finance
monthly
Personal Finance. Money. Investing.
Contribute
Newsletter
Corporate

UK-based consumer goods giant Unilever said on Monday that it would give shareholders an advisory vote on its plans to curb emissions at its next annual general meeting in May, becoming the first blue-chip company to give investors a voice on its climate plan.

Unilever has set a goal to reach net zero carbon emissions from its own operations by 2030, and to reduce the average carbon footprint of its products by 50% by the same deadline. The firm announced in June that all of its products would be carbon neutral from production to point of sale by 2039, and now plans to create a €1 billion climate and nature fund to invest further in improving the environmental impact of its operations.

Unilever will publish a detailed action plan outlining how it expects to hit these targets in Q1 2021, after which it will report progress against the plan annually and seek shareholder approval of its current measures. This plan will be updated every three years.

“It is the first time a major global company has voluntarily committed to put its climate transition plans before a shareholder vote,” Unilever said in a statement.

In order to achieve its climate goals, the company said it would need to transition its operations to 100% renewable energy, eliminate deforestation from its supply chain and rework many of its flagship products.

“Climate change is the most pressing issue of our time and we are determined to play a leadership role in accelerating the transition to a zero carbon economy,” Unilever CEO Alan Jope said.

[ymal]

Unilever is one of the world’s largest consumer goods companies, with a market cap of $120 billion. Through household brands including Ben & Jerry’s, PG Tips and Domestos, the company claims to reach over 2 billion customers worldwide.

Lloyds Bank revealed on Friday that black employees are paid a fifth less than their white colleagues on average.

The median pay gap for black staff in 2020 was 19.7%, while the gap for all BAME employees was 14.8%.

The bank said in its ethnicity pay gap report that the discrepancy stemmed from black staff being “disproportionately under-represented at senior levels” rather than from unequal pay being issued to employees of different ethnicities within the same role.

In July, Lloyds set a target to increase the number of black employees in senior roles from 0.6% to 3% by 2025, coinciding with an existing target of 8% BAME senior staff by the end of 2020 as part of its company-wide “Race Action Plan”. The bank also said that it had launched a Black Business Advisory Committee, to be headed by former Cabinet Office adviser Claudine Reid, to investigate growth barriers faced by black-led businesses.

"We want to be clear that we are an anti-racist organisation,” said Lloyds CEO António Horta-Osório, “one where all colleagues speak up, challenge, and act to take an active stance against racism.

"In doing so, our colleagues will help break down the barriers preventing people from meeting their full potential."

Professor Binna Kandola, business psychologist and co-founder of Pearn Kandola, criticised the bank’s striking pay gap and its disparity in roles by ethnicity. "Considering that the majority of senior roles are filled by white people, this would suggest that white staff are given preferential treatment and are able to climb the ladder more quickly,” he said.

[ymal]

"While the best organisations will try to be more systematic in assessing and evaluating performance, bias still penetrates these processes. Rarely are organisations willing to confront the fact that the problem is the people operating the processes. None of us are as objective as we believe we are, and none of us want to believe that we make judgements about people based on their ethnicity. As a consequence, minorities are more likely to be found in roles which have fewer opportunities for progression and which ultimately pay less.

"To solve the problem of the race pay gap, we must address the lack of opportunity for BAME people to advance to more senior positions. Performance evaluations, career development and line manager support are all crucial ingredients, and the people operating these systems must receive the training and support required to conduct these processes with career and accuracy."

Ofgem, the UK’s energy industry regulator, will allow energy networks to go ahead with a green energy investment programme into the country’s energy infrastructure worth over £40 billion, which will run from 2021 to 2026.

The programme is aimed at improving services, reducing the impact of UK energy networks on the environment, and setting a fairer price for customers.

In addition to a £30 billion initial payment to network companies running the country’s energy grid, Ofgem said it would make “unprecedented additional funding” available for green energy projects to arrive in the future, which will be aimed at reducing emissions from the energy system and eventually hitting net zero targets.

Companies have indicated that £10 billion of such projects could be in the works, though Ofgem added that there is no limit on the additional funding that it could provide, subject to good business cases being presented.

“Our £40 billion package massively boosts clean energy investment,” said Jonathan Brearley, chief executive of Ofgem. “This will ensure that our network companies can deliver on the climate change ambitions laid out by the prime minister last week, while maintaining world-leading levels of reliability.”

