4 ms·
Yes, good point. Large investors (pension funds being the big ones) have, for many years, struggled internally with this. After all, their job is to generate fi
by floki999 7y ago
Yes, good point. Large investors (pension funds being the big ones) have, for many years, struggled internally with this. After all, their job is to generate financial returns. Period. However, stakeholders (i.e. their members) have been putting on pressure for the managers to take into account environmental, social and governance impacts.
I think there is increased recognition that we are entering a stage where real, physical, climate risks are becoming more obvious and both managers and their constituents are realizing that the long-term cost of inaction will overshadow the short-term pain (if any) of staying out of certain investments.
But yes, at the end of the day, large investors do have to prioritize return generation. Luckily, investment opportunities and new sectors evolve and there are ample new areas for investors to look at.
- navigatesol 7y ago>However, stakeholders (i.e. their members) have been putting on pressure for the managers to take into account environmental, social and governance impacts. I agree, and have no doubt that the funds benefit from catering to their clients demands. I'm less certain about the investors (and planet).