As the director of CFA Institute Asia-Pacific Research Exchange I am responsible advocating the platform to CFA members and relevant stakeholders; managing relationships and thought leadership contributions from universities, institutions and regulators; organizing forums and symposiums across the region.
CFA Institute and PRI survey on ESG integration in Asia
In 2017, CFA Institute and the PRI agreed to undertake an ESG investing study that entails a survey, a series of workshops and the release of four reports: one case study report and three regional reports. The aim of the study is:
We would like you to help us by responding to the survey: https://start.yougov.com/refer/vXwDHpNl4ZBrY2
The results of the study and the feedback from the workshops will be published in the regional reports. There will also be regional and country guidance and case studies on how investors are integrating ESG issues into their investment analysis and decisions. These reports will be readily available for all CFA members and PRI signatories.
The survey contains two sets of questions that should take roughly 8 – 10 minutes to complete. It covers the impact of ESG investing at the financial market level and firm level. It is being completed by participants across seventeen countries.
If you like to fill out the survey, please do so by 15 June. We appreciate your response.
ESG Integration Explained: An Alpha-Generating and Risk-Reducing Tool
The term “ESG integration” is often used when talking about ESG investing. Practitioners new to ESG investing are sometimes uncertain what ESG integration is and how it is performed—so much so that they may not realize they are already performing integration techniques informally.
One definition of ESG integration is “the explicit and systematic inclusion of ESG issues in investment analysis and investment decisions.” Put another way, ESG integration is the analysis of all material factors in investment analysis and investment decisions, including environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors.
What does that mean? It means that leading practitioners are:
What does that not mean? It does not mean that
Safeguards against the Introduction of a Dual-Class Shares Structure
As revealed in a survey conducted in Asia Pacific by CFA Institute in March, a majority (60%) of the 450-plus respondents have not had any experience investing in firms with a DCS structure, which signalled the urgency for and need to educate investors and the general public on the implications of DCS structures.
The survey, “Dual-Class Shares and the Demand for Safeguards,” revealed that respondents in the region were divided when asked whether DCS structures should be introduced to the market, with 53% opposing the introduction and 47% in favour. Regardless of their position on DCS, almost all (97%) respondents considered it necessary to enact additional safeguards if DCS structures are permitted.
Among different possible safeguards, more than 90% of respondents considered it appropriate to implement enhanced mandatory corporate governance measures as well as time- and event-based sunset provisions, such as automatic conversion of shares with super voting rights to ordinary voting rights. Specifically, 94% of respondents considered it appropriate to introduce a time-based sunset provision; among which, 91% of such respondents considered it appropriate to convert shares with super voting rights to ordinary shares within 10 years. Separately, 93% of respondents considered introducing a maximum voting differential appropriate; 63% of these respondents found a 2:1 maximum voting differential optimal.