RESPONSIBILITY RESEARCH TUM VORLESUNG UMWELTMANAGEMENT, 25/06/2019 - Cosima Reiff, Associate ESG Ratings
←
→
Transkription von Seiteninhalten
Wenn Ihr Browser die Seite nicht korrekt rendert, bitte, lesen Sie den Inhalt der Seite unten
RESPONSIBILITY RESEARCH
TUM VORLESUNG
U M W E LT M A N A G E M E N T, 2 5 / 0 6 / 2 0 1 9
C o s i m a Re i f f, A s s o c i ate ES G R at i n g s
AGENDA
1. Nachhaltige Kapitalanlagen
• Hintergrund und Verständnis
• Motive
• Strategien
• Marktdaten
• Performance
2. Corporate ESG Performance Rating
DIVERSE BEZEICHNUNGEN
• Grünes Geld
• Ethisches Investment
• Prinzipiengeleitetes Investment
NACH H A LT IG E • Nachhaltiges Investment
K A P I TA L -
• Socially Responsible Investment (SRI)
• ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance)
• Impact Investing
ANLAGEN • ....
MAGISCHES VIERECK
GRUNDVERSTÄNDNIS Neben den klassischen Anlagekriterien Rendite, Risiko und Liquidität wird bei der
Kapitalanlage auch die soziale und ökologische Performance der Anlageobjekte
berücksichtigt
RENDITE RISIKO
LIQUIDITÄT NACHHALTIGKEIT
3
EU NACHHALTIGE FINANZWIRTSCHAFT
- Regulierungsvorschläge der EU-Kommission (2018) -
TA XO N O M I E S TA N D A R D S BENCHMARKS OFFENLEGUNGS- F I N A N Z B E R AT U N G
& LABELS PFLICHTEN
Klassifizierung nachhaltiger Green Bond Standard Transitions- und "Paris-konforme" ESG-Risiken im Nachhaltigkeitspräferenzen
Geschäftsaktivitäten und EU Ecolabel Benchmark-Methodiken Investmentprozess in MiFID und IDD Richtlinien
4
R E P U TAT I O N S R I S I K E N F Ü R I N V E S T O R E N .
• Institutionelle Investoren sehen sich aufgrund von kontroversen Investitionen
NACH H A LT IG E zunehmender Kritik ausgesetzt.
K A P I TA L - • Dies gilt insbesondere für Fälle, in denen die Kapitalanlage die Ziele der
jeweiligen Organisation konterkariert.
ANLAGEN
• Reputationsverluste durch Kontroversen bei der Kapitalanlage können sowohl
die finanzielle als auch die gesellschaftliche Position institutioneller Investoren
empfindlich schädigen.
MOTIVE
R I S I KO H I L F E M I T H I L F E V O N N A C H H A LT I G K E I T S R AT I N G S .
• Ratings haben Kunden vor Fehlinvestment gewarnt
• Unternehmen waren vorher schlecht bewertet etc.
