文章 Articles

社会责任投资:一条仍然漫长的征途

约翰•艾尔金顿表示,中国推出社会责任投资指数是一个令人欣喜的消息,但如果认为不靠更强有力的政治行动也能实现真正的改变就太天真了。

Article image

2010年“夏季达沃斯”9月份在天津举行,温家宝总理在讲话中重申了中国对发展和可持续性进行平衡的承诺。他表示,中国“要坚持节约资源和保护环境,着力提高资源利用效率和应对气侯变化的能力”。这是一个好消息,尽管中国已经开始推行社会责任投资,但在它履行这个承诺的能力上还悬着一个大大的问号。最近中国推出的让基金经理们参与可持续日程的举措令人欣喜,可人们还是应该问上一句:中国是否打算采取疲软市场的方式来应对严峻的环境挑战?

中国正在推出一项环境、社会和治理(简称ESG)投资指数,这当然是一个好消息。这项“中证ECPI ESG可持续发展40指数”包含了40家国内公司,是一个由中证指数有限公司和欧洲从事ESG研究的ECPI公司合办的合资企业。

1990年以来,我先后已经在六个社会责任投资(SRI)基金会担任过顾问,从小型的先驱企业到挪威的Storebrand保险公司等较大的金融机构都有。因此我坚信SRI是一个非常有价值的尝试,特别是在它超越了公司部门和业绩的阻隔,积极参与主流企业管理的情况下。力拓联合利华这样的全球性大公司对ESG日程和可持续性的推广等领域都有所涉猎,但是当我们听到这些公司的高管对于主流投资者在这些领域兴趣缺乏表示关注,情况就令人担忧了。

在最近的一次工商界生物多样性会议上,联合利华的可持续发展高级副总裁加文·尼斯在报告中说:“主流投资者(对上述领域)的兴趣非常缺乏,对我们所做的事情也没什么信任,而且没有什么迹象表明情况会很快有所变化。”他指出,只有SRI分析家才会对联合利华在巴西滴灌太阳能供电冰淇淋机水源保护项目等领域的投资感兴趣。

力拓首席执行官艾博年认可这个评估,并说他的公司向股东发布了定期的企业社会责任简报,却发现主流投资者就像《金融时报》所说的那样,“对力拓的行动不以为然,因为他们认为这并不是经营的核心”。

两位老总都认为分析家是错误的。BP在墨西哥湾的石油泄漏所引起的巨大金融责任,有可能增加人们对ESG的兴趣,但占市场领先地位的道·琼斯可持续发展指数在泄漏事故后只是把BP摘牌而已。(再说一句,我也多年曾经担任该指数的顾问委员会成员。)他们的最新排名中另一件引人注目的事就是丰田汽车公司(该公司曾经是SRI和ESG投资界长期的红星)由于质量问题而名次下降,这是因为它的质量控制没有跟上(产量)的飞速增长。

批评家们质疑,如果这样的公司只有在事故发生后才会被摘牌或降位,它们真的能为投资者们带来附加值吗?在察觉潜在风险(其中大多数也已经被这样的商业挫折所分担)方面它们又比其主流竞争者好多少呢?我认为这两个问题的答案都是肯定的,但很显然SRI基金在个案中要具体问题具体分析。

SRI的先驱们仍然坚信,养老基金等主要的长期投资者将会把ESG因素纳入考虑范围。我们已经看到瑞士再保险等主要的再保险公司开始把这类考虑融入其自身的大量股权。当大多数金融分析仍然以季度为基础进行的时候,投资者打开新视野的机会非常微小。

SRI另一个巨大的野心就是说服中国、挪威、俄罗斯、新加坡及沙特等国掌握的巨大主权财富基金把ESG标准和业绩目标融入其投资行动之中。俄罗斯走到这一步似乎还很遥远,但随着时间的推移,在其它国家会有可能实现。

