to lead in the global efforts to address climate changes and the challenges posed  — the U.S. is the world’s largest economy and the second largest emitter of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Use of oil and natural gas define the American economy and the culture of the nation.  The US is a major producer of and user of fossil fuel products. 

In his remarks at COP 27, President Biden “reclaimed” the country’s role as global leader in climate change actions and committed to help to address global warming at home and abroad.

The Biden Administration’s “Whole of Government” comprehensive approach to climate change was the centerpiece of his commentary to the gathered at COP 27.

Emphasizing the U.S. commitment to address climate change, President Biden told the summit participants: “I introduced the first piece of climate legislation in the United States Senate way back in 1986, 36 years ago. My commitment to this issue has been unwavering.

“And today, finally, thanks to the actions we’ve taken, I can stand here as President of the United States of America and say with confidence: The United States of America will meet our emissions targets by 2030. We are racing forward to do our part to avert the ‘climate hell’ that the U.N. Secretary-General so passionately warned about earlier this week. We’re not ignoring the harbingers that are already here.”

For domestic U.S. audiences, President Biden had this important news: “The United States became the first government to require that our major federal suppliers disclose their emissions and climate risks and set targets for themselves that are aligned with the Paris Agreement.

“As the world’s largest customer, with more than US$630 billion in spending last year, the government of the United States is putting our money where our mouth is to strengthen accountability for climate risk and resilience.”

However, while the U.S. government could leverage almost US$400 billions committed by Congress and the Administration to make investments in climate change solutions, “missing” are major investments to help other less-wealthy nations in climate change mitigation.

Not that President Biden was unsympathetic about helping other nations — . he has pledged to help developing countries with $11 billion each year to 2024 for transitioning to wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources.

Who Will Pay?  A Question Floating Above the Conversations

“Reparations” was the a key word circulating at COP 27 — who will help the less fortunate nations to address climate change issues? The expectations of less developed economies is that the rich peers, who generate the carbon emissions that affect the climate, will come to the aid of the nations they are negatively affecting.

While the U.S. expresses ambitions to help, with a divided U.S. Congress (keepers of the purse strings), the U.S. is not likely near-term to commit funds for other countries to address their climate change challenges.  The present state of affairs in US governance poses the question of whether the nation itself can continue on course to meet the goals of the “whole of government” approach to addressing climate change over changes of administrations. 

The “reparations” are about “loss and damage”. As The New York Times pointed out in its coverage of the COP meetings –  determining “loss and damage” funding is very difficult to define and loaded with potential legal liability for donating nations (such as for the U.S. and European powers).

Not that President Biden was unsympathetic about helping other nations. He has pledged to help developing countries with $11 billion each year to 2024 for transitioning to wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources.

One of continuing stories we see as this conference (COP 27) ends and the almost 200 nations that participate in the Conference of Parties are back at home dealing with climate change will be increasing focus among the participants on the “who pays” question going forward. The G&A team will be being staying tuned and will keep you updated as we move toward COP 28.

President Biden’s Comments at COP 27:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/11/11/remarks-by-president-biden-at-the-27th-conference-of-the-parties-to-the-framework-convention-on-climate-change-cop27-sharm-el-sheikh-egypt/

The Domestic Agenda To Renew and Strengthen the U.S. from Council on Foreign Relations –

Posted on by
Reply

November 4, 2022

by Hank Boerner – Chair & Strategist, G&A Institute

How about attending to some critical domestic issues that could help to determine the USA’s Global Influence

The United States of America “in” the world and “of” the world. Where do we as a nation and where do our people stand on domestic and global issues? Where should we stand on policies and practices (and what should the U.S. “stand for”)?

We monitor the work of, and the shared perspectives of a good number of organizations here at G&A Institute, including the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

As the COP 27 gathering nears (the Conference on Parties / UN climate talks), what are the concerns of the citizens of the U.S. – and what are the concerns of citizens of other nations about the U.S.?

Most important, what should our top line domestic concerns be so that the United States is well positioned to continue to lead as the world’s largest economy? And project influence abroad?

The Council set out its “Renewing America” agenda recently, with the noble aims of “fortifying the political, economic, and societal foundations fundamental to national security and international influence” (it’s our Top Story selection for you).