6N A C H H A L T I G E K A P I TA L A N L A G E N
- MOTIVE & STRATEGIEN -
RISIKO & RENDITE VERANTWORTUNG & WERTE
Nachhaltigkeit als ökonomischer Übereinstimmung der Kriterien bei der
Erfolgsfaktor mit Einfluss auf das Kapitalanlage mit eigenen ethischen
Risiko-Rendite-Verhältnis Werten
B E S T- I N - C L A S S A N S AT Z ENGAGEMENT AUSSCHLUSSKRITERIEN
Auswahl der Unternehmen, die innerhalb Direkte Einflussnahme auf die Ausschluss von Unternehmen, die in
ihrer Branche zu den Vorreitern bei der Unternehmensführung zur Verbesserung kontroversen Geschäftsfeldern tätig sind
Berücksichtigung von der nachhaltigkeitsbezogenen Leistungen oder Mindeststandards an die
Nachhaltigkeitskriterien zählen Unternehmensführung nicht genügen
7E N T W I C K L U N G N A C H H A LT I G E R I N V E S T M E N T S I N E U R O PA
- E u r o s i f, E u r o p e a n S R I 2 0 1 8 S t u d i e -
M A R K T-
ENTWICKLUNG
EUROPA
mEUR
CAGR = Compound Annual Growth Rate
8MARKTENTWICKLUNG GLOBAL
ENTWICKLUNG NACHHALTIGER INVESTMENTS GLOBAL
- GSIA, Global Sustainable Investment Review 2018 -
Globales Wachstum nachhaltiger Anlagestrategien Anteil von nachhaltig investiertem Vermögen nach Region
9BEISPIEL STUDIEN
Metastudie von Mercer (2007, 2009)
• Analyse von insgesamt 36 empirischen Performancestudien
• 30 Studien sehen einen neutralen bis positive Einfluss von ESG-Kriterien auf die
PERFORMANCE
Performance von Kapitalanlagen, davon 20 einen deutlich positiven Zusammenhang
Metastudie Deutsche Bank (2012)
• Analyse von insgesamt 100 empirischen Performancestudien
• Fazit: „Unternehmen mit guter Nachhaltigkeitsperformance haben geringere
KEINE RENDITENACHTEILE, SOGAR
Kapitalkosten und stellen für Investoren ein niedrigeres Risiko dar.“
CHANCEN DER OUTPERFORMANCE
FA Z I T
Ergebnisse zahlreicher empirischer Analysen zeigen: Nachhaltige Kapitalanlagen weisen
gegenüber konventionellen Investments keine Renditenachteile auf, sondern zeigen
einen neutralen bis positiven Zusammenhang.
10IN ZAHLEN.
EMITTENTEN-UNIVERSUM
M I TA R B E I T E R ~ 10.000 (2019)
Circa 360 Mitarbeiter, davon 195 Analysten, 25.000 20.000 ~ 8.000 (2018)
die mehr als 25 Sprachen sprechen ~7.000 (2017)
CLIMATE CONTROVERSIES ESG CO RP O RATE &
/NORMS CO U NTRY RATING S
AMERICAS
21%
EMEIA
ESG KUNDEN C O R P O R AT E ES G P E R F O R M A N C E R AT I N G
360 47%
500+ • Abdeckung wichtiger Aktienindizes in Industrie- und
Institutionelle Investoren & Schwellenländern
APAC
Asset Manager weltweit • Abdeckung von Small- und Mid-Cap-Indizes in
32%
entwickelten Märkten
• Wichtige nicht-börsennotierte Anleiheemittenten
12DATEN. ANALYSEN. HINTERGRUND.
Konkrete und komplementäre Daten im Bereich ESG & Corporate Governance
SCREENINGS & R AT I N G S KLIMA I M PA C T & S D G s GOVERNANCE
CONTROVERSIES D AT E N
• Norm-Based Research • Unternehmens- & Länderrating • Emissionen, Scope 1&2 und Scope 3 • Sustainability Solutions • Director / Board Data
• Controversial Weapons • Sustainability Bond Rating • Emissionsintensität Assessments (UN SDGs) • Director Skills & Bios
• Energy & Extractive • E&S Disclosure QualityScore • Potential Avoided Emissions • Impact Assessment Data • Director Pay Data
Screening • Governance QualityScore • Physische Risikoexposition • Executive Compensation
• Ethical Screening • 2°C-Ausrichtung Data & Profiles
• Global Sanctions Screening • Carbon Risk Rating
13C O R P O R AT E E S G P E R F O R M A N C E R AT I N G
AKTUALISIERUNG.
- Update von Rating Reports und Daten -
FORTLAUFEND JÄHRLICH
E R FA S S U N G V O N I N F O R M AT I O N E N V O N
KO N T R O V E R S E N UNTERNEHMEN
SCREENING (internationale Medien, NGOs, (Geschäftsberichte, CSR Berichte,
wissenschaftliche Institutionen...) Webseiten, Richtlinien...)
E V A L U AT I O N
UNTERNEHMENSVERÄNDER- Q U A N T I TAT I V E D AT E N P U N K T E
UNGEN (ESG Impact Daten, Umsatzdaten von
(Fusionen, Übernahmen, Delisting...) Produktgruppen und Dienstleistungen...)
