Why comply with the CFA Institute global ESG disclosure standards

In my role at CFA Institute, market participants often ask me why they should comply with our Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products, particularly when our European colleagues already must comply with the EU’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (and potential future regulations around carbon dioxide removal).

Similarly, our US colleagues that are awaiting rulemaking from the Securities and Exchange Commission, tell me they wish to wait until the dust settles and comply with what is mandated. I certainly understand and fully appreciate these reservations, but I worry my colleagues may not be seeing the full picture. Let me explain.

While consideration of ESG factors has become a highly charged political issue in the US, outside the US, there is less debate about whether it is appropriate to consider ESG factors. In both jurisdictions, however, there is still much concern about “greenwashing”— that is, advertisements or other disclosures that contain false or misleading information about an investment product’s environmental characteristics or impact.

There is a common root cause that underpins these seemingly disparate problems. ESG factors can be viewed through various lenses, including risk and return, personal values, and impacts on other people or the planet. When investment professionals, asset owners or investors evaluate a fund or strategy, it’s often not clear which of these lenses they are using. Some, but not all, markets have begun to address this problem through new regulatory disclosure requirements or guidance. However, uncertainty remains due to ambiguities in the requirements themselves as well as if and when new regulations will take effect.

In response to these problems, CFA Institute developed the Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products—global voluntary standards for disclosing how a fund or strategy incorporates ESG information or issues into its objectives, investment process, and stewardship activities.

We have found that often, standards are an effective way to resolve misalignments in the expectations of buyers and sellers. And, we have experience in this area. For example, prior to our development of the CFA Institute Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®), it was difficult to make meaningful comparisons of the historical investment performance among different funds and strategies.

Sponsored Content

The GIPS Standards solved this problem by establishing standards for the calculation and presentation of historical investment performance. Today, these are recognized by firms, regulators and investment professionals as the performance standard in the industry.

Similarly, investors today have difficulty making meaningful comparisons of ESG approaches used in investment products. The Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products address this challenge by requiring managers to provide prospective clients with an ESG Disclosure Statement, a document that provides key information about the fund or strategy, including:
• Environmental and social impact objectives
• Sources and types of ESG information
• Systematic consideration of financially material ESG information in investment decisions
• The use of an ESG index as an investment universe
• ESG screening criteria
• Targets for portfolio-level ESG characteristics
• Allocation to investments that have specific ESG characteristics
• ESG considerations in proxy voting, engagement, and other stewardship activities

Our Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products help asset owners—and their intermediaries—better understand, evaluate, and compare funds and strategies irrespective of whether there are local regulations in place, particularly because capital markets are global. We say this because an ESG Disclosure Statement can be a valuable input into an asset owner’s due diligence process and can help an asset owner ensure that a fund or strategy aligns with its investment policy statement. The Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products give asset owners an easy way to obtain higher-quality information about a fund or strategy by simply requesting an ESG Disclosure Statement.

The Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products help managers as well, by, for example, helping them explain to clients how ESG information and issues are considered in the design of a fund or strategy. These statements can save manager’s time and effort when responding to requests for proposals (RFPs) and due diligence questionnaires (DDQs). They can reduce risk by helping managers ensure that they have fully and fairly disclosed how and where ESG information and issues are considered in the design of a fund or strategy.

We know that asset owners and managers will continue to be scrutinized by clients, beneficiaries, regulators, and politicians.

The Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products provide asset owners and managers a mutually beneficial way to help them meet rising expectations for clarity and precision when communicating about the use of ESG factors in investment funds and strategies.

Instead of asking why market participants should embrace these standards, the better question may be: why wait? The wheels of regulation turn slowly and don’t always capture all the essential elements of the markets. Industry standards allow market participants to solve problems proactively.

As such, we urge all our constituents to adopt the Global ESG Disclosure Standards for Investment Products.

Paul Andrews is managing director for research, advocacy, and standards at CFA Institute.

Leave a Comment

La Caisse’s oil exit pays off as renewables portfolio pulls ahead of fossil fuels

La Caisse’s oil exit pays off as renewables portfolio pulls ahead of fossil fuels

Divesting from the oil sector has been a boon for La Caisse’s performance, as the Canadian pension giant says its energy investments have earned billions in value-add compared to the benchmark since the inception of its climate strategy. Head of sustainability Bertrand Millot unpacks the fund’s approach in an interview with Top1000funds.com.

Sort content by

Financial service providers commit to financing net zero

A range of global investment service providers, from stock exchanges to index providers, have signed up to the new Net Zero Financial Services Providers Alliance committing to align their products and services to net zero.

Sustainability and the need for practicality over ideology

Stephen Kotkin, Professor in History and International Affairs, Princeton University warned that the sustainability debate needs to become less ideological and more practical. He added that policy on a carbon price would do more to counter climate change than Biden’s huge infrastructure spend.

Unprecedented opportunity ahead

The climate challenge requires new investment on a staggering scale: new generating capacity, the electrification of everything, emissions-free fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, new supply chains and infrastructure, plus the building of negative emissions technologies. Stanford’s Dr Arun Majumdar explores the opportunities for new investment, the risk return trade-off and how investors should approach the opportunities.

Implementing net zero

What does it really mean to achieve a net zero strategy? As more investors make pledges for net zero, they need to set a strategy to achieve it. Investors leading the pack - ABP, Church Commissioners for England and CalSTRS - discuss the behaviour changes that are needed and how to allocate.

Poor disclosure is now a systemic risk

Poor corporate sustainability disclosure and the absence of global standards is now a systemic risk for investors, said panellists at Sustainability in Practice which included chief governance and compliance officer at Norges Bank, Carine Smith Ihencho.

ESG needs better data, better ratings and better products

Mass PRIM is involved in an MIT initiative to improve ESG with better data, ratings and ultimately products. Executive director and CIO, Michael Trotsky, explains how the ambiguity around ESG ratings creates acute challenges for investors trying to achieve both financial and social return.

Previous