Nine critical domestic issues are on the agenda.

The CFR concerns address issues that likely keep CEOs and board rooms up at night as they strategize and chart the way forward for their company:

• Energy and climate change [the concerns about the effects of domestic wildfires, severe storms, other extreme events, transitions/shifting to cleaner energy and energy efficiency];
• the future of the world of work;
• trade and finance [needed sensible policies, fixing the supply chain];
• democracy and [public sector] governance [ability to project power in the world];
• education [and the need for skilled workers, the long-term need for educated workforce];
• immigration (and attracting talent for the American workforce);
• infrastructure (investment to address crumbling infrastructure);
• innovation (R&D, China posing challenges to U.S. technology]:
• and, social justice and equity (think: long-term injustices to be considered).

On Energy and Climate Change: the Council experts share a “filter” of perspectives on the topics, including the perspectives of the U.S. ambassador on climate, Secretary of State John Kerry (“COP 27 and International Climate Action – a Conversation”).

Other “filtered” perspectives include “How the Inflation Reduction Act Will Help the U.S. to Lead in Clean Energy Economy”; “California Capitalism’s Successes and Challenges:, and, a webinar on “Climate Justice.”

If you have not followed the Council on Foreign Relations, the web link we provide will help you to learn more about the topics that we headline above.




Top Story:  https://www.cfr.org/programs/renewing-america


Going Green and Still Pumping Oil? The Challenges of Climate Change and Potential “Solutions” For Fossil Fuel Producers

Posted on by
Reply

October 19, 2022
by Hank Boerner – Chair & Chief Strategist, G&A Institute

We were thinking the other day about the enormous challenges posed by climate change to our global society — and therein of the challenges of meeting the ambitious goals being set by governments, the private sector, and investors to achieve “a net zero economy” by mid-century. That’s not so far away.

And so the pumping of tens of millions of gallons of crude oil every day by OPEC countries and other nations (like the U.S.A.) to meet the insatiable demands of society is not helping in the short term.  But we need the oil!

Not so far back the United States was a very different country (meaning, at the end of the 19th Century). Not so dependent on “oil” from below the ground (yes, we did rely on kerosene lamps and before that whale oil!)

The majority of people lived outside of cities, mostly on farmlands and ranches and wilderness places. Horses and boats provided the main means for transport of people and goods. (Remember stage coaches and canal boats towed by mules?) Homes were heated by wood and coal fuels.

Coming into their own in the early 20th Century: miracle developments like electric power, telephony, radio, gasoline-powered cars & trucks, powered flight, modern chemicals, modern medicines. And people were moving en masse to rapidly-expanding cities and the newly-identified “sub-urban” communities.

One such place was Queens County, New York, where some of the G&A team live and work or grew up in (today home of JFK International).  After World War One ended, 100,000 people a year (!) moved in to the new suburbs, rapidly replacing farms that dated back to Dutch settlement in the 1600s.

After World War Two ended, neighboring Nassau County (where some of us live and work today) saw the same growth pattern – in just four years “Levittown” replaced the sprawling farmlands of the former Island Trees (NY) on the largest prairie in the Eastern U.S.. (That was the Hempstead Plains.)

Which required more railroads and roads for autos & trucks to move commuters to city-center offices and factories. And so, more more more drilling for oil & gas and mining of coal.

All of this dramatically changed how Americans today live, work, and play, and s0 many aspects of our family and business lives. The same things were happening in Europe, the British Isles, Japan, and many other places.

And here we are in the 21st Century enjoying the fruits of all of this progress and at the same time trying to undo the negative sides of the sweeping progress made over the past 125 years or so.

To put some of this change and resulting challenges in perspective: TIME magazine had an essay recently about Saudi Arabia, its state-owned oil company (Saudi Aramco) and the ambitions of the world’s leading oil exporting sovereignty to lean toward green while still pumping 12 or more millions of gallons of oil per day (to help meet global demand of 100 million BBLs a day!).

Today, Saudis talk of the dreams of carbon capture, of moving to hydrogen power for autos, of building a new “green” city (NOEM) from scratch.  The Saudi goal is Net Zero emissions) by 2060!

