Investors aim to clean up corporate emissions in line with Paris agreement

Two years after the Paris Climate Agreement, investors are looking to involve corporations in the fight against climate change. Using their influence with the top 100 corporate greenhouse gas emitters, they hope to cut corporate emissions 80 percent by 2050. 

Christophe Archambault/Reuters
French President Macron hosts philanthropists at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Dec. 12, 2017, during the Paris climate talks. Global leaders in all fields are coming together on the second anniversary of the climate agreement to continue working towards the outlined goals.

More than 200 institutional investors with $26 trillion in assets under management said on Tuesday they would step up pressure on the world's biggest corporate greenhouse gas emitters to combat climate change.

Two years to the day since 195 governments adopted the Paris climate agreement, investors including Pacific Investment Management Co, Amundi, Legal & General Investment Management, Northern Trust, and Aegon said they aimed to work with the 100 biggest polluting companies to curb emissions under a five-year plan.

That, they said, would be more effective than threatening to pull the plug on their investments in such companies, which include Coal India, Gazprom, Exxon Mobil, and China Petroleum & Chemical Corp.

"We will be asking companies ... to curb emissions and bring them down in line with the Paris goals," said Anne Simpson, investment director of sustainability at the California Public Employees' Retirement System.

That would mean roughly an 80 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, she told reporters on a teleconference, beyond the ambition of most companies.

The investors said they were also calling on companies to improve disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions, including those from the use of their products, and to step up governance of climate risks and opportunities.

French President Emmanuel Macron will hold a summit in Paris on Tuesday to build on the 2015 climate accord, which has been weakened by President Trump's plan to pull the United States out and instead bolster the US fossil fuel industry.

Under the investors' plan, divestment would only be a last resort. If big emitters refuse to cooperate with them, shareholders could ratchet up pressure with public statements, resolutions, and votes.

Such measures can work, they said. In May, for instance, 62 percent of shareholders in Exxon Mobil voted for greater transparency about climate risks of oil and gas despite opposition from the board.

"To talk about this as 'if you don't do what we want we're selling' in a way lets the companies off the hook," said Stephanie Maier, director of responsible investment at HSBC Global Asset Management.

She said it was better to cooperate with major emitters because they contributed to droughts, mudslides, heatwaves, and rising sea levels that threatened investors' other holdings.

In the past, some big investors have divested from high polluting coal or from companies they judge to be out of line with the Paris agreement's goals.

Stephanie Pfeifer, chief executive of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change which is among those coordinating the five-year plan, said investors were increasingly looking for ways to align their portfolios with the Paris goals.

"We're two years on from Paris – this is a way to showcase there is momentum," she told Reuters.

Among pension funds with strong green goals, for instance, Denmark's $40 billion PKA aims to raise climate-related investments such as in wind turbines and green bonds to 10 percent of its holdings by 2020 from almost seven now. 

This story was reported by Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.