Reapproaching Divestment

Reapproaching

Investment

Joli Holmes

February 2012

Examining shortfalls of the divestment

campaign and other investment solutions

Forward The intended purpose of the following report is to be informational and discussion-provoking,

but in should no way be used as investment advice. This report is divided into three sections

and will cover some basics in investment, investment portfolio problems that the divestment

campaign does not address, and solutions to make college and university endowments more

resilient in a low-carbon economy. In regard to the divestment campaign, I appreciate all of

the efforts of everyone that has made the campaign a success. I support the motivations be-

hind the campaign, but I do not believe that divestment will be a successful strategy in fortify-

ing a portfolio against the effects of climate change.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Back to the Basics

What is an Endowment? 2

Asset Classes 3

Passive vs. Active Management 4

3. Problems With Divestment

Who Controls the Money? 5

Beyond the Top 200 6

Impacts on Asset Classes 7

4. Beyond Divestment

SRI and ESG Investment Strategies 8

Sustainable Managers 9

Sustainable Funds 10

Sustainability Indices 11

Hedging Our Bets 12

Shareholder Engagement 13

5. Conclusion 14

6. References 15

Hopefully your campaign is well informed about the threats of unburnable carbon, and research

done by the Carbon Tracker Initiative. Regardless, here is a quick background:

Unburnable carbon has recently become a hotly debated topic because fossil fuel companies

own enough fossil fuel reserves to raise the global average temperature by 4–6°C, which would

be devastating to the planet.1 However, international governments agreed in 2009 at the UN-

FCCC climate talks to limit global average temperatures to 2°C.2 This warming constraint will

have significant implications for fossil fuel companies and their investors—banks, endowments,

pension funds, and insurance companies.

The problem is pretty obvious, and the solution seems obvious as well—divestment. However,

it is my opinion that divestment may actually not be the most successful approach to protecting

an investment portfolio from the effects of climate change. The Fossil Free divestment cam-

paign has neglected to demonstrate to students how investment works, because they don’t

think it’s necessary to the campaign. I disagree. Understanding a little bit about investment is

the key to protecting your assets, countering your administration’s arguments, and demonstrat-

ing your ability to work with the administration instead of against it. Without the proper under-

standing of how an endowment portfolio works, students cannot research viable options for re-

investment, transfer of management and engagement strategies, again demonstrating to your

administration that you have the best intensions for your school, as well as the planet. Hopeful-

ly this report will serve as a guide to help you restructure your campaign strategy.

Want to know more? Check out more research on carbon regulation, financial regula-

tion, fossil fuel devaluation, banks, and more at:

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=FACF310C0681163C%21107

Introduction

1. Introduction 1

An endowment is essentially gifts of money, real estate, and other investments, donated to col-

leges and universities from friends of the college or alumni. Money that is donated to the col-

lege or university is invested, and with the proper management, it gains value over time. Most

colleges and universities only spend about 5% of their endowment per year. The endowment is

supposed to insure that monetarily the college or university can exist forever. Colleges and uni-

versities invest in an amalgam of investments, ranging from stocks and bonds (both domestic

and international) to infrastructure, commodities, hedge funds, real estate, and private equity.

The sum of all investments is called a portfolio.

An endowment consists of an assortment of investments to diversify its portfolio. Financial

markets are extremely volatile, because they’re subject to changes in supply and demand, gov-

ernment policy, financial regulation, and other market factors. However, diversifying across

different types of investments (called asset classes) and sectors within financial markets helps to

hedge against this volatility. Understanding a little bit about asset classes can strengthen your

divestment argument and help your campaign become more specific about your campaign re-

quests.

It’s also important to consider what the endowment funds in terms of what could be lost due to

bad or risky investments.

Endowed Professorships/Chairs:

Allow for a smaller student to faculty ratio, which influences college rankings

Increased diversity of knowledge throughout college

Endowed Scholarships/Fellowships:

Provides funding to students through merit, or need-based scholarships

Need-based scholarship can increase the diversity of the campus from a socioeconomic

perspective

Merit-based offers a greater range of opportunities to students individually selected for

academics

Supports specific departments or programs:

Allows for more specialized departments, funded through the endowment

What is an Endowment?