The dreams include the desert blooming with new green (cities)…and yet that Saudi oil keeps moving to distant points on Earth through pipelines and on oil tankers. Missing: the plan to reduce oil & gas production by 2030.

To help companies around the globe to meet ambitious 2030, 2040, and 2050 (net zero!) goals. Challenging. 

To contrast the astonishing changes of the recent decades: The Saudi Arabia we know today as a top oil & gas producer was a desert kingdom populated by Bedouin tribes and often shown on maps as “the Empty Quarter”.

Discovery of oil reservoirs changed all of that – today the kingdom has a Sovereign Wealth Fund (the SWF is the Public Investment Fund) with US$600+ billion and more in treasury thanks to oil & gas pumping and invests in many publicly -traded companies like Netflix (so dependent on fossil fuels to ever more power servers!).

About the impacts of climate change and the inherent challenges of our present society to achieve solutions – we see the story-telling of this everyday now in our favorite media!

Our editors and G&A team members carefully track and curate the coverage for you in the issues of our Highlights newsletter and here in our G&A Institute Sustainability Updates blog.

In our newsletter we regularly feature many news and feature stories about the efforts of public and private sector organizations taking actions to protect the planet and help the global society achieve a sustainable (and livable) planet in the decades ahead.

That’s the good news we try to share.  At the same time, as we think about the world’s progress from wilderness1800s to dramatic changes of the 1900s and into challenges of the 2000s and the negative aspects of progress…we cheer on the strategies, policies, actions, actions of leaders of organizations in the capital markets, corporate community, activist organizations, multilateral organizations, and more to address climate change challenges.. 

Ah, to save the planet while still making progress – that’s the ambitious goal of so many now.  After all, there is no Planet B for we, the billions on Earth (at least not yet).  

Top Story:

We bring you the fascinating story of Saudi Arabia and its plan to go green while remaining the world’s number one oil exporter over the coming years: https://time.com/6210210/saudi-arabia-aramco-climate-oil/

And a personal note:  A  durable book that has been around telling the story of the first half of the 20th Century (since 1952) may be of interest to you. This is “The Big Change, American Transforms Itself, 1900-1950” by Frederick Lewis Allen. He was the long time editor of Harper’s Magazine and authored such books as “The Lords of Creation” (about key capitalists like the Rockefellers, Morgans, Vanderbilts, and other of the Gilded Age wealthy). 

Highlights of Climate Week NYC 2022

Posted on by
Reply

by Lauren Snyder, Ph.D., Sustainability Analyst at G&A Institute

“Global Citizen Festival NYC” featured big-name musical artists to cap the 14th annual Climate Week NYC, a week of multi-stakeholder events focused on climate change in New York City.

Climate Week NYC brought together leaders, decision-makers and activists from government, civil society, and the private sector for discussions, encouragement and collaboration on how to keep the climate issue at the top of political and business priorities.

Organized by Climate Group, the week featured a variety of in-person, hybrid and virtual events all focused on a call-to-action of “getting it done.”  The opening ceremony, began by setting the current geopolitical contexts for the need to deliver on promises made, which was followed by Hub Live, bringing together over 1,000 voices in the climate space to collaborate, share ideas and promote workable solutions.

This year’s Climate Week revolved around ten themes: the built environment, energy, environmental justice, transport, sustainable living, finance, industry, nature, policy, and food.

Beyond these events, many others were held alongside the main New York City-based events. Climate Week NYC is scheduled each year to run concurrent with the opening week of the UN General Assembly. This year Climate Week included a 90-minute, high-level “SDG Moment” session, designed to keep focus on the 17 SDGS.

For those unable to attend the in-person events, the hybrid and virtual ones emphasized two key themes. A panel of journalists on the second day focused on the question:  “Are we looking up? Climate communications at a pivotal moment”, highlighting the need to move away from the alarmist nature of climate communications to one that focuses on “co-benefits.”

Rather than storytelling, for example, one presenter noted the need to shape climate change conversations to reach as many people as possible. In this example, energy opportunities that advance cheaper, reliable fuel supply can help to convince even climate skeptics who might oppose the usual climate-speak ideas.

The theme of spelling out the “co-benefits” also percolated in a public sector-oriented session: “The Paris Agreement and the Ambition We Need.” This session included Environment ministers from various countries such as Canada and the Maldives.