I N T E G R AT I O N
15D I A L O G - O R I E N T I E R T E R R AT I N G P R O Z E S S .
CORPORATE ESG
PERFORMANCE
RATING
16BEWERTUNGSPRINZIPIEN.
CORPORATE • Pool von 800+ Indikatoren, mehrheitlich branchenspezifisch.
PERFORMANCE • Bewertung der Nachhaltigkeitsperformance eines Unternehmens anhand
RATING von über 100 ausgewählter ESG-Kriterien.
• Materialität: Fokus auf 4 bis 5 hoch gewichteten Schlüsselthemen je
Branche.
• Messung von Transparenz, Risiken, Wirkung und Performance.
• Ratingskala von D- (poor) bis A+ (excellent), dahinterliegende nummerische
Scores.
• Ganzheitlicher Ansatz inklusive der Wertschöpfungskette.
• Transparenter Ratingprozess.
17KRITERIENENTWICKLUNG.
CORPORATE
PERFORMANCE •
E I N F LU S S FA K TO R E N
Gesellschaftliche Diskussion
RATING • Naturwissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse, technischer Fortschritt
• Regulatorische Veränderungen
• Datenverfügbarkeit
• Reportingstandards (GRI, SASB...)
G LO B A L E R E L E VA N Z
• UN SDGs
• Principles of Responsible Investment (PRI)
• EU Sustainable Finance Regulation
• Internationale Normen (UN Global Compact, ILO...)
18I N D I K ATO R E N Z U M E H R A L S 3 0 T H E M E N .
CORPORATE
PERFORMANCE
RATING
19RATINGKRITERIEN.
Beispiele.
M I TA R B E I T E R U N D GESELLSCHAFT UND C O R P O R AT E G O V E R N A N C E
ZULIEFERER PRODUKTVERANTWORTUNG UND WIRTSCHAFTSETHIK
• Vereinigungsfreiheit • Schutz der Menschenrechte • Unabhängigkeit der Aufsichtsgremien
• Chancengleichheit • Politische Einflussnahme • Nachhaltige Unternehmensführung
• Sicherheit und Gesundheit • Verantwortungsvolles Marketing • Aktionärsrechte
• Work-Life Balance • Datenschutz • Transparenz bzgl. Vorstandsgehälter
• Arbeitsplatzsicherheit • Produktsicherheit • Wirtschaftsethik
• Zuliefererstandards • Sozialer Einfluss des Produktportfolios ...
... ...
PRODUKTE UND Ö KO - E F F I Z I E N Z
U M W E LT M A N A G E M E N T DIENSTLEISTUNGEN
• Umwelt- und • Biodiversität • Energieeffizienz
Energiemanagementsysteme • Rohmaterialien und bedenkliche Substanzen • Treibhausgasintensität
• Klimaschutz • Materialeffizienz • Wassereffizient
• Auswirkungen auf Wasserhaushalt • Verpackung • Abfallintensität
• Umweltmanagement in der Lieferkette • Produkt-Lebenszyklus • Branchenspezifische Luft- und
• Grüne Beschaffung • Umwelteinfluss des Produktportfolios... Wasserschadsstoffintensitäten
... ... ...
20ABSOLUTER BEST IN CLASS ANSATZ.
Branchenspezifische Performanceerwartung und Prime Schwellen
Je größer die absoluten negativen Auswirkungen der Branche im Umwelt- und
Sozialbereich sind, desto höher sind die Anforderungen an das
Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement und desto höher ist daher die Prime-Schwelle.
21R AT I N G K R I T E R I E N – DAT E N BA N K .
22CO R P O R AT E ES G P E R FO R M A N C E – R AT I N G R E P O RT
ISS-oekom Corporate Rating Apple Inc. Apple Inc.
Apple Inc.