2. Back to the Basics 2

Cash Investments:

Cash investments are cash, which has little to no risk.

Bonds:

A bond, commonly known as fixed income, is a loan for a set period of time. A bond is paid back

with interest, so that the investor gets a return on the money s/he lent. Bonds are one of the saf-

est investment options, but generally generate lower returns. A bond can issued by govern-

ments, corporations, or banks. Often bonds are issued through banks in a form called under-

writing. The bank facilitates the transaction by finding willing investors to buy bonds enacted

by corporations.

Stock:

Stock, also called equity, is a part of the company. As a stockholder, or shareholder, an investor

owns a percentage of the company. Each year, shareholders receive a dividend, or a portion of

the profit made by the company that year. Stocks are also higher risk than most bonds, but

stand to make a better return. Owning stock is sometimes preferred to owning bonds because

shareholders, as part owners of the company, have the right to take part in company decisions.

Shareholders can engage in what is known as proxy voting, and raise initiatives known as share-

holder resolutions, that they think is important for the company to consider in its business

strategy going forward.

Real Assets:

Real assets are assets like real estate, commodities, and timberlands. Real assets generally are

higher risk than bonds, but lower risk than stocks.

Absolute Return:

Absolute return is a term used to describe unconventional investing strategies. Generally these

strategies seek to outperform the market and seek a positive return on investments regardless of

the market. Examples of absolute return investments are hedge funds, forwards, futures, op-

tions, and other derivatives.

Private Equity:

Private equity is a type of stock. Private equity, is the opposite of public equity, meaning it can-

not be traded on a public exchange. Normally private equity stocks are those of relatively new

companies that have not gone public. Private equity is a high risk investment because it cannot

be bought or sold on a public exchange.

Asset Classes


Passive vs. Active Management

Most asset owners, such as an endowment, use a mixture of passive and active investing strate-

gies. Passive investors will follow a benchmark like the S&P 500 or the FTSE 100, and invest in

all sectors across the market. Passive investors seek to match the market performance, as op-

posed to active investors who aim to outperform the market. Active investors are more selective

than passive investors, and don’t invest across the market. They select stocks (though still a

wide range) that they believe will perform better than the market, and neglect others that are

underperforming. Because active investors are more involved in actually choosing stocks, active

fund managers are generally more expensive than passive fund managers.

If an endowment is concerned about the future returns of fossil fuel companies and invested

with active fund managers, divestment would be relatively easy, because active managers are

already selective. However, divestment is much more challenging for asset owners that are in-

vested passively. Asset owners that manage large amounts of money often describe themselves

as universal owners, meaning that they are invested in everything. Frequently they follow multi-

ple indices beyond the popular American indices and are invested in international indices. In-

vesting across multiple indices allows large asset owners to diversify their investments and

hedge against the natural volatility of the markets. However, it is almost impossible to imagine

divesting as a passive investor, because it violates the universal nature of passive investing.


Most colleges and universities doesn’t manage their own endowments, but hire an asset (also

called fund or investment) manager to manage their portfolio. Colleges and universities use an

investment committee to review investments and develop an investment strategy. The invest-

ment committee is normally made up of members from the board of trustees, as well as others.

The investment committee selects an investment officer who hires fund managers to invest the

endowment. Depending on how large the university is, the institution could have many fund

managers, who manage many different funds, possibly thousands. The fund managers are nor-

mally selected for their past performance, and this one of the problems that endowments look-

ing to invest more sustainability could face. The fact that most endowments are not managed

internally, but externally, also poses challenges for the divestment campaign. The investment

committee usually doesn't know what it is invested in, but who it is invested with, and the ex-

pected risk and returns from those investments.

Who Controls the Money?

