Be informed about free updates
Simply log in to ESG investment Myft Digest – delivered directly to your arrived mail.
Don’t let a happy smile in my photo deceive. I come to the loss of work to this day. Stress on my family. Giving up our London home. Be broken.
The worst is my heretical speech Almost three years ago – in which I was thinking that climate change was not as material for portfolio as other risks, like, you know, recessions and things – they would not raise the murmur now. This is because under Donald Trump, the financial sector has performed one of its most infamous works of apostasy ever. He does not seem to believe in sustainability anymore.
The Net-Little Banking Federation has Lost his flock and the goals of emissions associated with funding are revisedkindly said. In the meantime, a happy finding of a portfolio manager who prays more for the environment, social and management. Will be too busy Falling a firmly obliged obligation to fall to subtract from fossil fuel companies.
Such is their loss of faith that the initiative of the net zero manager of the property “suspends his activities” in January. The insurance version is also dead. How I was judged in 2022 when I wrote on this site that such initiatives were “Clapptrap”.
Is that simply a matter of pragmatism, I would sympathize. Wake up the corner swinging the other way. Companies have always followed money – especially banks. When I was responsibly invested in the Great, the survey after the survey said the clients became green. Moms and dads and institutions equally wanted their savings to “do good”. An inflow into sustainable funds reached $ 645 billion globally in 2021, according to Morningstar, including ESG products. It was a quarter of all influx.
The banks also made a wealth from everything, from green bonds to research, such as index providers, advisers, data analysis companies and more. Well, demand was there. And now it’s not. For example, a sustainable influx, for example, there were ungodly $ 36 billion out of $ 1.5 Titran.
But hold on. Net zero goals or ESG have never been sold to us as shareholders of friendly, profit maximation options. Yes they are, fair enough. Lift them up – the world has changed. No, from the beginning they placed as basic beliefs. Sustainability was one of the main values of each bank. Saving our planet was the purpose of the property manager.
Such plastics have never been a language in the cheek. They really took them very seriously – as skeptics like me have learned about their expenses. But was it all a lie? If not, it is pathetic how much the finance industry has easily lost its religion. If they did not believe in sustainability in the first place, we all drove. Who would ever trust the banker or portfolio manager again?
Not to mention potential wrong sales. Therefore, in my opinion, the financial industry has no choice but to find its faith again. It must quickly remind us of the vital role that the world becomes a better place.
I still believe that. So Many others. The problem is that much of the sustainable finance 1.0 was wrong. It doesn’t matter. What is important is that the bankers convince us that they are truly in an attempt. And it will be again. So, the current return is an opportunity – to shed the wrong practices, to improve the good bits, as they preach the message that the finance of the force is for good.
Let’s start with banks. If I were a global boss of sustainability, I would have reminded the shareholders that 80 percent of world energy still comes from fossil fuels. You really want the lights to come in? The foolish cutting of finances into coal, oil or gas companies does not make sense. Better to engage, help them cross and encourage economic growth needed to invest in renewable energy sources.
I would also point out that half of the greenhouse shows come from only three dozen companies – and 16 of them are state -owned. Banks, as well as governments and regulators, should direct their efforts where it is calculated. And investors. But property owners and managers must first correct another set of distribution. As I wrote before, they confuse investment with trading.
Buying or selling shares on the secondary market in itself does not affect anything. Capital is permanent capital and there must be a buyer for any deviation – and vice versa. To influence the company, you need to own its shares to vote. Exclusion strategies are so perverse. They are also immoral because you force someone to own the supplies you turn off. The only “investment” that moves the needle occurs in primary markets – risk capital, private capital, direct borrowing and so on – where actual money is given or withdrawn. Sustainable Finance 2.0 should start here.
And, in the end, what about ESG? In spite of what they are blame for your deathI’m a fan. Not as an access to the selection of stock, although it is no less legitimate than any form of active management. Sometimes it works, mostly not. Instead, ESG is useful as a measure of “goodness” out of risk and return. Unlike the above, regulation is required. One result per company, no argumentation. Only then will people know what they buy.
Indeed, without trust in sustainable finances, there is no chance. It means being realistic, honest and pragmatic. Smaller trees hugged, more data and coherent solutions. But the first bankers must prove to us that they believe that.