The Minister from Canada stated it is “vital to sell the dream,” to show that current solutions and technologies are available to make a difference in mitigating and adapting to climate change.

The ministers presenting also emphasized the need for granular data and transparency – a theme that also could be found in the two opening ceremony  events – “Climate in the Geopolitical Context of Today” and “The cold truths for a warming world: what’s stopping us from ‘Getting It Done”?

Some of the more promising events for businesses were held in-person, including “Corporate Disclosure: Understanding Investor Perspective on Climate Risk sponsored by Agendi; others were organized by Morningstar, Sustainalytics, and The Wall Street. Journal.

The panel on “Preparing for the SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rule” provided interesting comparisons between the TCFD-based rules already implemented in the United Kingdom and the proposed SEC rule that will require companies to disclose climate-related risks and actions they will take to mitigate them.

While the multitude of events was overwhelming for some, everyone could find a topic of interest during the week-long series of sessions. While there was a lot of talking, presenting and chatter, these events do inevitably excite, encourage stimulating debates, and allow for exchange of ideas. The true test in the end for actions to be taken will be judged in the weeks and months to come.

The next climate summit (COP27) gathering is less than two months away, where world leaders, NGOs and private business decision-makers will gather for further climate action. The goal of keeping the 1.5C limit “alive” – this, the temperature threshold needed to avoid the worst climate catastrophe — does at times seem like a dream. The act of making that dream a reality depends on all of us — and perhaps was the most salient point of Climate week NYC 2022.

About the Author

Dr. Lauren Snyder joined G&A Institute in May 2022 as a Sustainability Analyst. She previously worked at the United Nations Global Compact Environment and Climate team where she launched a high-level external newsletter to promote corporate engagement on all aspects of climate change. Dr. Snyder also co-led with Accenture on the CEO Study on Sustainability “Climate Leadership in the Eleventh Hour.”

A native of South Korea, Dr. Snyder came to the U.S. as a child. She obtained her B.A. in German Literature and Linguistics from New York University and lived in Germany and Sweden for two years as a part of her undergraduate studies. Lauren also holds a master’s and Ph.D. in International Relations from the London School of Economics.

Dr. Snyder also holds a master’s degree in Public Administration and Sustainability from the Marxe School of International Affairs and Public Administration at Baruch College.

Dr. Snyder resides in New York City and enjoys time spending with her daughter. She also enjoys singing, theater and tennis. Although Dr. Snyder is legally blind, her disability does not stop her from achieving her goals.

Common Sustainability Reporting Standards Remain Elusive

Posted on by
Reply

December 21, 2021

by Bernie Kilkelly – VP and Director of Corporate ESG Disclosure, G&A Institute

Efforts by various international organizations to develop common global sustainability reporting standards continue to run into roadblocks, as different groups propose diverging approaches and methodologies to enhance ESG disclosure.

As reported by Responsible Investor (link below in our Top Stories), the G7 Impact Taskforce that was created in July (under the UK’s presidency of the G7), recently commented about reporting standards being developed by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), an even newer group launched at COP26 in Glasgow.

Rather than helping to find common ground around simplifying the alphabet soup of reporting frameworks and standards, the comments by the G7 Impact Taskforce (ITF) seemed to add to concerns that reporting standards could become more fragmented.

The ITF said it supports the approach of the ISSB, which is governed by the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) body, to develop a global reporting baseline focusing on the impact of sustainability factors on company enterprise values.

But at the same time, it recommended that countries “build upon this” approach to include other impacts on stakeholders that this reporting baseline would not address.

The ITF’s comments seemed to show support for the broader “double materiality” reporting approach that focuses on the impacts of business activities on society and the environment.  The “double materiality” approach is being used by the European Union’s accounting body —  the European Financial Advisory Group (EFRAG) — to develop a new set of corporate sustainability disclosure standards.

While the ITF’s statement calls for mandatory impact accounting for businesses and investors that would include “harmonized standards,” the elusive search for a common global approach to sustainability reporting continues.

As we close out 2021 and embark on a New Year, the G&A Institute team will continue to monitor the efforts of these organizations and help you make sense of the ever-changing world of sustainability reporting and disclosure.

Best wishes from the G&A team to all for a Happy New Year!

Top Stories