Endowment

Company 3

Company 2

Sustainable Fund

Manager 4

Company 1

Fund Manager 3

Fund Manager 2

Fund Manager 1

Index 2

Index 1

Fund 2

Fund 1

Trustee

Trustee

Trustee

Investment

Committee

Investment

Officer


S&P 500

Company

S&P 500

Company

S&P 500

Company

5

The obvious target of the divestment campaign is the fossil fuel sector. However, this has left

other industries and sectors unaccounted for. Utility companies, the chemical industry, cement

industry, smelting companies, transportation companies, mining companies, and the finance

sector should also be considered. Power Stations, mines, and smelters are capital intensive in-

vestments that have an economic life of 25-40 years, and also risk impacts from climate change

as well as stranded assets.3

Transportation companies are reliant on fossil fuels, and substitutes

for oil and liquified natural gas cannot meet current demand standards. Private banks in the fi-

nancial sector are also notoriously invested in and lending to fossil fuel companies. These banks

could also face risks from stranded assets and climate change impacts. There are other sectors,

industries, and companies that risk devaluations from stranded assets or are high emitters of

greenhouse gases, and could face the same risks as fossil fuel companies.

However, the Fossil Fuel campaign doesn’t include companies that risk devaluation or are fossil-

fuel intensive industries on its target top 200 list. Most endowment investment portfolios would

have to divest about 5% of their portfolios to be fossil fuel company free, but the Asset Owners

Disclosure Project (AODP), a non-profit working to increase transparency to investors, has esti-

mated that 55% of the average investment portfolio is exposed to climate change impacts.4

Simply put divestment isn’t enough. The divestment campaign is only considering investment

impacts from stranded assets such as coal, oil, and gas, but the reality is that climate change will

affect a lot more than just fossil fuel companies. Asset owners, like endowments, cannot just di-

vest from fossil fuel companies, they have to reconsider the structure of their whole portfolio. In

the future portfolios could be impacted by water shortages, food shortages, national and inter-

national carbon budgets, corporate reporting standards, and a number of other risks originating

from climate change mitigation strategies and climate change itself. In the end divestment just

doesn’t cut it, so the next question is, how do we move beyond divestment?

Beyond the Top 200

3. Problems With Divestment 6

Because stocks and bonds have been the focus of the fossil fuel campaign, impacts on other as-

sets have often fallen by the wayside. Mercer, an investment consulting agency, found that pri-

vate equity, infrastructure, real estate, and commodities such as timberland and agricultural

land, are the most sensitive assets to physical impacts from climate change.5 However, when

divestment is discussed, it is only from fossil fuel company stocks.

Asset classes will see physical impacts from climate change, but also from future climate policies

and changing technology. Policy could encourage increased spending to create renewable infra-

structure and technologies. Future climate policies such as a carbon tax, or cap-and-trade emis-

sions system could also negatively effect assets with high carbon emissions, involvement with

the fossil fuel industry. Infrastructure such as coal ports and rails, part of the real asset class,

could become impaired or stranded, like fossil fuels, prior to the end of their useful economic

lives. It is necessary not just to consider stranded assets, but the impact of climate change as a

whole on an investment portfolio.

The table below shows a few sample endowments from countries across the United States. In-

vestment committees manage their endowments very differently and will feel the impacts of cli-

mate change differently as well. An endowment similar to Ohio State University could suffer

from stranded assets because it has a high percentage of equities in it’s portfolio. An endow-

ment similar to Yale’s probably wouldn’t feel as much impact from stranded assets, but could be

more at risk from physical impacts from climate change because of their high concentration of

real assets.

Impacts on Asset Classes


YALE2012 STANFORD2011 ARIZONA STATE

2014 OHIO STATE

2013

Cash Investments 2.7% — — —

Fixed Interest 3.9% 10% 10% 25%

Equities 13.6% 37% 40% 47%

Real Assets 30% 23% 15% 14%

Absolute Return 14.5% 18% 15% —

Private Equity 35.3% 12% 20% 14%

Yale6

Stanford7

Arizona State University8

Ohio State University9

7

Over the past few decades, several new investment strategies called SRI (social responsible in-

vesting) and ESG (environmental, social, and corporate governance) have appeared. Managers

using SRI and ESG strategies go beyond the traditional technique of analysing risk and return.

SRI and ESG managers incorporate companies that comply with a range of criteria into their

funds. Companies that have policies towards mitigating negative ecological impacts, clean ener-

gy production, pollution mitigation and management, community development, diversity in the

workplace, equal opportunity practices, employee health and safety policies, and retirement

benefits, are often included in ESG or SRI managed funds. ESG and SRI managers may also run

positive and negative screens. They may exclude companies involved in the manufacture, pro-

duction, and retail of weapons, alcohol, gambling, and fossil fuel companies. The Forum for Sus-

tainable and Responsible Investment (USSIF) estimates that in the US, only 11% of investments

under professional management use social responsible investing (SRI) techniques.10

Although SRI and ESG managers are considered more sustainable from an environmental per-

spective, they don’t necessarily exclude what the divestment campaign is after—fossil fuels.

