SUSTAINABLE INVESTMENT, SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE KINETIC SOCIAL LICENSE TOOPERATE

Weekly Viewpoints on Sustainable Investment 

In this week's note some reflections from a week's work in Washington DC which gave a sense for where the investment aspects of sustainability are right now, and challenges for financing sustainability trends, as well as some catch ups with colleagues doing interesting work. I hope this commentary and analysis encourages you in your good sustainable investment work. 

IFC Sustainability Forum 18 June 2013

IFC SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT
At the invitation of IFC's sustainability team responsible for Commdev (promoting stakeholder investment in sustainability issues), I was an invited stakeholder for two back-to-back events in the political capital of the world's dominant economy: the IFC Sustainability Forum (aimed at a trends conversation, hosted at the suitably imposing Renaissance Hotel) and the IFC Sustainability Exchange (a multi-stakeholder listening and reframing format, squeezed into IFC's headquarters on Pennsylvania Ave). I took up the invitation partly because of the good systemic work that I see the IFC having the opportunity to influence, and to be a voice presenting the developing markets viewpoint and representing our work at AfricaSIF.org promoting sustainable investment in Africa. As always, instant commentary is via twitter, where I helped out the @IFC_org by tagging the events - #sustysmt2013 and #ifcsustyx2013, see http://commdev.org/sustainabilitysummit. The heavyweights on the first day's IFC Sustainability Summit topic spoke to the season of change I have spoken of before that I sense in the industry, it was headlined "Dealing with Uncertainty". The humility of admitting that the future cannot be forecasted is a good starting point, especially in a town better know for hubris and talking heads. But few speakers helped frame ways to get one's hands around the uncertainty. The IFC team did well to get some major voices in the room, albeit World Bank President Kim only as video message, and the question sessions were good, and the weaving role by moderator Jon Lukomunik worked well. Looking around the room though, and listening to sidebar conversations, the voices seemed a little narrow, missing was a broader voice from South America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa and South East Asia. Little did the speakers know that the stock markets would have a mini-meltdown come Thursday that reminded everyone how thin the progress out of the global financial crisis is, and the discontent on the streets of Brazil, the darling of emerging markets, reflecting the gaps between how things may appear, what politicians may describe, and what is happening on the ground with ordinary citizens. The political economy continues to shift investor reference points. This month Goldman Sachs changed their 2013-2014 GDP forecasts, revising down the outlook for the Euro area, China, Russia and Turkey and upgrading Japan’s. No word on Brazil...

INVESTING IN FRONTIER MARKETS

SinCo has worked on projects with the IFC since 2009, but perhaps the IFC deserves a quick primer. IFC's role is private sector investment in developing countries - originally through project finance (loans) but over the years increasingly in various equity products, bonds and financial market investments (for the latter IFC typically lends to a Bank or PEF who then on-lend to sub-projects - this is now a sizable part of IFC's business). For all of these, IFC are usually a long term investor and work with the client over sometimes many years on developing their E and S management / sustainability systems in order to meet development objectives. A significant amount of conversation covered agri-business sector and oil, gas and mining sectors. IFC clients range from junior exploration companies to the majors such as BHP-Billiton, Rio-Tinto and Anglo-American. As of June 2012, IFC had a portfolio of emerging market investments of US$31.4 billion, of which US$9.8 billion is in equity. In the year ended June 2012, IFC committed more than US$15 billion of debt and equity investments in 559 transactions, of which US$2.1 billion was equity. Since inception, IFC has invested approximately $19.3 billion of equity in more than 2,100 emerging markets transactions, with more than 1,340 exits. Why would IFC be hosting a global think session for sustainability in developing countries? IFC has an important promoter role to play, demonstrating that sustainability makes sense for investors, and for channeling investment to corners of the world where commercial investors are too skittish to invest in. The influence flows in 2 ways: as technical advisory through support for sustainability at company portfolio or regional levels, and as actual investor in equity or fixed income of portfolios and companies. In the field of sustainable investment, IFC has influence on the terms of sustainability through their IFC ESG standards (the basis for industry initiatives like the Equator Principles as well as private equity reporting for PE firms managing money for IFC, OPIC, and others), and directly where IFC's own asset management company (IFC Asset Management Company, LLC) is investing capital, with around US$4.8 billion of assets under management in five funds. AMC funds co-invest alongside IFC’s investments but has independent fund governance, for example AMC’s Board has majority independent members and separate fund investment committees. IFC s investments are typically limited to 25% of the total capitalization of the company or the project IFC equity ownership is typically limited to 20%. IFC does not take control positions.

EVERYTHING IS PUBLIC
Transparency was a refrain across speakers. The powerful, democratic tool of social media in sharing information (both accurate and inaccurate, fair and snarky) is critical for doing businesses in developing countries. The statistics on cellphone penetration is legend. If information is power, then sharing information is about using that power with equity. A term that had resonance was "information equity", talking of a fair deal when all stakeholders voices are reflected, captured and monitored over time. I have inserted into our most recent investment value chain analysis in recent papers for the IFC / POA (see Defining Momentum project page http://www.sincosinco.com/project-sustainable-returns.php) and WWF / GEPF ( see Shuffling Feet report on Navigating Muddy Waters page http://www.sincosinco.com/portfolio-climate-risks.php) some perspective on making sustainable investment happen in the context of pervasive social media and the demand for transparency. In this new Twitter-enabled context, we operate investment decisions within the overarching paradigm of maximum transparency, as a primary lens for building credibility. The ultimate defense may be to "wiki-leaks" proactively because there is no more any internal/external divide, as has so dramatically been demonstrated by young Mr Edward Snowden (future Iceland asylum seeker?). 