Apple Inc. A. Social and Governance Rating 50.0% C B. Environmental Rating 50.0% B-
Reportedly, the F TC issued subpoenas to music streaming services like Spotify, Jango, Rhapsody, and others to A.2.2.
determine
Weight Grade Weight Grade
Customer and product responsibility 13.1% C+
Weight Rating whether Apple's App Store
Weight Ratingrules violate antitrust laws. In 2015, Apple launched a new music streaming service, Apple Music,
and provided the App Store platform for competing streaming services. The main complaint with Apple stems from A.2.2.1. Social impact of products and services
a 30 per 3.8% C
Industry Electronic Devices & Appliances Status
Prime 60%
40%
60%
40%
cent fee that the company charges from other music streaming services, which makes their services less attractive
Apple's for iOS users. Moreover, the terms of agreement with Apple prevent the competing streaming services from
than
A.2.2.1.1. Social impacts of the product portfolio 3.8% C
advertising the possibility of using cheaper web-based versions of their own services in the app itself. 2017
C+
20% 20%
Country United States of America Rating
0% 0% Share of
D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+ D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+ Products and services with an impact on the achievement of global social objectives net sales
2016-04: Unfair contract terms against network operators, France (est.)
ISIN US0378331005 Prime Threshold
C+ A.1. Staff and Suppliers 25.0% C B.1. Environmental Management Company: Competition
15.0%
potential controversy
B+ Alleviating poverty:
Weight Rating Weight Rating Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
- staff - environmental management Media reports from April 2016 revealed a lawsuit filed by the French competition watchdog, the Directorate General for
Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
- freedom of association - energy management Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control (DGCCRF), against Apple for EUR 48.5 million, constituting of a EUR 8
- equal opportunities - climate change strategy million fine and compensations to respective network operators in France. As reported, the agency also seeks to force Combating
Apple hunger and malnutrition:
- health and safety - water risk and impact to remove the ten clauses alleged unfair, including provisions on amount of products to be ordered, contribution to
Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+
- work-life balance, pay and benefits - travel and transport advertising managed by Apple and to iPhone repair costs, funding of iPhone's in-store display, Apple's entitlement to void the
Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
- employment security/employm. types - suppliers contract with a operator without prior notice, to name a few. The regulator sees such clauses as illegal and granting too
poor medium good - trainingexcellent
and education much power to Apple over its French network operators. Ensuring health:
- suppliers
Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
The assessment of a company’s sustainability performance is based on approximately 100 criteria, selected specifically for each industry. A company’s failure to disclose, or lack of transparency,
2015-12: Audiobooks antitrust, Germany
60% 60% Company: Competition Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
regarding these matters will impact a company’s rating negatively.
potential controversy Delivering education:
40% 40%
20% 20% Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
In November 2015, the German Federal Cartel Office initiated administrative proceedings against Amazon’s subsidiary
Industry Leaders Key Issue Performance 0% 0% Audible.com and Apple regarding their arrangement for purchasing audiobooks. The companies hold a strong position in the
Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+ D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+
market for digital audiobooks in Germany and have a long-term agreement on the exclusive supply of audiobooks to Apple’s
Attaining gender equality:
Company name Country Grade iTunes store. The proceedings were initiated following a complaint by the German Publishers and Booksellers Association
Labour standards and working
A.2. Society and Product Responsibility 17.5% C+ B.2. Products and Services 30.0% B- Contribution:
(Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels) which accused the companies of abusing their dominant market position to force no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
(in alphabetical order) conditions publishers to accept 'unreasonable conditions' for the marketing of audio books. The watchdog investigations concentrated
Weight Rating Weight Rating Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
Dell Technologies Inc. US B- Resource-conserving production - society on whether Amazon and its subsidiary were building a monopoly in the audio book business and thus prevented audiobook
- env. impact of products and services
publishers to have had sufficient alternative channels for the sale of their digital audiobooks. Providing basic services:
- human rights - env. aspects along the value chain
HP Inc. US B- According to the German Federal Cartel Office in January 2017, it closed the administrative proceedings after Amazon and
Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
Take-back and recycling - community - product lifecycle
Apple ended their exclusivity agreement with effect from January 2017.
Koninklijke Philips N.V. NL B- - gov.relations/influence on publ.pol. - material efficiency Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
Ecodesign of products - stakeholder dialogue - substances of concern
- customer and product responsibility - energy efficiency Safeguarding peace:
- social impact of prod. and services - packaging, take-back and recycling 2014-12: Mobile carrier antitrust, Canada
Responsible sourcing of raw Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
materials - social aspects along the value chain - impacts of outsourced production Company: Competition
Legend: Industry Company Prime potential controversy Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
D C B A
60% 60% Other (Social):
According to media reports published in December 2014, Canada's Competition Bureau (CCB) is probing Apple Canada, a
40% 40% Contribution: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact
subsidiary of Apple, for its alleged use of anti-competitive clauses in contracts with domestic wireless carriers. The antitrust 0%
20% 20% watchdog recently sought a court order to compel Apple to provide information related to the investigation. However, CCB
Obstruction: no products or services with a direct and substantial impact 0%
Distribution of Ratings Rating History stressed that it has no evidence for anti-competitive conduct on behalf of Apple so far.
0% 0%
D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+ D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+
A.2.2.1.2. Strategy shift towards a more socially beneficial product portfolio 0.0% x
2014-09: Bid rigging investigation, Los Angeles, United States
115 companies in the industry Not applicable as the company does not exhibit a clear and substantial strategy to shift its portfolio towards socially (more)
A.3. Corporate Governance and Business Ethics 7.5% B- B.3. Eco-efficiency Company: Competition
5.0% C-
potential controversy beneficial products and/or services.
30% A
Weight Rating Weight Rating
A.2.2.2. Social aspects along the value chain 9.4% C+
- corporate governance - energy efficiency According to media reports in August 2014, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) suspended a USD 1.3 bn contract
B - board independence - GHG intensity A.2.2.2.1.
with Apple regarding its iPad school project due to allegations of bid-rigging. Pearson as a subcontractor to Apple in theRaw materials from controversial sources
20%
3.8% B+
- shareholder democracy - water efficiency project was to provide curriculum and apps on the IPads, which were to be distributed to all students, teachers and campus
- executive compensation - waste intensity a. Company position: The company is committed to implementing due diligence procedures in order to avoid the use of
C
administrators in the district. Although an initial investigation by the LA County District Attorney in 2013 had found no
- shareholder structure conflict minerals in its products. The company’s position also includes a commitment to continuing the sourcing from
irregularities, concerns were raised again after the release of emails indicating that an employee of the school district, who
- business ethics relevant countries/regions to support the local economy.
10% had previously worked for a Pearson affiliate, had been in contact with Pearson executives prior to the contract award to
D discuss the bid. The initial investigation had allegedly only examined the formal bidding process, but not the period prior to 100% of relevant operations.
Coverage:
that. Furthermore, the emails also revealed close ties of LAUSD's former superintendent with Apple and Pearson. The former
superintendent continued denying the allegations. Media reported that in December 2014 the FBI seized documents b. Due diligence
in in accordance with the US Dodd-Frank Act:
0%
D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+ 2014 2015 2016 2017 60%
2018 2019 60% relation to the Ipad programme suggesting further investigations into the matter. No further information is available on the
40% 40% investigation progress.
Having officially terminated the programme in December 2014, the LAUSD started to seek refund from Apple and Pearson for
20% 20%
the performance failures in Pearson's apps in April 2015. In September 2015, media reports revealed a tentative USD 4.2
0% 0% million settlement that the LAUSD might recoup from Apple.