There are relatively few funds that do exclude investment from the top 200 fossil fuel companies

as identified by the Carbon Tracker Initiative. Although funds may not exclude the top 200 coal,

oil, and gas companies, do consider a wider range of environmental impacts, and could be a

more appropriate choice to protect an investment portfolio from impacts from climate change.

However every fund differs on its SRI and ESG policies, so it’s important to understand the

methodology behind each ESG or SRI fund.

SRI and ESG Investment

Strategies

Climate Pollution

Community

Develop-

ment

Diversity Labor

Rights Alcohol Defense Tobacco

Executive

Pay

Fund 1 X X S S S R R R S

Fund 2 S S R R R X X X S

Fund 3 — — — — S X X X S

Fund 4 — — R R R — — — R

X: Does Not Invest

R: Restricted Investment

S: Screens Investment

—: No Screens in this Area

Sample Funds Demonstrating the Variability of ESG and SRI Policies:

4. Beyond Divestment 8

In October 2013, 70 asset owners and managers, managing more than $3 trillion in assets asked

45 of the world’s largest fossil fuel and power companies to disclose how they were responding

to financial risks posed by climate change and the systemic risk of unburnable carbon.11 These

are the types of asset managers that universities and colleges should have managing their en-

dowments. These asset managers, though they may not have fossil fuel free funds, are consider-

ing the systemic risks that climate change poses to investors.

Active Sustainable Fund Managers:

Aviva Investors

Boston Common Asset Management, LLC

Boston Trust & Investment Management Company

Breckinridge Capital Advisors

Calvert Asset Management Company, Inc.

Clean Yield Asset Management

Generation Investment Management

Impax Asset Management (based in Europe)

Hemes Investment Holding, INC.

Kleinwort Benson Investors (based in Ireland)

New Alternative Fund

Pax World Management Corporation

Rockefeller & Co.

Sarasin & Partners LLP (based in UK)

Trillium Asset Management

Veris Wealth Partners

Walden Asset Management

Zevin Asset Management, LLC

Sustainable Managers


Although there are more limited choices when it comes to fund managers that incorporate SRI

and ESG techniques into their overall investment strategy, many fund managers offer individual

funds that are more sustainable. Also the more pressure fund managers feel from asset owners,

the more likely they are to start providing carbon-tilted, carbon-free, or ESG and SRI influenced

funds. The USSIF estimated that the number of investments adhering to SRI practices grew by

22% from 2010-2012.12

If the demand for sustainable funds increases, supply will follow.

Mutual funds that exclude the top 200 oil, gas, and coal giants, as identified by the Car-

bon Tracker Initiative:

RBC Global Asset Management: Access Capital Community Investment Fund

Community Capital Management: CRA Qualified Investment Fund

Green Century Funds: Green Century Balanced

Pax World Management Corporation: Pax World Global Environmental Markets Fund

Portfolio 21: Portfolio 21 Institutional

Generation Investment Management: Multiple Funds

North Sky Clean Tech Fund

SFJ Ventures Fund III

Mutual funds that seek investments with positive impacts on the climate, pollution,

and other environmental factors:

Appleseed/Pekin Singer Strauss Asset Management: Appleseed Fund

Ardsley Partners: Ardsley Partners Renewable Energy Fund

Calvert Investment: Many Funds

Gabelli Funds: Gabelli SRI Green Fund

Legg Mason Investment Counsel: Legg Mason Investment Counsel Social Awareness Fund

Parnassus Investments: Many Funds

Pax World: Many Funds

Shelton Capital Management: Shelton Green Alpha Fund

TIAA-CREF Asset Management: TIAA-CREF Social Choice Equity Institutional

Walden Asset Management: Walden Small/SMID Cap Innovations Fund

Sustainable Funds


Sustainability Indices

As climate change and other environmental issues has increasingly entered the political, finan-

cial, and economic agendas, several sustainability indices have appeared. An index is a collec-

tion of stocks that passive investors follow like the S&P500 or Russel 3000. The FTSE4Good,

Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI), and MSCI are among the first to produce sustainability

indices that assess how companies are integrating ESG and SRI techniques into their business

strategies. These indices often only include companies that are considered ‘best in sector’ or

have environmental policies in place.