SOCIAL LICENSE TO OPERATE
Social media is the social license to operate (SLTO). The role of social media is that it monitors SLTO and offers a grassroots communication channel that encourages (forces) companies, politicians, administrators, investors and other actors to be mindful of treating people fairly. It is not static. The SLTO changes over time. This insight from Rio Tinto's T.Malan was an important one and which many speakers added to. It is also not comforting. Hard-won stakeholder reputation and agreement is not fixed in stone, in coal or gold. It will change, meaning stakeholder mapping and monitoring needs refreshing on some regular cycle, some suggest annually is enough. The point was reinforced in the most granular session which focused on the IFC Commdev Financial Valuation Tool (FVT) widget, basically a strategic planning and valuation tool relying on a ex ante discounted cash flow analysis to value the "investment" opportunity set for stakeholder actions based on the positive/negative cash and time-flow effects on development of site projects. A new Wharton case study using Newmont in Ghana has a helpful context for FVT. No company seems to be using FVT across all projects, although Anglogold Ashanti (NYSE:AU) presented its use in their Geita mine, along with network power/influence analysis. From my perspective, FVT is not being used to explain to mining company institutional investors how company mine investments in sustainability are being made, something I hope we can help change. Anglogold claim mine operators are spending 60% of their time on sustainability issues, that 40% of projects are affected and 25% result in material cost over-runs. And a final word to Vale, the Brazil global miner. Their global public affairs hushed the audience into thoughtful silence by reminding us that mines make profits but also losses, and in the fullness and fairness of sharing the development of riches from rocks, more conversations should include situations that generate profits as well as losses, not only the former. The framing makes sense to investors, but politicians. Too often rights are disconnected from responsibilities. We do well to keep them related, with rights comes responsibilities.

Do good work on sustainable investment that matters.

Graham Sinclair

Principal

@esgarchitect

SinCo

Sustainable Investment Consulting

www.sincosinco.com

@SinCoESG

Based on my work, experience and interactions, all views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the named individuals, institutions or SinCo, it's clients or services providers. No mention suggests endorsement. This commentary does not constitute investment advise. Issued by SinCo to professional investors and stakeholders for information only and its accuracy/completeness is not guaranteed. All opinions may change without notice and may differ to opinions/recommendations expressed by other business areas of SinCo. SinCo may maintain positions and trade in collective investment instruments referred to. Unless stated otherwise, this is not a personal recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy/sell and any prices/quotations are indicative only. SinCo may provide sustainable investment architecture and other services to, and/or its employees may be directors of, companies referred to. To the extent permitted by law, SinCo does not accept any liability arising from the use of this communication.

© SinCo 2013.  All rights reserved. Intended for recipient only and not for further distribution without the consent of SinCo. SinCo reserves the right to retain all messages. Messages are protected and accessed only in legally justified cases.

THE STATE OF SUSTAINABLE INVESTMENT: AWKWARD TEENAGER YEARS?

Weekly Viewpoints on Sustainable Investment 


In this first of a new series of my weekly notes, I reflect on my conversations on the state of play in London with European colleagues in the investment industry operating in theme of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investment decisions. I hope these comments and analysis encourage you in your good sustainable investment work.

Good audience for Responsible Investor RI Europe 2013 in London 11-12 June 2013. PHOTOCREDIT SinCo2013

STATUS QUO

What is the state of play in sustainable investment? It is a common question posed to me by colleagues when I meet, or ask when I travel back. All professionals are tracking their progress, and that of the vocations. Partly it is driven in by the long term insecurity of an investment theme that has very much had to fight for recognition amidst a crowded investment belief system, and has had to strive for credibility. I was asked by Hugh Wheelan [@hughwheelan] and team at Responsible Investor to lead the panel covering ESG in frontier and emerging markets for the RI Europe 2013 conference (I will cover the panel in next week's note, see some instant analysis at #RIEurope2013). Being live in London provided an opportunity to explore the mood of experienced colleagues, and take the temperature of where things are at. 

RI EUROPE 2013

The superficial data points at the event speaking to the health of the industry are what they are: for another year, RI Europe had around 300 people in one place, 66 as content providers (the most impressive being Dr Paul Woolley, Chairman of the Paul Woolley Centre for the Study of Capital Market Dysfunctionality at LSE and former GMO head for London). It was at a newish, somewhat snobby hotel, with around 15 stalls of vendors presenting their wares. In my conversations on the state of sustainable investment with peers, I was exploring reactions to some of the comments by Erika Karp, Head of Global Sector Research at UBS based in New York. Erika announced her 31 July exit the previous week in the last of her weekly notes which have been one source of inspiration. Referencing her strategy/tactics approach and "The Art of War", Erika described "The war has indeed been won for proponents of long-term corporate excellence as business models for the future need to evolve to address the greatest issues of our day...Now the warriors of the past three decades can move along with the mainstream….as will I." Erika's comments jive with an overall tone that a change is happening across the industry, something that I flagged back in December 2012. But I am not as bullish that it is all onward and upward. Some of the peers we have been working with the past decade are cycling on to new seasons. a few have cashed out. Sustainability is not necessarily a welcome addition to conversations with investment professionals, but more of the concepts can fit into strategic, operational, reputation, legal and business model risks. Conversations on ESG factors happens much more easily in a broader range of conversations. New ESG functions have been created or configured, for example the new role being recruited for at Harvard Management Company in Boston to tackle sustainability for their US$31 billion endowment. Expanding sustainable investment means expanding ESG research and ratings. The industry consolidation the past 2 years continues. For example, sustainability rating agency Sustainalytics has just hired a new head of relationships in Germany and MSCI ESG has added to their servicing staff in London. And yet, large parts of listed equities portfolios have little coverage and/or fundamental equity coverage that includes ESG issues in recommendations. 

