Nordhaus and ‘No Regrets’

Nobel Prize winner Professor William Nordhaus, Sterling Professor of Economics and Professor of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University, explains his theory of ‘No Regrets’ whereby companies can integrate ESG at a level that brings real benefits for society but has limited impact on the corporate.

Companies integrating ESG need to examine how they deal with the harmful externalities that they generate. By reducing the damaging spill overs of corporate activity like pollution, but without huge financial costs or damaging shareholder value lies at the heart of ESG integration, said Professor William Nordhaus, Sterling Professor of Economics and Professor of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University.

Speaking at “Sustainability Digital: A Planet in Trouble” the recipient of the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences outlined the arguments in his book “The Spirit of Green,” explaining that ESG holds so many concepts and ideas it is easy to become muddled. By looking at ESG through the lens of reducing externalities that benefit society without real corporate harm brings clarity.

Nordhaus used the analogy of turning down a thermostat to explain how corporates can introduce a policy of ‘No Regrets.’ The heating is still on, just a notch lower so that “we don’t’ feel the difference” but it has a “substantial difference” on externalities.

“We can make substantial contributions to reducing footprints in a win for society at small cost for firms.”

Nordhaus said that many firms achieve a win-win, where good management and governance brings benefits to both the firm and society. Challenges come for companies that act in the interests of society in a way that impacts the company negatively. However, a small reduction in a firm’s carbon footprint has a substantial impact on others. He said that “modest” ESG integration that reduces externalities increases shareholder value in a way that is also a “win-win” that does not mean a company will lose out. It has a benefit for society and comes at a low cost to the firm – and does not trigger a shareholder revolt.

Sponsored Content

Nordhaus said that investors should choose portfolio companies that apply this principle, selecting companies that reduce their carbon footprint at a low cost and designing portfolios that have lower impact. He said this approach would allow investors to reduce their portfolio imprint “with minimal loss” and he urged investors to “intervene with managers” to design portfolios for lower impact.

Carbon price?

Nordhaus, who outlined his argument for a carbon tax last year, told delegates that he believes a price on carbon is more likely under the Biden administration. However, he said it wouldn’t happen in the near future.

“It requires legislation and a majority in the House and Senate,” he said. He does believe US federal regulations are likely around auto emissions, however.

“I would be very surprised if this was not introduced,” he said.

He also urged governments to facilitate innovation in low carbon technology. The “radical” and “deep change” needed to reach net zero by the middle of the century requires a new landscape of innovation fuelled by a price structure where innovation pays off.

“Profit orientated firms need to have a price structure that reflects this priority,” he said, urging for a price structure that incentivizes private actors to conduct research. “The battery people know what to do; they just need an incentive,” he said.

In broad concluding comments, he said that corporations are increasingly viewed as members of society with economic and ethical obligations. He said ESG integration involves mostly voluntary actions, and said the idea that profits are the “central goal” for businesses is a “misleading compass” that needs correcting. He said containing the impact of climate change is possible if we go about it efficiently and at a low cost, focusing on corporate externalities. “We don’t’ have to go back to the Stone Age,” he said. “You don’t cure a pandemic by holding up in the house. You do it with a vaccine.”

Leave a Comment

Climate the No.1 priority for 2021

Climate the No.1 priority for 2021

Climate is by far the number one sustainability priority for investors in 2021 according to a poll of asset owners from more than 32 countries which came together for the Top1000funds.com online Sustainability event in March.

Sort content by

Engaging with Investors on ESG Issues

Bond issuers—including sovereigns, who represent 50 percent of the fixed income asset class—are faced with increasing scrutiny on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues from investors. Forums organized by the World Bank Treasury to promote dialogue between institutional investors and sovereign bond issuers have highlighted the challenges sovereign issuers face in engaging with investors on ESG topics and in communicating ESG-related information that investors consider financially material to their portfolios. This document provides examples, best practices, and action plans that can help debt managers enhance their capacity to engage with investors incorporating ESG information in investment decisions.

Portfolio Engineering

For decades, we have engineered scalable portfolios to help institutional investors achieve their goals. In the past, these goals have typically been financial (eg. return and risk targets), but now many investors are also seeking to achieve environmental and social impacts through their portfolios. We believe the best way to achieve both financial investment goals and these impact goals is through portfolio engineering that incorporates these objectives holistically, beginning with crisply defining an investor's goals, systematically looking across a variety of asset classes to find assets that are aligned with these goals, and then combining those assets to create a portfolio that is designed to achieve a high ratio of return to risk.

New Policy Concensus

We are now at a turning point, with Democrats controlling both legislative chambers and the presidency, and an emerging concensus among Democratic policy makers and their advisors that enables fiscal spending that is both significant in size and ambitious in scope. Later this year, we expect to see the first expansionary fiscal package centered around the pursuing long-term social, environmental, and competitiveness policy goals (following the more immediate COVID recovery package). In these Observations, we explore two key shifts in Democrats' thinking underlying these policy proposals, which we expect will be sustained well beyond this fiscal package.

Social Conditions Consideration

The ultimate goal of economic policy is simple and timeless - to ensure prosperity and maximise living standards. Broad macroeconomic measures such as GDP growth, the unemployment rate, and inflation had for decades been a good proxy of rising prosperity, so they have dominated economic policy making and are enshrined in most central bank mandates. But even before the COVID-19 crisis, it had become clear that traditional economic measures have increasingly diverged from social outcomes.

Secular Supply and Demand

Over the past two decades, China's secular rise dominated commodity markets, as its industrialization required a massive amount of raw materials to build up the country. As we consider the future, we see many reasons to be bullish on commodities tactically, but one of the most important secular factors will likely support industrial commodity demand for years to come: the shift in global economies away from fossil fuels and toward greener energy.

Diversity Impact Score

Throughout its history, the U.S. domestic Asset Management Industry, projected by PwC to grow to $71.2 trillion in assets under management by 20251, has exhibited an empirical lack of diversity with respect to gender and ethnicity within its ranks. Numerous studies have shown that Women and People of Color (“POC”) are underrepresented in the Industry, including a 2019 study commissioned by the Knight Foundation finding that Asset Management firms owned substantially or majority-owned by Women or POC managed only 1.3% of the Industry’s total assets under management.

Previous