Brearley added that the costs incurred by the new investment “must fall fairly for consumers”, adding that the regulator would reduce the returns paid to shareholders by 40% to bring them closer to current market levels.

[ymal]

Last month, Ofgem said that it is considering lifting its cap on household tariffs by £21 annually to help companies that have been struck by an increase in unpaid bills – meaning that millions of UK customers may pay more for their utility bills from April 2021 to help energy suppliers cover the cost of those unable to pay for energy due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

As a famous 2000s TV show said, ‘it’s not easy being green’, and in some ways they were absolutely right. But as a small business owner, there are lots of things you can do to ensure your small business is on the right side of the green argument.

Why Should You ‘Go Green’? 

Climate change and global warming are two very complicated issues that have no clear answer. There are arguments for and against almost every type of renewable energy source. Of course, there are no political infringements on the entire green issue as well, but one thing we can all probably agree on is this: we should all be attempting to be better stewards of our planet.

Being better planetary stewards doesn’t have to mean everyone needs to go vegan, that you need to turn your heating off, ditch your car for a bicycle, and only washing in your local river. Instead, it means making changes to the way you work and the way you live that are better for the planet. If we all made little changes, we would soon make a big difference.

How Can Businesses Be Greener?

The complex issue of businesses going green can give anyone a headache. Which bits should you change? What can you legally do? They are all very difficult questions, and the answers do need to be weighed up using a proper costing analysis too to ensure that any changes won’t eat into potential profits.

There are marketing issues too. When the general public gets wind of a company trying to ‘do better’, there are usually two responses. One, your audience and customers are proud of your efforts, and you win ‘brownie points’ with them, or two, there will be another segment of your audience who are furious with you because you’re not doing ‘enough’. It’s worth considering the rough and the smooth and having clear answers for each side.

Don’t let the latter response put you off. Everyone has got to start somewhere, and so here are three ways your business can ‘go green’ that are easy to start right now.

[ymal]

Be A Water Hero

Make it a priority in your business to conserve water wherever possible. Not only will this mean you’re helping the planet by looking after a finite resource, but if you can demonstrate that, unlike other businesses your size and in your location, you are making an effort to save water, customers will more likely head your way. You can even cut your water bills by conserving water. However, if you want to ensure that you make even more savings that can be put towards making your company even greener, then get in touch with a company that can cut back your business water rates by comparing the best deals. All the money you save from this can help you to continue on your green journey.

Encourage Greener Transport Options

There are lots of transport options you can encourage your staff to look at, and it’s always best to lead by example here. Whether you choose to take part in the bike to work scheme, invest in public transport loans, or you start a carpool, there are lots of options and many helpful government-backed schemes that you can take advantage of.

Plants In The Office

There is solid scientific evidence that having more greenery in the office can make staff feel happier and healthier. Make sure you go for real plants and flowers, and if you’re in the retail, food, or service industry, your customers will appreciate the little effort too!

In a context that has seen rapid growth in the offer of sustainable and responsible funds in recent years, Etica stands out for having made this approach its exclusive approach as far back as the year 2000. Integrating ESG criteria into investment decisions is an important element for society in creating value over the long term, both financial value, i.e. with returns adjusted for risk, and non-financial value, i.e. value for the community and the environment.

Numerous studies have shown that the returns of sustainable and responsible funds are in line with traditional returns, and sometimes even higher, particularly in periods of greater market volatility. ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) analysis of securities allows for more comprehensive control of risks and helps to select the most sustainable companies in the long term. Investing in companies that ignore ESG issues can, in the long term, turn out to be an unfortunate choice in terms of performance.

According to 2019 data from the World Economic Forum, which monitors the main global risks by type, over the past 10 years, there has been a transition from predominately economic risks in 2009-2010 to an ever greater frequency of environmental and social risks, particularly since 2017. Not only have these risks become more common, but they have also become more significant given the extent of the damage they can cause. The most recent report published by the WEF at the beginning of 2020 shows that, for the first time ever, the top five global risks in terms of probability are all environmental.

Investing in companies that ignore ESG issues can, in the long term, turn out to be an unfortunate choice in terms of performance.

Precisely from a risk perspective, Etica has innovated the relevant studies, structuring a new risk metric, the ESG Risk, which measures ex-ante the actual impact of critical elements arising from factors related to ESG concerns that could have an adverse effect on the performance of the securities in which a fund invests.