STARBUCKS SELLING WELL

The red-eye from New York arriving at the world's busiest airport first thing in the morning always leads to a manic experience on the first, long day. One colleague suggested I do not so much drink caffeine, but am secretly fueled by it. Not so much anymore, but on the 30 hours mission in London, it was necessary. Mostly fair trade, organic coffee (unlike that served on United). And definitely necessary in the afternoon when panelists droned on in dysfunctional fashion, meandering over talking points even they were not convinced of. The late afternoon double espresso dash to the nearest Starbucks included face-slapping cold drizzle (that sorted out the jetlag for a few hours, the upside of inclement weather England?!). Mr Schultz will be pleased to know that the Starbucks messages of corporate responsibility were reliably posted on the wall and the long queue confirmed meeting a societal need. But the volume of trash generated remains an Achilles heel for Starbucks and a philosophical challenge to fast food retailers' sustainability ethos in general, given few customers chose to bring their own cups. One longtime sustainable investment colleague from Northern Europe voiced a concern that many have been expressing in different ways, that sustainable investment has lost it's way, and that one's efforts may not be amounting to much. It is a big question. For me it partly explains the emergence of the "impact investing" sub-theme, as well as my future work in real economy investments through infrastructure and private equity as growth capital. Industry initiatives are being more critically assessed as they seek to re-boot, for example GRI, PRI, the SIFs and the Equator Principles have each been re-formatting their programs and organizations. Rumblings of discontent remain. A pattern I have observed is that colleagues with many years in the profession start to seek greater impact from their work, and want to know that progress is being made as a whole. For some, stepping into different asset management and research roles is the next step, for others it is moving into work at - and for - companies. The state of play questions - why and how - are often raised by new voices. Sometimes the comments are as naive as from my MBA students who have not done the background readings. Sometimes the comments can be cringeworthy. For example, in the panel on "Real Assets" I cringed at a newbie rattling on about subjective epiphanies, without the wisdom of the decades of academic research, industry experience or philosophical. It is like hearing your hometown's ills being categorically described to you by tourists. The room was polite though unsettled. As the panelist opined about his personal epiphany fellow panelists started to look like they had left the toaster on.

TRANSATLANTIC

I wrote this note on the return leg at 37,000 feet over the Atlantic en route Manhattan for The Conference Board conference on "Ethics and Shareholder Value Summit" that I helped shape over the past six months. The fact that a company trade group is hosting this event with panels using the voice of investors (for example "Investor Panel: Why Corporate Governance and Ethical Practices Make a Difference to Shareholders"), suggests the state of play for sustainable investment is healthy. The event comes just weeks after The Conference Board "Summit on Sustainability", where Erika Karp described a "stellar "win". My view remains that companies remain more fearful of their customers than their investors (unless they're an aggressive hedge fund). In deciding on how best to describe the state of play and the progress by the 4 key actors - companies, researchers, policy makers, and investors - perhaps the better explanations come through explaining the progress of each separately. Sustainability will progress, fail or succeed in each stakeholder category in inter-related but different ways. In my experience, investors are conservative. Companies may be moving, especially larger multinationals competing globally, as demonstrated by this week's release of the Interbrand Green reputation rankings on the "best green global brands". But for sustainable investment, the situation is mixed. In Europe, my sense is of an industry that has figured out a lot, has much of its basics right, but is also at the risk of being buffeted by the economics of investment and research. The greyness of a broad theme like sustainable investment with its own vernacular and a dearth of finite edges contributes to this sense of instability. New investment products are being launched, but softly. Research is expanding, but is really just catching up with where investors have always expected it to be, and career professionals in sustainable investment are not secure. Sustainable investment remains at a "teenager" stage, sometimes speaking well, at other times not a welcome presence, prone to fits and starts. How it turns out requires a whole lot more bad hairstyles but hopefully few wardrobe malfunctions.

  

Do good work on sustainable investment that matters.

Graham Sinclair
@esgarchitect

Principal
SinCo - Sustainable Investment Consulting
www.sincosinco.com
@SinCoESG

Based on my work, experience and interactions, all views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the named individuals, institutions or SinCo, it's clients or services providers. No mention suggests endorsement. This commentary does not constitute investment advise. Issued by SinCo to professional investors and stakeholders for information only and its accuracy/completeness is not guaranteed. All opinions may change without notice and may differ to opinions/recommendations expressed by other business areas of SinCo. SinCo may maintain positions and trade in collective investment instruments referred to. Unless stated otherwise, this is not a personal recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy/sell and any prices/quotations are indicative only. SinCo may provide sustainable investment architecture and other services to, and/or its employees may be directors of, companies referred to. To the extent permitted by law, SinCo does not accept any liability arising from the use of this communication.

© SinCo 2013.  All rights reserved. Intended for recipient only and not for further distribution without the consent of SinCo. SinCo reserves the right to retain all messages. Messages are protected and accessed only in legally justified cases.


UPDATED 15 July 2013: Text edits, paragraphing, hyperlinks, caption.

Poor Economics: Maybe "Modern Family" is Big in Morocco?!

Are people with low incomes also laughing at Modern Family?

Finally, a chance for some uninterrupted reading to complete the excellent "Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty" written by MIT professors Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo [@mitecon]. Like most such books, a companion website www.pooreconomics.com and twitter @pooreconomics build on the material which made the book the FT / Goldman Sachs business book of the year 2011, republished in March 2012. The avowed purpose of the award is to select “most compelling and enjoyable insight into modern business issues, including management, finance and economics” reported in Financial Tomes by FT's management editor Andrew Hill in October this year. In 2011, The Economist described the material as "Untying the knot: New ideas about an old problem", flagging the positive effects of a trial once a programme or policy was proven in pilot. The book Poor Economics and its prize attracted positive and negative responses. I am finishing the book in 2012 now during my annual reading sessions in Woodstock VT at year-end in the snow. The findings and arguments are still relevant and thought-provoking. I wonder if/when Bill Gates will read Poor Economics for his top 10 list of "Books That Made Me Think"? Yes, Bill Gates reads and writes book reviews at The Gates Notes... [Update 4 Jan 2013: on further review, Mr Gates posted his review in Oct 2011].

Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty is written by academics, but readable. It certainly moves well past cliches of the poor, trying to go beyond the stereotype, and assessing the often complex economic arguments that people with little money must solve for. It describes the problem of assumptions on providing goods to low income people, and especially the promotion of immunization.The opening chapters impressed me for 1. the open-minded approach by researchers with "outside" perspectives, and 2. the aggregation of studies presented in an accessible way. By the time I finish it there will no doubt be more keypoints. The book poses questions and answers like "why would a man in Morocco who doesn’t have enough to eat buy a television? Why is it so hard for children in poor areas to learn, even when they attend school? Does having lots of children actually make you poorer? Answering questions like these is critical if we want to have a chance to really make a dent against global poverty". The book was more recently reviewed in an academic journal the book for how it "brings together recent contributions in development economics that have in common the use of randomized control trials (RCTs), or similar techniques". Of course, these trials can be quite expensive. A critical counterpoint the authors present is that studies that answer the wrong question are useless, and poor studies have great costs when they direct policies doomed to fail.