Although the sustainability indices are a good start for passive investors looking to invest more

responsibly, they’re still pretty new and pose a few problems for responsible investors. One of

the biggest is the large concentration of commercial banks present in the sustainability indices.

Commercial banks are notoriously involved with the fossil fuel industry through lending and

underwriting, and could pose significant risk to investors because of their risky lending strate-

gies. For example, the DJSI North America Index has high concentrations of JP Morgan Chase,

Bank of America Corp, and Citigroup Inc.13

All three of these banks are top financiers of coal-

fired power and coal mining. The top 10 companies included in the FTSE4GOOD’s Environmen-

tal Leaders Europe 40 Index included banks HSBC and BNP Paribas, two other large funders of

coal.14

Although the sustainability indices have limitations, companies must show more than a

large market capitalization to be included in the index. The MCSI indices also appear to have

better screens than the FTSE4Good or DJSI, and have excluded more of the large commercial

banks and energy companies that the FTSE4GOOD and the DJSI included. MCSI also has the

option of creating custom indices, which could be an interesting option for passive investors to

explore.

Although the MCSI indices could be a good solution for passive investors, it’s important to con-

sider a range of factors. The first and most obvious are risk and return. Are the risks and returns

similar to indices your endowment previously benchmarked against? It’s also important to con-

sider the methodology used to create the different sustainability indices. Do they include ‘best

in sector’ companies? Do they consider finance companies as high risk, as well as energy com-

panies? How do they assess companies on their ESG and SRI practices? Are they benchmarked

against a specific stock exchange? Stock exchanges vary tremendously in fossil fuel exposure.

The London Stock Exchange is far more exposed to fossil fuels, specifically coal, than the New

York Stock Exchange which is more diversified. So benchmarks like the FTSE that follow the

LSE, are far more at risk than the DJSI or MSCI, which track the NYSE. Emerging market stock

exchanges are also likely to be impacted more from climate change. They have a greater con-

centration of energy companies than developed markets, and developing countries are likely to

feel climate change impacts more than developed countries.


Investors interested in diversifying their portfolios should engage in strategic asset allocation

(SAA). Mercer, an investment consulting agency, found that SAA is attributable to over 90% of

the fluctuations in a portfolio over time.15 Traditionally investors have diversified across main

asset classes like equity, fixed income, cash investments, real assets, and their different sub-

groups. But Mercer found that it is necessary to diversify across sources of risk to protect asset

against risks from climate change.16

Diversifying across sources of risk implies underweighting sectors exposed to high carbon emis-

sions, such as utilities, cement, and fossil fuel sectors. Investors can also hedge against fossil fuel

investments through investment in industries that will succeed in a low-carbon economy. Low-

carbon bonds, companies specializing in energy efficiency, and renewable energy are examples

of investments that would likely succeed in a low-carbon world.

Investors can tilt their portfolio away from carbon intensive sectors, but they can also tilt their

portfolio away from certain companies. Pure coal and oil sands companies are higher risk than

more diversified mining companies or oil & gas enterprises. Utilities, miners, and some financial

companies could also face risks from climate change. Investors can choose to only invest in less

risky fossil fuel companies, or can overweight less risky companies to hedge against the riskier

ones.

Hedging Our Bets


Shareholder Engagement

4. Beyond Divestment

Investors and fund members should engage with their fund managers about risks from climate

change. The more pressure that asset owners and fund managers feel from fund members and

investors, the more likely they will be to engage with companies likely to feel impacts from cli-

mate change and climate change mitigation strategies.

Fossil fuel companies are aware that under a 2° scenario 60-80% of their reserves cannot be

combusted, but they will continue to spend CAPEX on exploration and development until the

world’s demand for fossil fuels decreases. As long as there is a profitable market, fossil fuels will

be supplied. But by pressuring many industries, sectors, and companies to answer questions

about mitigating run-away global warming, and the implementation of carbon risk in to their

long-term strategy, they may start to change, as some already have.