The starting point for the elaboration of ESG Risk is the concept of entropy which, in statistics, represents the measure of disorder. This parameter comes into play because it is suitable for analysing the portfolio in relation to a characteristic of the securities that are fundamental for Etica - ESG relevance expressed through the score associated with each company or government security in the issuer analysis phase. The first step is to look at the six classes of ESG scores into which securities are divided and to take into account how issues are distributed, and then to calculate how much “disorder” there is in the ESG scores in the different configurations of the six possible cases. This is the first measure of risk.

Analysis of the results has shown that the riskiest portfolios financially are also the most “disorderly” compared to the ESG score.

The importance of this metric is also confirmed by robust evidence showing a close connection between financial risk, represented by undiversified VaR (one of the possible measurements of a potential loss of an investment position within a given time frame) and non-financial risk, represented by ESG Risk, for all asset classes and all sectors and countries. That is, a fund with a higher VaR also has a greater ESG Risk and a fund with a limited ESG Risk is characterised by a modest VaR.

In addition, by estimating the financial loss of the equity portfolio, through a stress analysis and via VaR (Value at Risk), if we consider only ESG risk factors, we can estimate that the risk of the ESG component alone generally amounts to between 5 and 15% of the overall risk. We regard this as a very significant result.

The importance of considering ESG variables in the analysis and valuation of a portfolio is also clear in the context of a new type of efficient frontier linking the portfolio’s return to its overall risk which we call “holistic” and which includes both traditional financial variables and non-financial (ESG) variables.

 

The chart on the left shows a “traditional” efficient frontier, as we are accustomed to considering it, namely portfolios sorted according to their reward-to-volatility ratio. The chart on the right shows a new efficient frontier, which has the vector risk module on its X-axis, i.e. our holistic view of risk Rv (which considers the VaR, the Relative VaR with respect to Etica's Investable Universe and the ESG Risk).

 

The result of the comparison is remarkable because, on the one hand, it highlights how the efficient frontier remains broadly valid in the shape and trend of the curve, but on the other hand, it tells us that also considering ESG Risk (and RelVaR) modifies the shape of the frontier to such an extent that, if ignored, the expected reward would be overestimated for like risk, and could potentially lead to unwelcome surprises.

The result of all our analyses paves the way for integrating ESG variables into the all-inclusive investment risk calculation, something that Etica has been conducting for all its funds for about 5 years.

More recently, Etica developed further analyses of ESG Risk and its potential, presenting them at the twelfth International Conference on Risk Management, held in Milan in June 2019. The joint study by Paolo Capelli, Risk Manager at Etica, Federica Ielasi, University of Florence, and Angeloantonio Russo, LUM Jean Monnet University, demonstrated that the ESG Risk metric helps to optimise portfolio diversification and improve the financial volatility estimate, especially in the medium-to-long term. Let's take a closer look at these two key results.

Empirical evidence shows that certain typical analysis factors within the process for selecting issuers, such as the company's market value, its governance characteristics and the country risk (in terms of control of corruption and regulatory quality), have a strong influence on the ESG Risk metric. Some examples to provide clarification.

A lower ESG Risk is more likely to be found when:

Thus, ESG Risk helps managers in portfolio analysis, reducing the inherent entropy (disorder) and optimising the portfolio’s internal diversification.

Analysis of the results has shown that the riskiest portfolios financially are also the most “disorderly” compared to the ESG score.

The second relevant implication of this study relates to the power of the ESG Risk metric to mitigate and reduce the unexpected volatility of a portfolio over the medium to long term.

As previously indicated, sustainable and responsible strategies with long-term objectives should consider ESG Risk analysis in order to obtain financial, as well as social and environmental returns. Traditional financial ratings do not show the same tendency to mitigate the relationship between ex-ante financial risk and the ex-post volatility of a portfolio in the short or medium term.

Therefore, investors who establish their own investment strategy without considering ESG Risk run the risk of losing control of the volatility of their portfolios, as well as making their investments more vulnerable, particularly during economic downturns.

The results of this study, therefore, make an interesting contribution both to financial theory and practice, particularly in relation to asset management. In addition to traditional financial risks, it is increasingly important to consider and manage risks arising from ESG factors that often translate into significant economic risks.

Anyone deciding to invest by incorporating aspects related to ESG issues into the financial analysis can then rely on competitive advantage in long-term risk management since calculation of the ESG Risk provides a holistic view of the total risk of their investment, which is synonymous with greater transparency and awareness.

Today, the world of finance and investment is being held accountable to a new standard. And its colour is green.