挪威是这一领域的典范。由于挪威国民所具有的ESG相关价值观,其政府养老基金(截至今年6月底达到4490亿美元,合3万亿人民币)开始对所有投资进行积极而长期的选择。

的确,挪威人,或者更广泛一点说,斯堪的纳维亚人实在非同寻常,他们长期以来在社会和环境上的觉悟是世界其它大多数地方的人所无法比拟的。但在更广大的欧洲地区,今年也传来了积极的消息。在欧洲社会责任投资论坛发表的2010年度财富报告中,人们可以看到坚持自身投资组合要按照可持续性标准进行管理的高净值欧洲投资人的比例从2007年的8%上升到2009年的11%。这就意味着(倾向于可持续投资的)资金总额达到7290亿欧元(9360亿美元),比2007年增加了三分之一还多。欧洲社会责任投资论坛的执行主任马特·克里斯滕森非常兴奋,指出大多数较富裕的投资者开始用其1%的财富“试水”,但如果试验成功的话,就可能增加在可持续投资上的份额。

但愿如此,但我并不认为目前SRI活动的水平能够对全球资本主义体系发挥足够的调节作用,实现温家宝总理所向往(或者说应该向往)的那种可持续性。因此,我们尽管对中证ECPI ESG可持续发展40指数表示热烈欢迎,但英语中有一句谚语是“一燕不成夏”,不知道中文是不是有对应的表达。一个令人不安的事实依然存在,那就是:要实现真正的进步,我们必须进行大规模的政治努力,而这个规模对当今的大多数国家领导人来说仍然是难以想象的。
 

作者简介:约翰·艾尔金顿,飞鱼星公司执行主席和可持续性组织非执行主席。

首页图片由rednuht

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

赚钱,猛赚钱乃中国企业最大之社会责任

标题已经说明一切心里话,和需要说的话。

Making money, and lots of it, is the greatest social responsibility of Chinese industry

Everything I wish to say, and everything that needs to be said, has been explained in the title.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

赚钱世界第一

赚钱才是硬道理,中外都一样。咱们是么时候才能比美国公司赚钱呢?那一天,才是我们的节能环保喘气的那一天。

Earning money comes first

Earning money is the top priority for China and the west alike. When can we earn more money than American companies? Only on that day can we take a breath for energy saving and environmental protection.

Thumb original 0 034 large Reply arrow
dlee

目光短浅的思想的危险

那是一个非常目光短浅的观点,也很危险:产业的第一考虑应该是获利这个想法忽视了该产业的长期可持续性。赚钱和对社会负责并不是互斥的,很多公司的成功都表现出这一点。继续追求赚钱而不思考未来是很不负责任的,无论是从商业角度,还是道德层面。

一个公司忽视自身对社会和环境的责任是非常危险的。行业依靠输出和输入 - 两者都是有限资源。比如一个木材公司,如果没有补种树木来保持原有数量,是不能砍树的。否则,这公司迟早会倒闭。同样,一个公司也可以仅凭其良好的信誉生存,拥有顾客。采矿公司在其运作的当地社区野蛮施工则产生不好的公共关系。

市场存在于环境中,而且它是一个有来有往的关系。个体不能脱离其他而存活,如果一个市场对环境有不利,最终也不会有好的环境来支持市场。这是最基本的生态经济。

The danger of short-sighted thinking

That is a very short-term point of view and very dangerous. The idea that industry's first consideration should be profit disregards long-term sustainability of that industry. Making money and being socially responsible are NOT exclusive, and many companies have shown this with great success. To continue to pursue money without thinking about the future is irresponsible both in a business sense and a moral sense.

It is very dangerous for a business to ignore its responsibilities to society and the environment. Industry depends on inputs and outputs - both of which are finite resources. A timber company, for example, cannot cut down trees without replanting at a rate that maintains a continuous stock - otherwise, the company will eventually go out of business. Likewise, a company exists solely on its good reputation with its customers. It is just bad PR for a mining company, for example, to run roughshod over the local communities it operates in.