Another part of engagement is being present in company decisions. Shareholders do hold pow-

er, but have the right to exercise this power through proxy voting at company annual general

meetings (AGM). At BHP Billiton’s last AGM, held in October 2013, the first four questions

posed by shareholders were about climate change and BHP’s strategy.17 At the AGM sharehold-

ers tried to elect Ian Dunlop, who was previous head of Australian Coal Association and em-

ployee of Royal Dutch Shell, but now works as an environmental activist. Although Dunlop only

received 4% of the vote in London, and 3.5% of the vote in Perth, this is a primary example of

investors are starting to engage with fossil fuel companies.18

To engage in proxy voting shareholders must own at least $2000 in company stock. Divestment

would be limiting because it leaves investors unable to participate in proxy voting or raise

shareholder resolutions. Although this does protect part of the divestee’s portfolio, it doesn’t

address the overarching problem of climate change that could be raised through shareholder

resolutions.

13

Many asset owners have already taken action to address risks from climate change, yet there

hasn’t been much action from university and college endowments. Most college and university

endowments cannot have the same influence in the investment world as other asset owners, be-

cause of the amount of money they control. However, other asset owners, with the exception of

foundations, are invested to make a profit, and pay out dividends to shareholders. Endowments

are also invested to make a profit, but are invested to sustain their mission as leaders of innova-

tion and solutions, not to pay lucky shareholders. It is this difference that gives colleges and

universities a distinct voice in the investment world, should they choose to lead.

It is my opinion that divestment from fossil fuels is not the best approach to address risks from

climate change. Divestment will only protect part of the portfolio in the event of a carbon bub-

ble forming, but the problem is much more overarching. Although I have included a list of more

sustainably focused managers, funds, and indices, I believe the change must come from the

shareholders and fund members.

Alone, each university and college owns a very small portion of many companies, but together is

where shareholders have the opportunity to see change. University and college endowments

need to come together, like 70 asset owners and managers did in 2013, and ask fossil fuel compa-

nies, utilities, financial institutions, smelting companies, and mining companies to disclose

their strategies in a low-carbon economy.

As leaders of higher learning, colleges and universities have a opportunity to unify and lead as-

set owners towards more sustainable and reliable portfolios.

Conclusion

5. Conclusion 14

1 (2013.) Unburnable Carbon 2013: Wasted Capital and Stranded Assets. Carbon Tracker Initiative

& The Grantham Research Institute, LSE.

2 Ibid.

3 (2012). Managing Climate Change Risks. Asset Owners Disclosure Project.

4 (2014). Global Climate Index 2013-14. Asset Owners Disclosure Project.

5 (2011). Climate Change Scenarios—Implications for Strategic Asset Allocation. Mercer LLC.

6 (2012). The Yale Endowment. Yale University

7 John F. Powers. (2011). Report From the Stanford Management Company. Stanford Management

Company.

8 Endowment Investment Strategy Asset Allocation Principles. Arizona State University Founda-

tion.

9 (December 31, 2013). Asset Allocation. The Ohio State University.

10 (2014). SRI Basics. USSIF.

11 (October 2013). Investors Ask Fossil Fuel Companies to Asses How Business Plans Fare in a Low-

Carbon Future. Carbon Tracker Initiative.

12 (2014). SRI Basics. USSIF.

13 (January 2014). Dow Jones Sustainability North America Diversified Index. Dow Jones Sustaina-

bility Indices.

14 (January 31, 2014). FTSE4Good Environmental Leaders Europe 40 Index. FTSE.

15 (2011). Climate Change Scenarios—Implications for Strategic Asset Allocation. Mercer LLC.

16 Ibid.

17 Georgia. (November 28, 2013). BHP AGM. 350 Australia.

18 Sue Lannin and Pat McGrath. (November 21, 2013). Climate Change Activist Ian Dunlop Ap-

pears to Have Failed to Gain a Seat on BHP Billiton’s Board. ABC News.

References

15 6. References

Reapproaching Divestment

Documents

Transcript of Reapproaching Divestment