Global institutions, such as the United Nations, World Bank, World Economic Forum and International Monetary Fund, and activist agencies are the driving force behind the adoption of ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) Standards in socially responsible investing.  Worldwide sustainable investments, covering environmental, social and governance, and impact investing, have grown sharply in the last few years to exceed US$ 30 trillion as at the start of 2018. But this is only the beginning.

ESG investing needs to grow, not only for the greater good but also because it is good for business. Here are some reasons why sustainable finance and investment are the right way forward.

Climate change is not only a reality, it is an emergency in some countries. While international accords, such as the Paris Agreement, and domestic regulators battle the crisis through legislation, it is also incumbent upon private enterprises to do their bit by adopting sustainable practices, making impactful investments and improving transparency and governance.

Neglecting the last can have extremely painful consequences, as we know from the 2008 Financial Crisis. What’s more, for corporations with global operations, any lapse in compliance with human rights regulations, labour norms or ethical practices can result in investor backlash, reputation loss, and punitive damages.

Today, the world of finance and investment is being held accountable to a new standard. And its colour is green.

Business economics is slowly shifting towards green resources as natural gas becomes cheaper than coal and other renewable forms of energy become more economical, predictable and scalable. Digital technologies are also supporting the shift to environment-friendly, cost-saving options such as online channels, digitised documentation, robo-wealth advisers, chatbots, smart assistants and cloud computing.

The generations of today and tomorrow are socially conscious and expect enterprises to espouse the same values. Many teenagers are already at the forefront of environmental activism. Millennial consumers, who will inherit wealth worth US$ 16 trillion over the next few decades, are exerting their influence to push financial service companies towards ESG compliant practices. Wealth managers, banks, and other financial institutions have no option but to meet the expectations of this important customer constituency.

Last but not least, financing ESG compliant projects helps to diversify the investment portfolio into new growth sectors such as clean and efficient energy.

Some financial institutions are taking a lead in adhering to ESG principles in lending and investing. ABN Amro has a comprehensive sustainability strategy focusing on climate change, circular economy and social impact issues. The Bank’s climate change vision aims at financing only “energy label A” real estate by 2030, increasing the share of renewable energy in the energy portfolio to at least 20%  by next year, and also doubling sustainably invested assets to €16 billion by that time. It has also built the first bank office based on circular principles in Oosterhout, Netherlands.

The generations of today and tomorrow are socially conscious and expect enterprises to espouse the same values.

Another great example is Nordic Investment Bank, which takes sustainable financing very seriously. In addition to investing in the green bonds of companies in various countries, NIB issues its own environmental bonds and invests those proceeds into sustainable projects. The Bank follows corporate governance best practices to achieve several aims, including fighting corruption and money laundering, managing risk, and procuring ethically.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by UN member nations lists 17 sustainable development goals aimed at removing poverty, improving health and education, reducing inequality, and fostering growth while addressing climate change and preserving our oceans and forests. This agenda will succeed only if it has support on the ground, at the level of the enterprise. The financial services industry can make a significant contribution to this cause through sustainable lending and investing.

The ruthless ‘barbarian at the gate’ and unscrupulous ‘corporate raider’ have evolved into a more thoughtful, sophisticated and socially conscious investor. In turn, this shift has heralded the ever-increasing prominence of environment, social and governance (ESG), impact, and socially responsible investing.

Like most significant behavioural and cultural shifts, this trend is driven by factors both internal and external, with chief responsibility laying at the feet of limited partners (LPs), alongside brand management concerns and an increased chance of returns.

However, for PE leaders looking to reap the rewards of social conscious investing, it’s not enough to simply look the part. If PE firms want to legitimately strike a balance between doing good and doing well, they’ll need to have social impact at the centre of how they define success and how they operate. This will require significant cultural shifts ushered in by the appropriate inclusive leadership.

The LP push and social positioning

Private equity’s move towards socially conscious investments and practices has, broadly speaking, been spurred by the requirements of limited partners. With LP’s monies sourced from pension funds, universities, governments, etc., they are often representing the interests of average citizens. As such, these LPs need to be confident that this money is being managed by people whose values align with those of their constituents.

PE firms, therefore, need to consider our current social environment. Issues including diversity and inclusion, environmental sustainability and contemporary labour practices take a more prominent position in the public consciousness, with much of this driven by the values of millennials. Adhering to these values can drive profit, and research has shown that millennials will pay more for a product when it has social or environmental sustainability as one of its benefits.