Also, being able to access Prof Abhijit Banerjee giving a 90min lecture at London School of Economics [@LSE] in March 2012 (#lsepoor) it is great to hear the author's own inflections. The lecture adds more layers to the approach to the research. The lecture is also a classic example of the presenter pivoting (!) on the advertised title of "Poor Economics: Barefoot Hedge-fund Managers, Reluctant Entrepreneurs and the Surprising Truth about Life on less than $1 a Day", as you hear in his opening caveat. Prof Banerjee is currently the Ford Foundation International Professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), see his bio. There's also a useful interview by FT after the awards in 2011, where its selection was partly reported as being due to "“the potential for the greatest impact”, said one of the judges, Vindi Banga, a former Unilever executive". Prof Duflo is interviewed on NPR's @KQEDForum in 2012 and had Lunch with FT in March 2012.

Poor Economics is solid reading because it builds from the ground up, applying randomized controls to test what is actually happening - see studies map.http://pooreconomics.com/about-book Stories are persuasive. Narratives make compelling cases. But so many stories and theories exist. With so many opinions, whether at your cocktail party or talking heads on TV, facts matter most. Evidence-based research is critical to my work in sustainable investment, the basis we work from in our #ESG work at SinCo. The book for me adds to a better understanding of the realities of investing in frontier markets and how billions try to get by which I most recently read in Portfolios of the Poor: How the World's Poor Live on $2 a Day (Princeton University Press, 2009), still available on Amazon. POTP was written from studies funded by the Ford Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Financial Access Initiative. Over 250 families in Bangladesh, India, and South Africa participated in the unprecedented study of the financial practices of the world's poor.

Poor Economics covers many studies. One area of specific current interest is food and nutrition which overlaps with the logic model and design thinking for my work with the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust. The malnutrition challenge is well explained for the costs it has on economies and society. Our work at SinCo [@SinCoESG] in designing and developing a rating and ranking for the Access to Nutrition Index (ATNI) [@ATNIndex] includes a logic model on getting more nutritious manufactured foods to lower-income populations. Prof Abhijit Banerjee recounts important research and poses questions on why, given more money, how people with low incomes may not choose to buy more nutritious foods or what would be prescribed for them by development agencies. Rather the studies show increases in spending is used on consumables, even entertainment, often because they do not see themselves as undernourished. The authors gained this important insight from a man interviewed in Morocco. Not for the first time, researchers will find poor people with low incomes but have televisions. Even poor people have gaps in their lives where they want to be distracted, informed and made to laugh. Maybe the hit sitcom Modern Family is also big in Morocco?!

Investing In A Green Economy - theme, sector or hybrid?

Sustainable investment is an investment management theme that is growing. Sustainable investment is investment that fully considers all risks and rewards of a given investment. After the global financial meltdown, Madoff and Copenhagen in the past two years, how much better is sustainable investment understood by investors in London, New York, Stockholm, Amsterdam or Tokyo today? Billions of dollars of new investment in new technologies is needed to de-carbonize the global economy. In January the “2010 Investor Statement on Catalyzing Investments in a Low Carbon Economy” - issued by four investor groups representing more than USD 13 trillion in assets including INCR - called on Governments from their podium at the UN in NYC to take immediate steps to catalyse the development of a low-carbon economy and attract the necessary private capital. Their call even reached the Sundance Channel.

Do most institutional investors still fail to understand sustainable investment? Pension funds and institutional investors – with their advisors at private banks and hedge funds in wealth management centres like Geneva or Melbourne – are fiduciaries who should efficiently and effectively allocate and manage their assets. Looking at macro sustainability trends such as natural resources, urbanization and demographics change, how well are these funds and their advisors giving appropriate consideration to any factor which may materially affect the sustainable long term risk-adjusted performance of the Fund's investments, including environmental, social and governance factors, across all asset classes? Sustainable investment is opposed to the concept of externalities, the economic term for costs pushed onto society, and the planet. Nobel Prize-winning columnist Paul Krugman this week surveyed the “economics of climate change or, more precisely, the economics of lessening climate change”. Krugman describes externalities this way:

“What if you manufacture a widget and I buy it, to our mutual benefit, but the process of producing that widget involves dumping toxic sludge into other people’s drinking water? When there are “negative externalities” — costs that economic actors impose on others without paying a price for their actions — any presumption that the market economy, left to its own devices, will do the right thing goes out the window."

Some of that capital will come from High Net Worth [HNW] investors like those who manage their wealth through Switzerland’s established private banks and hedge funds. Returns are not guaranteed. In fact millions of Euros were thrown into the clean tech sector at companies that could never be competitive or commercially viable in the long term. But some high-risk, high return investors will be the first to back new technologies. We had a small but globally significant example in Vaud last week. The Solar Impulse first flight on 7 April in the commune of Payerne VD is a good example [see Wired video]: experimental technology co-funded by Swiss adventurer Bertrand Piccard with partners giving corporate funding for research and individuals providing project financing through subordinated loans. Seriously experimental - imagine sitting in that cockpit for an around-the-world flip? And of course, at the Geneve Auto Salon in February 2010, hybrids and electric cars were represented at most stands [seriously, a metallic green Ferrari 599 hybrid and I am meant to think it's green?!]. Actually the real pushing technology was in the dim and out-of-the-way green hall, away from all the flashy lighting and chick models. Credit Suisse posted a note on the "environmentally friendly stars was developed in Switzerland: The Lampo2 from the Protoscar think tank based in Ticino".

When we at SinCo design investment architecture for institutional investors, we design to integrate environmental, social and governance [ESG] factors. Major Swiss investor [and now Swiss big brother after UBS meltdown the past 2 years] Credit Suisse considers “Sustainable investment is no trend but a key sector for the future.” We disagree. Putting ESG into a bucket misses the innovation it offers. We prefer to describe sustainable investment as a theme – it is neither an asset class nor sector, but an approach to investment management that explicitly integrates all factors – including environmental, social and governance [ESG] factors – into the decisions.

Building Sustainability Indexes

Building sustainability indexes is a specialist function for index architects. The Domini 400 Social Index has been running since 1 May 1990 as a benchmark for the obvious question: including ESG factors in selecting large US companies, how does it impact performance. The ETF tracks at iShares FTSE KLD 400 Social Idx Fd (ETF) (Public, NYSE:DSI). Over the years the DS400 has come to send many other messages, and practitioners know the strengths and weaknesses of this specific index, but it has established the role for the sustainability index. The purpose of an index must be clear in order to create focus for any sustainable investment approach. At SinCo we recommend that any index must be succinctly defined. Sharpening the sustainable investment focus is critical. Criteria matter. So does longevity. Many interesting variations will emerge in the design, development and ongoing execution of the index, and tensions within the mission and current programs may be expected. Maintaining focus prevails on the choice of work and work partners and the design of selection criteria. The Dow Jones Sustainability Index is now 10 years old [see the latest review with DJ here] and some of the people who helped build it like Alex Barkawi have moved on.

Our experience of sustainability indexes provides the empirical basis for design directions and development, interpreted by experts in sustainable investment and the role of indexes. The emergence of country-level indexes rather than international (for example DJSI Global) or themes indexes (for example, carbon or water). South Africa is an obvious example in emerging markets with the JSE SRI Index [up this year, together with Brazil (BOVESPA ISE) launched by the IFC in 2005, and India (S&P CRISIL/KLD/IFC), as well as emerging country examples in Egypt, Spain and South Korea, together with newer thematic indexes such as the Healthy Living Index (SAM) and international initiatives like the Carbon Leaders Index – CDLI (CDP/Innovest).

• SAM Sustainable Healthy Living Fund is designed to invest from the global stock universe in the most attractive enterprises along the health value added chain. For this purpose those trends which influence the Healthy Living-sector decisively are investigated in the first step by means of macroeconomic analysis.
• Carbon Leaders Index – CDLI (CDP/Innovest) The CDLI scores for the Global 500, Europe, FTSE 350, and S&P 500 companies are now used by index provider Markit to create a family of equity indices.
  

Index architecture must map to the investment case and the index proposition. We will cover the impact of sustainability indices separately, other than to say now that sustainable investment indexes have an impact, but a complex model is needed to assess the impact. Indexes (and indexed portfolios) are actively managed investment instruments that are constructed according to objective criteria and are compiled and marketed by financial services firms such as FTSE Group/Financial Times [www.ftse.com/Indices], Morgan Stanley Capital International Indexes [www.msci.com], Standard & Poor’s Indexes [www.sandp.com] and Dow Jones Indexes [http://www.djindexes.com/].

Index membership literally confers “investment grade” on firms because numerous managed funds are benchmarked to, or directly invested in, these indexes. Where the index is themed, selection into the “club” confers a certain halo effect or positive association for that company because there has been a dramatic increase in the scale of funds that directly track market indexes. Gaining and maintaining membership in an “index club” is often a critically important goal for company executives. As with any differentiating characteristic, companies seek to gain competitive advantage with investors, prospective employees, and other stakeholders, and a high ranking in an index can give them such an advantage.

When a company is ranked or included in an influential or prestigious index such as the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) or the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For, the company will reference that fact, especially when that firm is looking to present credentials as being “world-class”. For example, Brazil petroleum major Petrobras [Petroleo Brasileiro SA (ADR) (Public, NYSE:PBR)] lists five accreditations on a full-page color advertisement in a magazine targeted at investors and company executives (Bloomberg Markets magazine, December 2009), including membership in the DJSI. On the other hand, exclusion from an index can encourage companies to pledge changes. When Daimler [Daimler AG (Public, ETR:DAI] and Bayer [Bayer AG (Public, ETR:BAYN)] were excluded from the DJSI STOXX, their reaction in the German business paper Handelsblatt on 8 September 2008 ranged from pledges to improve (“We will definitely intensify our efforts regarding sustainability”, according to a spokeswoman from Daimler AG) to surprise at being excluded (Bayer commented, “We are not happy about it and we will try our best to be included again, since this is increasingly relevant to us on a financial basis. However, it will be more and more difficult to achieve inclusion in this benchmark.”). Our experience is that ratings, rankings and indexes may be a powerful tool for driving forward sustainability and creates a signaling effect across sectors and stakeholders. At this time we do not delve into the detail of ratings, rankings and indexes. There exist many different approaches, and characteristics of each of the three may be quite different, offering different value propositions that the index leadership must address at the outset of their goal and objective setting stages. Indexes are a feature of any discussion, a reference point, and quite literally a benchmark. Sustainability indexes can be even more so.

Tobacco Investment Contingent Liabilities

Walking into Great Westerford this morning on a crisp sunny Cape winter morning I was surprised to find huddles of smokers grabbing a puff on the steps. A beautiful day, puffing away. But maybe not that much different than those who need their 'morning cup of Joe' to start their day. The human habit of smoking is a fascination: humans choosing to buy a product directly linked to disease - including my two sisters whose own grandparents died from lung cancer and cardiac failure linked to chain smoking. Help explain how this logic stacks up: tobacco is a non-nutritious agricultural industry product driving farmers to farm cash crops not nutritious foods for sale to multinationals to sell to humans as aspirational good living to smoke and will in time directly lead to negative health impacts. Any investor integrating ESG factors must be investing away from tobacco. One may make an investment case and an ethical case. Either way, it raises all the classic considerations in sustainable finance and responsible investment: 1. whose money is it, 2. what is best practice investment analysis, 3. are all the investment factors covered [including environmental, social and governance ESG factors] and 4. what time horizon is long term? The decision to invest in tobacco must be a litmus test for any work on ESG architecture. Is it being discussed by the large ICGN or smaller PRI at their annual meetings this week in Sydney? Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg in January 2009 put some of their personal fortune [USD 50m] into combating smoking, but I wonder if their endowments have? Any investment practitioner who is tasked with integrating ESG factors sooner or later will be faced with a tobacco name in the portfolio holdings or investable universe. In South Africa this morning, longtime investment writer Ben Temkin, originally a stalwart at Financial Mail and now at Business Day, covered his position on BAT, British American Tobacco, cross-listed in London LON: BATS and on Johannesburg Stock Exchange. Check the BAT investor presentations here for their take on the contingent liabilities, or the lack thereof. Thank you for smoking.

BAT is considered a "blue chip" investment name for many years and a large part of the Rembrandt/Richemont/Remgro story that is now playing out again as the Rupert family heading the companies consider re-bundling what they unbundled. A Business Day reader who follows Ben's Private Investor column that offers some investment thinking and breaks down the investment opportunities of the day, challenged him on the "fundamentals" that a tobacco firm offers as an investment opportunity. The reader challenges Ben by saying he has a declared bias against investing in tobacco, that if the same numbers reflected the financials of say, a retailer, that Ben would be making different recommendations. In effect the reader is making an ethical case: investor should suspect looking behind the numbers. Perhaps Ben has had a tobacco-related illness cause personal tragedy, similar to a money manager of a multi-billion dollar shop just off Wall St leading a large fixed income team; who invited his staff to bring all investment ideas forward but never bother to bring forward a tobacco deal on account of losing a parent to tobacco-related illness. Knowing that the product of a firm is directly linked to ill health does create an ethical crisis for its business partners, including investors. How they choose to deal with the ethical dilema is their liberty to choose. The Independent's Warner stated it plainly in 2006 "Jeremy Warner's Outlook: Investing in tobacco may be unethical, but it sure is lucrative, as Gallaher bears witness". What was it about 2006, articles pitching the sector were also on MSN Up in smoke – should you invest in tobacco? By Richard Hunter, Head of UK Equities, Hargreaves Lansdown July 11 2006, Businessweek VIDEO "Investing in Tobacco Stocks: How to play it" and a real pearler from "Investment U" pitching why one should invest in tobacco despite the liability and regulation issues Tobacco Stocks: “Smoking” Out Investment Profits From A Blue Chip Titan November 2006. As you ponder what to invest your money in, enjoy some of the wry humour in Thank You for Smoking [2004]. And try not to grin at the catchphrase "Nick Naylor doesn't lie, he filters the truth"..!

The investment case is a lot closer to the ethical case than people think. If one invests, like Warren Buffett, in the firm for its business and long term prospects, how may one look past the product and its effects? Why invest in a sector or firm in a sector where the sector has a large negative exposure? Back in 1997 a public health professor at the top-tier University of Michigan in the USA pushed for major institutional investor TIAA-CREF to back away from tobacco "Vote on TIAA-CREF tobacco investment policy". Also at universities, activist students are a big headache for tobacco industry, being business types, future leaders, and able to see through pseudo-sophisticated arguments, illustrated by the 2004 article on Edinburgh students "Students stub out tobacco investment". A 2007 paper illustrated the irony for Australian pension funds in "Australian pension funds and tobacco investments: promoting ill health and out-of-step with their members", opening with some solid paragraphs:

Calls for institutional investors to divest tobacco shareholdings threaten the industry's share values, publicize its bad behaviour and label it as a politically unacceptable ally (Wander and Malone, 2006). In 1990, US tobacco control advocates began urging government investment and pension funds to divest tobacco stocks as a matter of responsible social policy (Wander and Malone, 2006). Tobacco companies fought hard to counter the divestment push and eventually only seven US states divested their tobacco stocks (Wander and Malone, 2006).

Since 2000, transnational tobacco companies have sought to regain the public's respect and investor confidence by embracing the principle of ‘corporate social responsibility (CSR)’ (Hirschhorn, 2004). The appearance of British American Tobacco in eighth place on a Corporate Responsibility Index for 2006 published by the St James Ethics Centre suggests the CSR strategy has been at least partially successful (Chapman, 2006). Investment analysts continue to describe tobacco shares as a good buy (Dubose Tomassi, 2006). Incredibly, as late as 2004, five leading US medical schools held shares in the tobacco industry (Wander and Malone, 2004). The scope of current pension fund investments in the tobacco industry is indicated by a 2006 estimate that smoke-free legislation in England could add up to £20 billion (US $35 billion) to UK pension deficits (Simpson, 2006).

The irony of seeing nurses smoking by the hospital exit is analogous to the news in June 2009 from Canada that health insurer investment arms are investing in tobacco, which the tobacco industry proudly reported and were defended by the Candian Finance Minister as reported by CBC in June 2009. It appears Nigeria has banned future investment in tobacco. Personal habits are sometimes at odds with the societal good, or even one's personal good.

Ben's column title "Contingent Liabilities Take Shine of BAT" in Business Day 16 July 2009 offers a gentler version of the danger. As he summarizes in his conclusion:

Before you are tempted to buy the shares, however, read [this is always a smart thing for investors to do!] the nine pages on contingent liabilities and financial commitments in Note 30 of the 2008 annual financial accounts [statements]. It is a terrifying horror story, and its possible financial implications on future earnings are not quantified.

Any investor must assess the opportunities for risk and reward from placing money in the ownership or lending of a going concern today, expecting to earn a higher rate of return than some base rate - say the rate of inflation or interest on a cash account. So any investor in a tobacco firm must take a view on the cash returns to the firm in the forthcoming period, or the market's opinion about that return, depending on whether they are basing on fundamentals or relative measures and technical market movements [if you're a trader, it's a matter of seconds, if you're a deep value investors, a matter of years]. That means assessing all the scenarios for the firm. Which include the huge public healthcare costs that are attached say, in the US. Part of the Bloomberg Initiative's purpose to fight tobacco in low and middle-income countries (focusing on 15 countries) is exactly to avoid the future healthcare burden in countries that cannot afford it, literally. The future "settlements" from the tobacco industry of course have created the conundrum where the state government has a vested interest in the tobacco firm thriving and earning cash returns, in order that the tobacco firm pays the settlement into the future. Federal and state legislators have a vested interest in keeping tobacco in business. These are the so-called "Tobacco Bonds", applied and rated by Moodys at state level. Government has a vested interest in cigarettes because of the large excise duties and taxes levied on them, effectively creating a chunk of reliable cash revenues that are hard for politicians to become un-addicted to [see The Red tape Chronicles spotlighting the taxpayers interest in smoking teenagers and made of US state securitization of tobacco settlements in "Ten years Later Tobacco Deal Going Up in Smoke from Nov 2008]. New York state Public Interest Research group [NYPIRG], one of the publicly funded think tanks, outlines the case for state-level divestment in the US [Tobacco Divestment in New York State] in fighting against NY funds invested still in tobacco. Many of these arguments apply in emerging and frontier markets like Brazil, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Sri Lanka or South Africa, which is why the Bloomberg Initiative targets such countries. NYCERS, the activist pension fund active in sustainability and ESG investment, remains invested despite stopping new investment some years ago. We have no view on the efficacy of the "black box warnings" that tobacco companies must slap onto the packaging. Pharmaceutical companies detest that stigma, and food companies have wriggled at the prospect that some of their marginally nutritious foodstuff could deserve the same. Some of the drive to capture the full costs of tobacco is reflected in the litigation and the global regulations to prevent marketing and sale [cigarettes are sold, not bought] that the World Health Organization Tobacco Free Initiative helped drive in the late 1990s under Gro Harlem Brundtland, the former head of the UN sustainable development commission that coined the sustainability definition in 1987:

"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two key concepts:

1. the concept of 'needs', in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and
2. the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs."

It is hard to reconcile this thinking with investment decisions channeling cash today into tobacco, yes? Sustainable finance is about comprehensively assessing explicit and implicit risks and benefits of investments: not just the ones that firms choose to write about, legislators bother to regulate, and lawyers cannot slide past. The investment case is a lot closer to the ethical case than people think. Integrating ESG factors - what is the total lifetime lifecycle cost of tobacco production and sales to humans? - is part of the holistic investment playing field with no externalities that we think all investors should play on. No costs should pushed onto society, and hidden costs should be exposed. Once all the costs and benefits, risks and returns are fully priced in, go ahead, puff away: thank you for smoking.

Earth Hour Bright in Darkest Africa

8:30pm Saturday 28 March 2009 and NOT so dark at the bottom of Africa. Nor in Sydney nor London for that matter. Earth Hour South Africa, as the photo suggests, was looking a tad too bright! What change did we observe in our unscientific survey from Table Mountain overlooking the Cape Town CBD? The Cape Town provincial government and city offices were dark [yes, there may be other explanations than energy saving!]. The only visible change at 20h30 CAT [Central African Time] was the ABSA building logo going dark, perhaps because ABSA [JNB: ABSP] is now majority owned by Barclays [LON: BARC], and the degree of coordination was good.

What “beacons” kept shining vaingloriously under southern skies? From our perspective, not much about the city changed, with the amber glow of incandecent and the blu-ish light of neon strung around CPT as usual. After the speeches by African politicians and with South Africa representing Africa into the G20 and climate change negotiations heading to Copenhagen in December 2009, one hoped for major Parliamentary action. Underwhelming… What of the corporate players? Most easily spotted – there were others we did not spot – were some brands making the wrong statement in the African night sky:

• FNB [First National Bank], which uses an iconic African acacia as its corporate identity
• LG, the South Korean electronic goods manufacturer with the tagline “life’s good” which did trumpet its Earth Hour in Malaysia
  
• Southern Sun, on top of the Cape Sun, touted green credentials last October
  
• Nedbank, a billboard for the “green bank” storeys high downtown, which figures, because they had ZERO Earth Hour coverage on their busy wesbite.
  

Oops?! Nedbank [JNB: NED] must have been feeling awkward come Monday, what with having pitched their positioning on the JSE SRI Index in April 2008, hosting the Green Mining Awards, and being the bank with the affinity program for customers tied to WWF SA called Green Trust. Motivating a major global financial institution to action is a logistical mountain, as JP Morgan Chase Earth Hour PR illustrates in defining what it can and cannot do. Reminds me of the story from a mate in Corporate Responsibility at ANZ bank in Australia. As head of the Earth Hour project around 2007 she had plans in place to cut lights in the large ANZ [OTC:ANZBY; ASX: ANZ] headoffice building in Melbourne BUT could not get her facilities people to guarantee the huge neon signage crowing the building to go dark. Unperturbed, and in superb Aussie “can-do” fashion, she had on stand-by a colleague or two with a large hatchet and some rubberized boots! No way that light was shining at 8:30pm! One gets a sense for the drama watchng the video of Earth Hour Cape Town mayor Helen Zille doing the big switchoff, and the relief of "oh, it worked!". Things have moved on sufficiently that this year the ANZ-sponsored ANZ stadium, a major in Australia, voted to switch off its external branding lights. See the list of participating Australian banks.

Another icon for sustainability best practice in Africa is Woolworths [JNB: WHL], the premium retail store. It was rated best in class for sustainability, and signed to the WWF water neutral initiative, has a sharp Eco-Efficiency award programme for suppliers, and forthcoming Woolworths Sustainability Index is yet to be posted at http://www.woolworthsholdings.co.za/sustainability/sus_index.asp. Woolworths Earth Hour activity hooked directly to employees at head office in CPT encouraging a big switch off AND offering a discounted CFL swap - up to five bulbs. Stores tried some ideas, but emails to customers only focused on the weeks' special deals, so maybe they missed an extra step to magnify impact. The WLH notice read:

Woolworths supports Earth Hour: For one hour, millions of people will switch off their lights across the globe in support of Earth Hour to raise awareness on saving energy. Saving energy is an important part of our Good business journey and we encourage all colleagues to participate by turning their lights off for an hour. Earth Hour is a World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) initiative. On 24 and 25 March you can change your incandescent light bulb for an energy saving light bulb, courtesy of Woolies and Eskom. This will save you money and help to reduce energy usage. This is a small way for each of us to participate in our Good business journey. Woolworths is targeting a 30% relative reduction in energy usage by 2012. When: 24 and 25 March from 09:00 - 13:00 Where: Woolworths house, foyer. Please note that we can only exchange a maximum of five light bulbs per person. Remember to support Earth Hour on 28 March from 20:30 to 21:30. P Consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?