D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+ D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B B+ A- A A+
Controversy Monitor
2013-03: Bribery investigations, Russia
Company Industry
Company: Corruption
Controversy Score -20 Maximum Controversy Score -23
Controversy Level Significant Controversy Risk Moderate
Minor Moderate Significant Severe Minor Moderate Significant Severe
ISS-oekom Corporate Rating / Last Modification: 2019-03-22 Page 25 of 54 © ISS-oekom
ISS-oekom Corporate Rating / Last Modification: 2019-03-22 Page 3 of 54 © ISS-oekom
ISS-oekom Corporate Rating / Last Modification: 2019-03-22 Page 35 of 54 © ISS-oekom
ISS-oekom Corporate Rating / Last Modification: 2019-03-22 Page 1 of 54 © ISS-oekom
23N A C H H A LT I G K E I T S - P E R F O R M A N C E V O N I N T E R N AT I O N A L
TÄT I G E N K O N Z E R N E N M I T S I T Z I N I N D U S T R I E L Ä N D E R N
– DMU: 1.600 Large Cap Unternehmen –
0,06% 0,06% 0,13% 0,06% 0,12% 0,06%
16,71% 16,15% 16,16% 16,48% 17,07% 20,37% → Anstieg der Top-
P O S IT IV E Performer
ENTWICKLUNG 30,09% 34,07% 35,87% 40,15% 43,62%
47,23% → Mittelfeld wächst
kontinuierlich
53,14% 49,72% 47,85% 43,31%
VERBESSERUNG DER 39,19%
32,34% → Weniger als ein Drittel
DURCHSCHNITTLICHEN ESG- sind Poor Performer
PERFORMANCE TROTZ STEIGENDER 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
ANFORDERUNGEN poor medium good excellent
GRÜNDE
• Zunehmende Transparenz in Bezug auf ESG-Themen
• Steigende Bedeutung von Standards wie TCFD und SASB
• Gesetzliche Anforderungen und Berichtspflichten
• Gestiegenes Bewusstsein über den Beitrag von ESG-Aspekten zum
Unternehmenserfolg
24A N T E I L D E R U N T E R N E H M E N M I T P R I M E S TAT U S P R O B R A N C H E
– in Bezug auf das gesamte ESG-Rating-Universum –
Household & Personal Products 28,2%
Semiconductors 26,7%
Electronic Devices & Appliances
V ERT EILU NG DES Telecommunications
21,7%
19,8%
P R I M E S TAT U S
Machinery 19,3%
Software & IT Services 17,2%
Electronic Components 16,0%
Financials/Commercial Banks & Capital… 14,4%
Automobile 13,9%
Textiles & Apparel 13,8%
Utilities/Electric Utilities 12,5%
AUSGEPRÄGTE UNTERSCHIEDE DER Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 12,2%
PRIME-QUOTEN JE NACH BRANCHE Health Care Equipment & Supplies 11,5%
Real Estate 11,0%
Metals & Mining 10,2%
Auto Components 9,8%
Chemicals 9,4%
Construction 6,7%
Food & Beverages 6,4%
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels 6,0%
Retail 4,8%
NUR 16,6% DER UNTERNEHMEN ERREICHEN DEN PRIME STATUS:
• Unterschiedliche Risikoprofile von Unternehmen und Branchen
• ESG-Auswirkungen der Produkte und Dienstleistungen
• Öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit und Erwartungen von Stakeholdern
25Branche Top #1 Top #2 Top #3
Automobile Peugeot S.A. FR C+ BMW AG DE C+ Tesla Inc. US C+
Borregaard Air Products and
Chemicals Clariant AG CH B- NO B- US B-
ASA Chemicals Inc.
Electronic Devices Dell Technolo- Koninklijke
HP Inc. US B- US B- NL B-
& Appliances gies Inc. Philips N.V.
TO P DR EI Financials/Commercial NIBC Bank
NL C+
ABN AMRO
NL C+
Raiffeisen Bank
AT C+
Banks & Capital Markets N.V. Group N.V. International AG
ESG-LEADER Machinery Alstom S.A. FR B-
Ingersoll-Rand
Plc
IE B- Komatsu Ltd. JP B-
Kumba Iron Anglo
Metals & Mining ZA B GB B Norsk Hydro ASA NO B
Ore Ltd. American plc
EUROPÄISCHE UNTERNEHMEN ERZIELEN Oil, Gas &
Enagás S.A. ES B Snam S.p.A. IT B- TOTAL S.A. FR B-
Consumable Fuels
DIE BESTEN BEWERTUNGEN
Taiwan
STMicroelect T
Semiconductors CH B- Semiconductor B- Intel Corp. US B-
ronics N.V. W
Manufacturing
Industria de
Textiles & Apparel H & M AB SE C+ ES C+ adidas AG DE C+
Diseño Textil
Utilities/Electric Utilities Ørsted A/S DK B VERBUND AG AT B ERG S.p.A. IT B
ERGEBNISSE
• Europäische Unternehmen dominieren weiterhin die Top-3-Platzierungen
• Einige langjährige Erstplatzierte wurden 2018 von neuen ESG-Leadern
verdrängt
26NORM-BASED CONTROVERSY ASSESSMENT.