Issues including diversity and inclusion, environmental sustainability and contemporary labour practices take a more prominent position in the public consciousness, with much of this driven by the values of millennials.

This transition, coupled with the increasingly public interest in private funding means that equity investment is now a spectator sport where the audience can play a shaping role–with a rotation of its thumb or a click of its keyboard–in determining whether the leader has earned the right to continue. Organisations with diversity and inclusion practices that don’t face up to scrutiny, shaky environmental sustainability or unethical employee practices, therefore, present a far riskier investment proposition.

The resignations of Miki Agrawal of Thinx and WeWork founder Adam Neumann are just two examples of how the public now plays the role of moral arbiter. Or, take the gig economy debate and the various companies which operate within it. An initially attractive investment opportunity lost its bloom as public concerns around zero hours’ contracts and workers’ rights caused many valuations to tank.

Driving for value and driving for values

It’s clear then why impact investing has gained such a significant position in PE investment strategy, with large PE firms having set up their own separate funds focused on impact investing. Bain Capital has ‘Bain Double Impact’, which is focused on helping “mission-driven companies scale and drive meaningful change.”

On the smaller end of the market, a new breed of firm has emerged dedicated to positive change. Harlem Capital is a NYC- based minority-owned firm whose focus is to “change the face of entrepreneurship by investing in 1,000 diverse founders over the next 20 years”. This bold mission statement has already paid off for the firm, garnering public praise, media coverage and support from large cap PE firms such as KKR and TPG.

At face value this looks like an ideal scenario; businesses, PE Firms, LPs, society and the environment all benefitting from a more conscious and responsible flow of money. However, this ideal can only be truly achieved if this social conscience is an inherent, inextricable part of a PE firm’s culture, rather than a reflexive attempt to respond to an emerging zeitgeist. To fully realise the potential that impact investing holds, PE firms must not only shift where they deploy their money, but also rethink how they build an investment thesis that deeply connects to the psychology of all company constituents and the public.

This ideal can only be truly achieved if this social conscience is an inherent, inextricable part of a PE firm’s culture, rather than a reflexive attempt to respond to an emerging zeitgeist.

What’s leadership’s role in building a new PE culture?

If PE Firms are to see the full benefit of impact funds, their leadership needs to be beyond reproach, and they must promote not only a drive for value, but a drive for values. The DNA and mindset of PE cultures and their leaders must evolve to rise to the challenge of a rapidly changing landscape.

A mindset and cultural shift of this magnitude is a leadership challenge, and our model of inclusive leadership highlights the keys to making the real difference. We have found that inclusive leaders focus on:

1) Curiosity – creating the conditions for learning, creative thinking, and openness to new ideas;

2) Courage – embracing the uncomfortable, taking risks, and empowering others; all crucial for leaders who will have to work to evolve a system that has historically produced great results in its previous mode of operating; and

3) Connection – deeply understanding self and others and building bridges for meaningful engagement; a non-negotiable for investors to understand how to build a value-generating investment thesis that ignites public belief rather than ire

Our data shows that PE leaders score low on the 3Cs of the inclusive leadership model with the most marked dip found in Connection. This is not totally surprising when one considers the rigid metrics that determine success or failure within the PE space. Internal rate of return, and multiple of money will always have a high place on the agenda, but in this brave new world of impact investment and heightened public scrutiny, leadership strategy and talent management approaches need to evolve to drive all the relevant success behaviours in its leaders.

PE has the opportunity to reshape its past and its future. Once decried as a value destroyer, stripping companies of assets for profit, the stage is now set for it to balance driving value and driving values. To achieve this, PE leadership needs to deeply embed the values they aim to promote and create a leadership culture that is open to ideas and investment not solely from a financial returns perspective.

Doing good and doing well can go hand in hand.

Authored by Rosanna Trasatti, Managing Director, Global Head of Private Equity at YSC.

There is no doubt that a focus on Environmental Social Governance (ESG) by funds brings financial gain, so why is it that some financial institutions and leading companies are still lagging so far behind, asks Emma Arnold from WYG. Even last month at the world’s largest property event, MIPIM, leading investors stated that they would only focus on environmental matters if it was driven by client needs. This is frustrating given this year’s global risk report states that the top four global risks in terms of likelihood or impact magnitude are environmental – extreme weather events, failure of climate change mitigation, adaptation and natural disasters and water crisis. There are therefore clear and tangible financial risks for those leaders lagging behind in the safeguarding of their companies and funds for the future.

