Chris McKnett: The investment logic for sustainability

譯者: lin piao 審譯者: Dong Mao

The world is changing

世界正在變化

in some really profound ways,

一些深刻的變化

and I worry that investors

我擔心的是投資者

aren't paying enough attention

沒有注意到

to some of the biggest drivers of change,

世界變化的一些最強勁驅動力

especially when it comes to sustainability.

特別是永續發展

And by sustainability, I mean the really juicy things,

提到永續，我想真正有吸引力的是

like environmental and social issues

環境和社會話題

and corporate governance.

以及政府間的合作這樣的問題

I think it's reckless to ignore these things,

我想忽視這些問題是草率的做法

because doing so can jeopardize

因為忽視這些就會危害

future long-term returns.

未來長期的收益

And here's something that may surprise you:

有些事情會讓你吃驚：

the balance of power to really influence sustainability

真正影響永續的權力平衡

rests with institutional investors,

在於機構性投資者

the large investors like pension funds,

大投資家喜歡養老基金

foundations and endowments.

基金會和捐贈基金

I believe that sustainable investing

我相信永續性投資

is less complicated than you think,

並沒有你想得那麼複雜

better-performing than you believe,

比你相信的要更容易操作

and more important than we can imagine.

也比我們想像得要更重要

Let me remind you what we already know.

我來提醒一下大家 那些我們已經知道的東西

We have a population that's both growing and aging;

我們有一個不斷增長和老化的人口數量

we have seven billion souls today

現在世界上有 70 億人口

heading to 10 billion

本世紀末將

at the end of the century;

達到 100 億

we consume natural resources

我們消耗天然資源

faster than they can be replenished;

其速度比自然資源的補充要快

and the emissions that are mainly responsible

引起氣候變化的二氧化碳排放量

for climate change just keep increasing.

在持續增加

Now clearly, these are environmental and social issues,

現在很明顯 這些都是環境和社會問題

but that's not all.

但那還不是全部

They're economic issues,

這還是經濟問題

and that makes them relevant

所以這些問題也

to risk and return.

於風險和回報有關

And they are really complex

它們真的很複雜

and they can seem really far off,

看起來也真的很遙遠

that the temptation may be to do this:

所以沒甚麼吸引力讓人們去做：

bury our heads in the sand and not think about it.

把我們頭埋在沙子裡，不想這件事

Resist this, if you can. Don't do this at home.

如果可能，不要這麼做 不要在家裡做這個

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But it makes me wonder

不過這禁不住讓我想

if the investment rules of today

今天的投資原理

are fit for purpose tomorrow.

是否適合將來的目標

We know that investors,

我們知道投資者

when they look at a company and decide whether to invest,

如果他們想知道一家公司是否值得投資

they look at financial data,

他們就去看財務資料

metrics like sales growth, cash flow, market share,

如銷售增長、 現金流量、 市場份額

valuation -- you know, the really sexy stuff.

市場估價這些指標 — — 你知道這些是很誘人的東西

And these things are fundamental, of course,

這些東西是當然是最基本的

but they're not enough.

但這還不夠

Investors should also look at performance metrics

投資者還應看看性能指標

in what we call ESG:

我們稱之為 ESG：

environment, social and governance.

環境 (E)、 社會 (S) 和治理 (G)

Environment includes energy consumption,

環境包括能源消耗

water availability, waste and pollution,

水的供應、廢品和污染

just making efficient uses of resources.

更有效地利用資源

Social includes human capital,

社會包括人力資本

things like employee engagement

像員工敬業程度

and innovation capacity,

和創新能力這些方面

as well as supply chain management

以及供應鏈的管理

and labor rights and human rights.

勞動權利和人權

And governance relates to the oversight

以及有董事會和投資者對公司

of companies by their boards and investors.

進行大方向的管理

See, I told you this is the really juicy stuff.

看，我說了這些是很吸引人的東西

But ESG is the measure of sustainability,

但 ESG 是來衡量永續的

and sustainable investing incorporates ESG factors

將永續投資於 ESG 因素相結合

with financial factors into the investment process.

與投資過程中的金融因素相結合

It means limiting future risk

它意味著減少未來風險

by minimizing harm to people and planet,

通過對人類和地球危害的最小化

and it means providing capital to users

這就意味著给用户提供資本

who deploy it towards productive

讓他們帶來有效益和

and sustainable outcomes.

可永續的成果

So if sustainability matters financially today,

如果今天永續影響著財政

and all signs indicate more tomorrow,

這就表明更多的可能性

is the private sector paying attention?

私營企业在關注嗎？

Well, the really cool thing is that most CEOs are.

嗯，很酷的是大多數 CEO 都關注這件事

They started to see sustainability

他們開始考慮永續

not just as important but crucial to business success.

因為它不僅重要 而且是企業成功的關鍵

About 80 percent of global CEOs

大約 80% 的全球 CEO

see sustainability as the root to growth in innovation

把永續看成是投資收益的根本

and leading to competitive advantage

可以在各自行業體現競爭的優勢

in their industries.

可以在各自行業體現競爭的優勢

But 93 percent see ESG as the future,

他們中 93% 把 ESG 看做是未來的方向

or as important to the future of their business.

或對他們生意的未來非常重要的部份

So the views of CEOs are clear.

所以這些 CEO 的認識是很清晰的

There's tremendous opportunity in sustainability.

在永續事業上有巨大的潛在機遇

So how are companies actually leveraging ESG

那麼這些公司實際上如何利用 ESG

to drive hard business results?

努力帶來他們生意上的成果呢？

One example is near and dear to our hearts.

有一個例子離我們的心很近很親切

In 2012, State Street migrated 54 applications

在 2012 年道富銀行把 54 個應用程式

to the cloud environment,

移入到雲環境中

and we retired another 85.

我們撤回了另外 85 個

We virtualized our operating system environments,

我們虛擬了我們的系統運行環境

and we completed numerous automation projects.

我們完成了許多自動化專案

Now these initiatives create a more mobile workplace,

現在這些倡議創造了 更多的移動工作場所

and they reduce our real estate footprint,

它們減少了我們的辦公場所

and they yield savings of 23 million dollars

每年的運營成本一共

in operating costs annually,

可以節省 2300 萬美元

and avoid the emissions

還可以避免廢氣排放

of a 100,000 metric tons of carbon.

那 100 萬噸的二氧化碳量

That's the equivalent of taking 21,000 cars

就相當於讓 21,000 輛汽車

off the road.

離開公路

So awesome, right?

很棒，對吧？

Another example is Pentair.

另一個例子是 Pentair

Pentair is a U.S. industrial conglomerate,

Pentair 是美國的一個工業集團

and about a decade ago,

大約 10 年前

they sold their core power tools business

他們賣掉了他們核心的電動工具業務

and reinvested those proceeds in a water business.

把收益投入到跟水有關的業務

That's a really big bet. Why did they do that?

那可是一個很大的賭注 他們為什麼那麼做?

Well, with apologies to the Home Improvement fans,

嗯，跟家居裝修迷們道個歉

there's more growth in water than in power tools,

水資源的利潤增長要比電動工具快

and this company has their sights set

這家公司很有眼光

on what they call "the new New World."

在他們所說的"新新世界"上

That's four billion middle class people

因為 40 億的中產階層

demanding food, energy and water.

對糧食、能源和水質量有要求

Now, you may be asking yourself,

現在你可能會問自己

are these just isolated cases?

這些只是個別的例子？

I mean, come on, really?

我的意思是 拜託，真的嗎？

Do companies that take sustainability into account

那些考慮永續的公司

really do well financially?

真的有很好的效益嗎？

The answer that may surprise you is yes.

答案可能會令你吃驚 是肯定的

The data shows that stocks with better ESG performance

資料顯示，具有好 ESG 性能的股票

perform just as well as others.

和其他的股票沒有差別

In blue, we see the MSCI World.

藍色線條 我們看到的是 MSCI 的情況

It's an index of large companies

它是大公司

from developed markets across the world.

來自世界各地成熟的 股票市場的一個參數

And in gold, we see a subset of companies

金色線條，我們看到的是

rated as having the best ESG performance.

具有最好 ESG 性能的一個子參數

Over three plus years, no performance tradeoff.

三年多裡，沒有性能上的失衡

So that's okay, right? We want more. I want more.

那已經夠好了，對吧？ 我們要的更多，我要的更多

In some cases, there may be outperformance

在某些情況下 ESG 可能有

from ESG.

超常的表現

In blue, we see the performance

藍色線條 我們看到的是

of the 500 largest global companies,

500 個全球最大的公司的性能指標

and in gold, we see a subset of companies

而黃金線條，我們看到公司的

with best practice in climate change strategy

執行氣候變化政策

and risk management.

和風險管理最好的一個子參數

Now over almost eight years,

現在已經八年過去了

they've outperformed by about two thirds.

他們已經優於三分之二左右

So yes, this is correlation. It's not causation.

是的，這是相關性 並不是因果關係

But it does illustrate that environmental leadership

但它確實說明這樣的環境領導力

is compatible with good returns.

有相當好的收益

So if the returns are the same or better

所以如果收益相同或更好

and the planet benefits, wouldn't this be the norm?

而且給地球帶來好處 為甚麼不把這個當成標準呢？

Are investors, particularly institutional investors,

投資者們，尤其是機構投資者

engaged?

參與進來了嗎？

Well, some are,

嗯，有些吧

and a few are really at the vanguard.

有幾個真的是先鋒

Hesta.

比如 Hesta

Hesta is a retirement fund for health

Hesta 是一個

and community services employees in Australia,

澳大利亞的醫療和 社區服務僱員的退休基金

with assets of 22 billion [dollars].

有 220 億 [美元]的資產

They believe that ESG has the potential

他們相信 ESG 所具有的潛力

to impact risks and returns,

去影響風險和收益

so incorporating it into the investment process

所以將其納入投資中

is core to their duty

是他們職責的核心

to act in the best interest of fund members,

基金成員的最佳利益行事

core to their duty.

他們的職責的核心

You gotta love the Aussies, right?

現在你喜歡上 Aussies 了，對吧？

CalPERS is another example.

CalPERS 是另一個例子

CalPERS is the pension fund

CalPERS 是一個

for public employees in California,

加州公務員的養恤基金

and with assets of 244 billion [dollars],

有 2440 億[美元]的資產

they are the second largest in the U.S.

他們的資產在美國第二大

and the sixth largest in the world.

世界第六大

Now, they're moving toward 100 percent

現在他們 100% 地轉向

sustainable investment

永續投資

by systematically integrated ESG

通過系統地把 ESG

across the entire fund.

整合到整個基金

Why? They believe it's critical

為什麼呢？他們相信這是關鍵

to superior long-term returns, full stop.

超級的長期回報，就是這樣

In their own words, "long-term value creation

用他們自己的話來說 “長期價值的創造

requires the effective management

需要有效的管理

of three forms of capital:

三種形式的資本：

financial, human, and physical.

財力、 人力和物力

This is why we are concerned with ESG."

這是我們為什麼關心 ESG”

Now, I do speak to a lot of investors

我和很多投資者交流過

as part of my job,

這成為我工作的一部分

and not all of them see it this way.

但不是所有的人這麼看

Often I hear, "We are required to maximize returns,

經常聽到 “我們都需要最大限度的收益

so we don't do that here,"

所以我們這裡不這麼做”

or, "We don't want to use the portfolio

或者，“我們不想使用這個方法

to make policy statements."

作為我們的營業政策”

The one that just really gets under my skin is,

做讓我反感的一個是

"If you want to do something about that,

“如果你想要做甚麼的話

just make money, give the profits to charities."

就去努力賺錢，然後 把所有收益都捐給慈善機構”

It's eyes rolling, eyes rolling.

我只能翻白眼了

I mean, let me clarify something right here.

我的意思是，讓我澄清一下

Companies and investors are not

公司和投資者都不是

singularly responsible for the fate of the planet.

唯一對地球的命運負責的人

They don't have indefinite social obligations,

他們沒有無限期的社會義務

and prudent investing and finance theory

和審慎的投資和金融理論

aren't subordinate to sustainability.

他們不從屬輿永續

They're compatible.

他們是和永續相容的

So I'm not talking about tradeoffs here.

所以我不是在這裡 談論他們該如何讓步的

But institutional investors

但機構投資者

are the x-factor in sustainability.