The market exists within the environment, and it is a back-and-forth relationship. One cannot survive without the other and if the market grows to the detriment of the environment, eventually, there will not be enough environment in good enough condition to support the market. That is basic ecological economics.

Thumb original 0 034 large Reply arrow
dlee

正确……

这就是说,如果没有自然环境,那么“市场”就难以维持。但即便没有我们,自然环境也会良好的运转(甚至会更好)。

Correction...

That is to say, the MARKET cannot survive without the environment. The environment can get along just fine (and probably better) without us.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

大道理、小道理

关于节能减排的大道理,关于企业的社会责任的大道理,我们心知肚明,无需在这儿赘述。设想一个连钱都不大会赚的企业如何实现自己社会责任抱负呢?一个整天琢磨着忧国忧民大事的企业家,哪有时间和精力考虑对员工的承诺呢?连自己的企业都岌岌可危,员工整天在失业的危机中度过,他有时间考虑什么社会责任吗?非也。近视当然不好,远视也不是什么好事。我们提倡既不能近视,也不可远视,我们提倡合适。干什么事情都不能眼高手低,美好的想法谁都有,谁不希望能像比尔盖茨那样大方这大方那呢?你有那个实力没有?没有之前,还是老老实实做好你的主业,同时别忘记自己能做的事情,也许不是你主动和愿意的,但是社会之主流和发展之方向,企业家这点意识还是有的。

是有那么几个企业,主业副业兼顾,但是凤毛麟角。关键是这种模式好像现在看来具有不可复制性,我们的任务就是要把这个模式变得通俗易懂,深入人心,让每个企业都能找到属于自己的一个可以施展的空间,这个多难啊。

Major principle and minor principle

In regards to energy saving and emissions reduction, and the major principle of social responsibility in businesses, we are all well aware and there is no need to repeat it here. Imagine, how would a business that does not know how to earn a lot of money, achieve their goals of social responsibility? How would an entrepreneur who is concerned about his country and people all day long, have the time and energy to think about staff and commitments? Even his own business is in jeopardy and the staff is in the middle of an unemployment crisis, does he have time to think about social responsibility? Definitely not. Near-sightedness is of course not good, but Far-sightedness is not necessarily good either. We advocate that we can neither be near-sighted nor far-sighted, we advocate appropriateness. We should not have unrealistic expectations in what we do. Everyone has nice thoughts but we can't all hope to be like Bill Gates, being generous in this and that. Do you have that kind of strength? Before you do, honestly and sincerely do your business, while remembering what you are capable of doing. Perhaps it is not what you initiated or wanted, but with the mainstream of society and direction of development, there is some sense of entrepreneurship.

There are a few businesses that take into account main business and subsidiary businesses but that is rare. The key is that this model seems to be unable to replicate. Our job is to make this model so that it is easy to understand and win the hearts of people, allowing companies to find their own space to put to good use. That will be difficult.

Default thumb avatar
cdhelennh

政府必须要有所作为

在中国的政治体制下,需要把政府对经济强有力的操控能力使在真正有用的地方。不必回到原来计划经济的老路,只要政府运用一定的经济金融手段(而不是行政手段),可以进行建立、规范SRI运作机制的有力尝试,比如“绿色证券”的动议可以进一步深入(尽管现在已经做到规范上市公司环境信息披露了,但仍然不够)。

The government must make a difference

For China's political system, it is necessary to use the government's powerful ability to control the economy in a truly useful place. It is not necessary to go back to the original planned economy. As long as the government uses certain economic and financial means (rather than administrative means), it can establish and attempt to use the standard SRI system, such as further the "green securities" motion (although listed companies now have to disclose environmental information, it is still not enough.)