With mounting media coverage on environmental issues, there has never before been so much pressure on CEOs and financial leaders to step up and become real drivers for change. With current geopolitical instability and government divergence on regulation, there seems to be never-ending uncertainty in how high on government agendas sustainability really is. Without finance, projects do not happen and companies do not function, and therefore our financial and corporate leaders have far more power to bring about real cross-boundary global change than regulators. It makes sense because pollution and social harm cost money, both in tangible loss of profit and in reputation. For example, much focus has been placed on energy and oil and gas companies in recent years regarding their inputs to climate change, but there is a wider focus now across all businesses; just look at the recent focus on fast fashion (waste, viscose pollution, bleaching chemicals, slave labour) and agricultural land use (deforestation by beef, soy, wood and palm oil).

Our financial and corporate leaders have far more power to bring about real cross-boundary global change than regulators.

The increase in, use of, and availability of technology throughout the world enable widespread communication, leading to a real and increasing global social drive for change in the way we live - from the food we eat to the brands we buy. A banking friend recently said to me: “We cannot take the role of the police”, and I agree, but financial institutions can outline guidance in sale purchase and funding agreements to drive change, and corporate leaders can take a real and peripheral look at their businesses to assess business risks and deploy mitigation – they cannot afford to ignore it as a ‘nice to have’.

The role of environmental due diligence for businesses is therefore of paramount importance, but the approach needs to change from its current state as a risk-based tick box exercise to one where opportunities and risk mitigation are mapped for the company or project at the outset enabling asset managers and CEOs to bring about this change. And we still need a shift in attitude, one where comprehensive ESG due diligence is instructed early in the process by the deal teams and not at the last minute. This way, real consultative change can be brought about. ESG due diligence needs to be change driven, not just identifying risks but applying the ‘so what’ factor and making recommendations and road maps of what changes can be made throughout the lifetime of the investment to increase ESG performance, reduce risk and increase value.

Having practiced in due diligence for over twenty years, I have seen a real change in a purely environmental focus (climate change, natural resources, pollution and environmental opportunities) to the emergence of the “S” part of ESG, covering social issues such as human rights, modern slavery, gender equality, remuneration, supply chains and health and safety, and the ‘G’ representing the important role of corporate governance and behaviour on in these issues, highlighting poor governance such as lawsuits and anti-bribery and corruption issues.

And so, the term ESG – Environmental Social Governance has evolved. This is now a term being used primarily by the investment community to assess and benchmark the performance of companies. It is seen as being similar to Corporate Social Responsibly (CSR) which many leading firms now include in their annual reporting, but it should not be confused with being solely about green investing, where funds primarily invest in ‘green’ initiatives. It applies to any company or fund.

The working practices of a company are often quite different to the glossy brochures and corporate information that is communicated via a CSR board report in a data room.

In the world of finance, ESG is causing much confusion as there is a multitude of standards and guidance published. There is a current drive to covert ESG into a number, and it has been picked up by ratings agencies so they can compare ESG performance, with most large corporations now having a global score.

However, when looked at through a purely ratings-based lense, it can be misleading. Information is gathered by assessing public information, board reports and interviews with company management, it is then graded and given a metric so that it can be more easily understood by the financial markets and compared via sectors. Worryingly though, for most, there is little to no ‘boots on the ground’ assurance done on the numbers and as an experienced environmental professional, I can tell you that the working practices of a company are often quite different to the glossy brochures and corporate information that is communicated via a CSR board report in a data room.

So ESG cannot be purely defined by a metric, it is a living and breathing process for managing risk and increasing value. You would not invest in a company without a proper set of audited accounts, and therefore metrics should be accompanied by global independent assurance via due diligence. Managed properly at the outset, ESG can help corporations and funders make their desired returns with a clear conscience – that can only be a good thing.

Website: https://www.wyg.com/

About Finance Monthly

Universal Media logo
Finance Monthly is a comprehensive website tailored for individuals seeking insights into the world of consumer finance and money management. It offers news, commentary, and in-depth analysis on topics crucial to personal financial management and decision-making. Whether you're interested in budgeting, investing, or understanding market trends, Finance Monthly provides valuable information to help you navigate the financial aspects of everyday life.
© 2024 Finance Monthly - All Rights Reserved.
News Illustration

Get our free monthly FM email

Subscribe to Finance Monthly and Get the Latest Finance News, Opinion and Insight Direct to you every month.
chevron-right-circle linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram