Including environmental, social and governance considerations in investment decisions is becoming of paramount importance for the fund management industry. Moreover, those principles may be coming into force in asset allocation even faster than previously thought.
A new survey of ESG adoption rates, from UBS Group AG’s asset management unit and Responsible Investor Research, covers more than 600 asset owners in 46 countries, responsible for more than 19 trillion euros ($21 trillion) of assets.
The report splits the universe of respondents into three categories. “Doers” are investors already taking ESG into consideration in their day-to-day allocation strategies. “Adopters” are those planning to do so in future, while “Non-Doers” are firms which don’t see ESG as material to their investment strategies. And the “Doers” dominate.
The survey is significant because almost two-thirds of the respondents aren’t signatories to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment charter. That in turn suggests underlying ESG adoption is even more widespread across the investment industry than it would appear.
The survey “tested the hypothesis that ESG considerations were taking root more widely among asset owners than was commonly recognized,” the report says. “The short answer is that they are.”
Of the firms in the survey that haven’t joined the UN charter, some 68% are already applying ESG standards, with a further 25% saying they plan to do so. The study cites an unidentified U.K. company pension fund as saying the charter just adds to the reporting burden.
That makes sense; a London-based portfolio manager told me that he’s reluctant to sign up to the PRI out of concern that future iterations of the guidelines might prove unpalatable and overly restrictive, but once a firm has joined it would be commercially difficult to abandon the club.
The higher proportion of U.S. investors saying they don’t plan to adopt ESG principles — 11%, compared with 3% in the rest of the world — may be because of concern about breaching their fiduciary duty to their clients, based on the findings of a recent paper by two U.S. law professors.