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

君子有所为有所不为

君子有所为有所不为,小人为所欲为。

junzi knows what ought to do and what not

Junzi -- Confucius's ideal person, who any one of us, rich or poor, has the potential to become -- knows what ought to do and what not. However, the petty individuals act on their own wills.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

政府作为不作为:中国5年内试点碳排交易

人民网:“发改委气候变化司副司长孙翠华昨日在联合国气候变化国际谈判天津会议“应对气候变化中国在行动”的边会上透露,中国将在5年内在部分行业和省份试点推出碳排放交易。

孙翠华介绍,目前碳交易主要有两种形式,一种是基于《京都议定书》下的项目减排,即CDM减排;另一种则是排放权交易。她表示,目前中国正处于工业化发展阶段,因此不可能现在设定二氧化碳减排的总量限制。”

领导提到的这两种方法不知道有什么区别?CDM是美国八十年代末九十年代初,为了解决酸雨问题推出的二氧化硫排放权交易,非常成功。交易的前提是给碳定个价,价格太高,“会影响经济发展”,价格太低,没积极性。我们在节能方面况且还是个门外汉,就要碳谈交易进军了,真是笑话。有时候,做还不如不做。

The government's omission: China's five year carbon emissions trading pilot

People's Daily: "Yesterday, in a side event, "China takes action to fight climate change" during the UN Climate Change Conference in Tianjin, NDRC deputy director Sun Cuihua revealed that within five years, China will pilot carbon emissions trading in some industries and provinces.

Sun Cuihua explained that there currently are two major forms of carbon trading. One is based on project emissions of the "Kyoto Protocol," namely CDM emission reductions, and the other one is emissions trading. She said that China is in the industrial development stage and therefore it is not possible to set limits to carbon dioxide emissions."

What is the difference between the two methods mentioned by the leaders? In order to resolve the acid rain problem, the US pushed forward carbon dioxide and sulfur emissions trading in the late eighties, early nineties, which was very successful.The prerequisite of trading is to set a price for carbon. If the price is too high "it will affect economic development" and if the price is too low, there will be no initiative. We are still strangers to energy efficiency, but we are already talking about carbon trading, it's a joke. Sometimes, it would be better to not do anything.

Default thumb avatar
furtherviews

闪闪发光的不都是金子

虽然挪威政府的养老金可能会在这一领域作为代表,养老金包括一些拥有恶劣的环境认证的公司。
比如,挪威最近被强迫要求退出一个公司:三林环球,它们的林业企业中的两个已经在之前被授权为合法的和可持续的管理。然而,那些证书(在沙捞越和圭亚那)已被撤回,且不能重新恢复。

All that glisters is not gold

Although Norway's Government Pension Fund might be regarded as the poster child in this area, that fund a includes several companies which have poor environmental credentials.

For example, Norway was recently obliged to delist one such company, Samling Global, two of whose forestry businesses had previously been certified as legal and sustainably managed. However, those certificates (in Sarawak and Guyana) have been withdrawn and not re-instated.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

不懂

看不明白,这家挪威的基金怎么了?这个什么三林公司出了啥事了?这个和我们谈的社会责任有什么关系?一头雾水。

I don't understand

I don't understand. What about this Norwegian fund? What happened to this Sanlin company? What has this got to do with the subject, social responsibility? I'm totally confused.

Thumb original 0 034 large Reply arrow
dlee

I actually find that heartening

The fact that a company can be de-listed from a sustainable business index means there is ongoing oversight happening. To me, that gives the list more reliability and credence, rather than less.

其实我觉得这篇文章挺令人振奋的

一个公司能够被从可持续发展的商业指数上划下来,这意味着市场存在持续的监管。对我来说,这份名单显得更可靠可信,而非相反。

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

强有力的政治行动

啥都要政治行动和干预,这可不得了。我们需要政治干预嘛?干预会产生什么结果呢?我们都是些低能儿,需要精英来指点江山?未必吧。

Strong political action

If everything needed political action and intervention, it would be disastrous. Do we need political intervention? What results would come from intervention? Are we all so unintelligent that we need an elitist to comment on national affairs? Not necessarily.