Earth Hour is one of those tipping point type efforts, the ones where a small item at the right point of leverage creates some kind of systemic change. Gladwell made it common jargon with business types early this century. Think of the first time you saw a cellphone that was more mobile telephony than brick or a music player as seamless as the second generation iPod. In the same category we recommend to you Nudge. The current thinking person's book – Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness [good timing, boys!] – relies less on regulation but suasion as a driver. Earth Hour, one of the better things to come out of Australia, aims to use just an hour as a window to a different future, highlighting the a raft of environmental issues by reversing the glaring trend to burn energy to light up the planet [roasting marshmallows as in Madam & Eve is optional!, see cartoon above]. WWF is the enviro NGO which is held in high esteem globally, is behind the idea since the Australian affiliate moved onto it in 2007. WWF helped popularize it in the US, Europe and Africa through local affiliates. Even Brunei joined in this year with mosques covering ecology in the Friday sermon. Brunei was the sixth largest per capita CO2 emitter in 2004, and always worth a punt in your geography quiz - Q: which continent is Brunei on? The first-ever OPL cohort covered Earth Hour in our review of international awareness and advocacy tools on the inaugural WWF One Planet Leaders programme in Switzerland in 2007/8. Earth Hour 2009 aims to "reach more than one billion people in 1000 cities around the world, inviting communities, business and governments to switch off lights for one hour at 8:30pm on Saturday March 28 and sending a powerful global message that we care enough about climate change to take action".

Chicago Tribune included some beautiful shots, see Bern cathedral after 8:30pm CET. The ultimate photo-op would not be darkness at night, a reversal of the classic artificial “world at night” photo from the NASA project to plot urbanization which we often use to describe systemic approaches and regional differences to sustainability+investment and sustainable development. That photo replaces thousands of words. It reflects the sustainable development footprint and challenge, as well as being useful to quickly pinpoint critical footprints for Sinclair & Company in SA, USA and Switzerland. It is a little harder to pinpoint Harare, for example. Earth Hour works on local time, so the rolling blackout kicks in according to international timezones [an arcane system worthy of another blog another day] from 8:30-9:30pm local time.


Things Go Bump in the Dark

Certainly the WWF and Earth Hour South Africa team had great marketing reach, and some big brand names as participants. In Cape Town, the iconic Table Mountain went dark – in the same way that peer emerging market major Brazil had the lights on the Christ statue in Rio de Janiero go dark - see some great photos and comments on GlobalVoices. Unlike the Sydney Opera lights apparently, bad form, Oz. Pop radio DJ Fresh on 5FM had some useful suggestions for the young and virile with a dark Saturday night hour to kill.

Even the most exclusive CPT eateries interrupted diners to explain the lights would be cut for the hour – but that’s never a problem where an extra candle as to ambience and the grill is gas-fired. In the streets the “grass-roots” approach in this emerging market as always relied on the lamppost signs strapped up pitching the idea, in between the election posters. Random support came through using the local Idols to spread the word, as the SA Property blog did. The Earth Hour Facebook group had 859,516 members, and blog Greenmarket covered the myriad other electronic marketing approaches [never did get the BB download though...] including photo stream on Flickr. With all this global coordination reminding me of the all-time greatest worldwide brand – Y2K – one wonders how the branding specialists will one day hence come to rate Earth Hour as a global brand?

The UN SG endorsed the effort [but here the earlier comment regarding public offices and darknesses echoes[!]] and one of the fine old twentieth century institutions, Baden-Powell’s Scouts had action at community level. But what difference does it make? As a global phenomenon it was open to interpretation. In South Africa the Mail&Guardian Thought Leadership blog [the editors feeling a little lofty the day they launched it, mmm?] the hopes were high, but Bridget McNulty’s view from Signal Hill matched ours from the slopes of Devils Peak: underwhelming. In the most environmentally-sensitive city on the continent. Check some of the Comments to Bridget's posting Earth Hour: A Little Underwhelming... which reflect the ambivalence to this form of social action, and in the contradictions in creating change which in itself uses energy. Even 1970s era environmentalists at National Post add some contra-wisdom.


Enter the Investors

My interest as always is to probe: where are the investors? No, one will never find a line-item for compliance with Earth Hour in the Green Century Mutual Fund from Boston, or the GS Sustain index from London, nor the RIAA certification. Not even in the WWF International’s own green investment product run from international headquarters by Chiew Chong, the Living Planet Fund, offered for sale as an OEIC out of Luxembourg to European clients. Australian industry website Ethical Investor posted the event, But a rough poll of some leaders in investing integrating ESG factors had at best an ad-hoc, personal approach, as opposed to a coordinated, strategy one would expect from sophisticated knowledge-based service industries. A simple list of investment/financial Earth Hour participants in Africa were:

• ABSA
• Coris Capital
• Coronation Fund Managers
• Discovery
• Investec
• Liberty Group
• Metropolitan
• Momentum
• Nedbank
• Old Mutual
• Sanlam
• Santam

The Earth Hour event juxtaposed timeously with the Principles for Responsible Investment [PRI] annual assessment submissions due 31 March 2009. As my experience reflected when working with the PRI annual assessment 100-odd questions on making the six principles of the PRI happen, it is easy to put up some aspirations with guidelines and waving a flag. Many of the PRI’s key signatories share the discomfort. It is much harder, but yet so much more impactful, to measure the outcomes and net impact of the driven behaviour. Earth Hour is just an event. But maybe it should be a line-item along with the other 100 questions for investors. It does at least offer the advantage over the 100 other data-points: complete transparency and immediate accountability in real-time. Inaction leading to reaction from consumers, observers, and investors, with reputation sensitivity driving future action.

Earth Hour, as some beautiful photos attest, was no doubt a success. WWF has done well, and partly by not hogging the spotlight putting the issue above the WWF brand. It is obvious that the symbolism is not enough, as BusinessWeek suggests through it's guest commentator, with interesting Comments. Earth Hour points participants toward the major Copenhagen conference and the Species Report. It is but a moment, not even 10% of a day/night cycle. The next obvious anniversary date upcoming is Earth Day. More symbolism and action/inaction sure to follow. Like all ceremonies and rituals, sometimes useful for impact, but at least useful for planning the diary.

Will Earth Hour 2009 nudge the thinking further along the learning curve, and will the youth remember it when they next come to make investment decisions?