是在永續發展中的重要因素

Why do they hold the key?

他們為什麼掌握著這個權利？

The answer, quite simply, is, they have the money.

答案很簡單 是的，他們有很多錢

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

A lot of it.

很多很多錢

I mean, a really lot of it.

真的很多啊

The global stock market is worth 55 trillion dollars.

全球證券市場是價值 55 兆美元

The global bond market, 78 trillion.

全球債券市場價值 78 兆美元

That's 133 trillion combined.

這加起來133 兆美元

That's eight and a half times the GDP of the U.S.

是美國 GDP 的八倍半

That's the world's largest economy.

這是世界最大的經濟體

That's some serious freaking firepower.

這就是一些重火力

So we can reconsider

所以我們需要重新考慮

some of these pressing challenges,

這些緊迫的挑戰

like fresh water, clean air,

像新鮮的水源，清潔的空氣

feeding 10 billion mouths,

供 100 億人享用

if institutional investors

如果機構投資者

integrated ESG into investment.

把 ESG 整合到投資裡面

What if they used that firepower

如果他們用那火力

to allocate more of their capital

去分配更多他們的資本

to companies working the hardest

到刻苦工作

at solving these challenges

去解決這些挑戰的公司

or at least not exacerbating them?

或至少不加重他們的負擔呢？

What if we work and save and invest,

如果我們工作、儲蓄和投資

only to find that the world we retire into

僅僅是為了我們退休的地方

is more stressed and less secure than it is now?

比現在更艱難、更沒安全感？

What if there isn't enough clean air and fresh water?

如果沒有足夠的、清潔的 空氣和新鮮的水怎麼辦？

Now a fair question might be,

現在的一個問題是

what if all this sustainability risk stuff

如果威脅永續發展的這些事情

is exaggerated, overstated, it's not urgent,

是被誇大，強調了，並不是緊急的

something for virtuous consumers

良性消費者那些事

or lifestyle choice?

或是生活方式的選擇呢？

Well, President John F. Kennedy said something

嗯約翰 · 甘迺迪總統說

about this that is just spot on:

下面的話可以用在這裡：

"There are risks and costs to a program of action,

“一些行動是需要風險和代價的

but they are far less than the long-range risks

但是他們不如為了舒適的不作為

and costs of comfortable inaction."

更具有風險和需要代價。”

I can appreciate that there is estimation risk in this,

我可以理解在永續發展中會有一些風險

but since this is based on widespread scientific consensus,

但因為這是基於廣泛的科學共識之上的

the odds that it's not completely wrong

它就不是完全錯誤的

are better than the odds

它出錯的幾率

that our house will burn down

比我們房子被燒幾率小

or we'll get in a car accident.

或者比我們遭遇車禍的幾率小

Well, maybe not if you live in Boston. (Laughter)

如果你不是生活在波士頓的話（笑聲）

But my point is that we buy insurance

我想說的是我們買保險

to protect ourselves financially

來保護我們的財政

in case those things happen, right?

以防那些事情發生，對吧？

So by investing sustainably

通過給永續投資

we're doing two things.

我們在做兩件事

We're creating insurance,

我們要創建保險

reducing the risk to our planet and to our economy,

為我們的星球，我們的經濟降低風險

and at the same time, in the short term,

同時在短期內

we're not sacrificing performance.

我們不至於犧牲它的性能

[Man in comic: "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"]

[漫畫的人："如果它是一個大騙局，我們創造了更好的世界卻沒有回報怎麼辦?"]

Good, you like it. I like it too.

好的，你們喜歡它，我也喜歡它

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I like it because it pokes fun

我喜歡它，因為它諷刺

at both sides of the climate change issue.

在氣候變化問題的雙方

I bet you can't guess which side I'm on.

我打賭你不能猜我在哪一邊

But what I really like about it

但我真的很喜歡它

is that it reminds me of something Mark Twain said,

是它讓我想起馬克 · 吐溫說

which is, "Plan for the future,

就是“要為未來做計劃

because that's where you're going to spend

因為那是你

the rest of your life."

要渡過餘生的地方。”

Thank you.

謝謝

(Applause)

（掌聲）