UN GLOBAL OECD
AREA ISSUE C O M PA C T GUIDELINES
Right to health Consumers’ rights
Human rights due diligence
Right to life Cybersecurity
Stakeholder consultation
Human rights risk in military/security Right to privacy
Indigenous rights Principles Chapters
supplies Tobacco control
Forced displacement 1,2 IV, V, VIII
Torture/inhumane treatment Right to an adequate standard of living
Traditional knowledge
HUMAN RIGHTS Right to water
Right to self-determination Social discrimination
Freedom of expression Failure to pay fair share of taxes
Child labour
Just and favourable conditions of work Discrimination Principles
Forced labour Chapter V
Safe and healthy working conditions Living wage 3,4,5,6
Union rights
LABOUR RIGHTS
Oil spill
Failure to assess environmental impacts
Water pollution Nuclear safety
Climate change mitigation Principles
Soil pollution Waste management Chapter VI
Depletion of biodiversity
Hazardous substances
7,8,9
Air pollution
Deforestation / illegal logging
ENVIRONMENT Gas leak
Money laundering Principle Chapters
Anti-competitive behaviour Fraud
Bribery 10 VII, X, XI
BUSINESS
MALPRACTICE
27KONTROVERSEN AKTUELL IM DISKURS.
R EC H T E
ZWA N G SA R B E I T K L I M AWA N D E L B I O D I V E RS I TÄT
INDIGENER GRUPPEN
• Sehr hoher Anteil an • Erhöhte Reputationsrisiken • Widerstand gegen Klima- • Im Vorfeld der Peking Konferenz
Menschenrechtskontroversen infolge umfassender Initiativen regulierungen und unzureichende 2020 beobachten Interessen-
• Große Pipelinevorhaben in durch Interessenvertreter Klimaschutzmaßnahmen werden vertreter das Thema zunehmend
Nordamerika und Wasserkraft- • Rechtliche Risiken infolge von der Öffentlichkeit kritisch.
projekte in Südamerika regulatorischer Initiativen zunehmend kritisch gesehen. • Gestiegenes Bewusstsein
• Zunehmende soziale Konflikte in • Geschäftsaktivitäten in Indien, • Besonders risikoexponierte hinsichtlich der Verletzlichkeit
Brasilien könnten negative Brasilien, Thailand und Branchen sind Energieversorger, von Ökosystemen und der
Auswirkungen auf die Rechte Malaysia weisen die meisten Banken und Rohstoffe Zusammenhänge zwischen
indigener Gruppen haben. Kontroversen auf. • Die schwerwiegendsten Klimawandel und Biodiversität
Kontroversen in den USA
28FRAGEN & ANTWORTEN
www.issgovernance.com/esg/
V i e l e n D a n k f ü r I h r e A u f m e r k s a m ke i t .
29Disclaimer ISS ESG is the responsible investment arm of Institutional Shareholder Services Inc., the world’s leading provider of environmental, social, and governance solutions for asset owners, asset managers, hedge funds, and asset servicing providers. With more than 30 years of corporate governance expertise and 25 years of providing in-depth responsible investment research and analytics, ISS ESG has the unique understanding of the requirements of institutional investors. With its comprehensive offering of solutions, ISS ESG enables investors to develop and integrate responsible investing policies and practices, engage on responsible investment issues, and monitor portfolio company practices through screening solutions. It also provides climate data, analytics, and advisory services to help financial market participants understand, measure, and act on climate-related risks across all asset classes. In addition, ISS ESG delivers corporate and country ESG research and ratings enabling its clients to identify material social and environmental risks and opportunities. Along with these robust ESG offerings, the unit provides institutions with an established standard in measuring, analyzing, projecting, valuing, and discounting a firm’s underlying economic profit. This document and all of the information contained in it is the property of Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (“ISS”) or its subsidiaries. The Information may not be reproduced or redisseminated in whole or in part without prior written permission of ISS. ISS MAKES NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE INFORMATION. All statistics referenced to in this document are approximate and updated on an annual basis and, unless otherwise noted, relate May 15, 2019.
Sie können auch lesen
