This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Yet the pace and scale of their reductions is in the realm of what every company and country must do by 2030 to keep the faith of the ParisAgreement. But 40% of the reductions came from divesting, or selling off, dirty assets, which from the atmosphere’s perspective is akin to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
This backsliding has increased polarisation between investors, with some choosing to divest and others – in recognition of their responsibility as universal owners – doubling down on engagement with the sector. There is value in engagement, provided it happens over a defined period and there are defined outcomes.
Choosing the right method to measure portfolio emissions is crucial to investors’ alignment with the ParisAgreement, and should reflect their strategy. Reasons are manifold but include better risk management, earlier identification of strandedassets, and the realisation that ParisAgreement goals are in jeopardy.
Financial organisations thus have a major role to play in the decarbonisation of the global economy, yet it is estimated that since the ParisAgreement in 2015, the 60 largest banks have instead invested $5.5 They can also divest from high-emitting industries such as thermal coal production. trillion USD in fossil fuels.
Now they must wait to see how signatories to the ParisAgreement act on the commitments outlined in the official response to the Global Stocktake, as well as multiple other pledges announced across the two weeks before that final text was signed, sealed and gavelled. C has not lessened; if anything, it has increased,” he says.
Aligning investment portfolios with the goals of the ParisAgreement requires engagement with the real economy, said Claudia Bolli, Head of Responsible Investing, Swiss Re. Speaking at the City Week financial services symposium in London, she echoed the views of the UN-convened Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance (NZAOA) that 1.5°C
Alongside the progress of a bill in California calling for fossil fuel divestment by public-sector pensions, and the SEC’s plans for climate-risk disclosures , this new assault on greenwashing moves US policy closer to its European counterparts, where fund disclosure rules are already reshaping the market.
Divest or wind down? This leaves it heavily exposed to reputational, regulatory and stranded-asset risk, leading many investors to avoid it. The company said it would continue the “responsible decline of its thermal coal operations over time”.
In order to manage the pensions of our savers sustainably over the next 50 years, we need a strong, robust climate policy response and companies have a lot of influence over policymakers.” “Companies acting in breach of one of these norms will be publicly blacklisted and divested from our portfolio,” she says. “We
C, in line with the ParisAgreement goal. . “If The report warns that fossil fuel demand will peak as government policies to cut emissions, asset owners’ net-zero commitments and the rapid growth of clean energy technologies combine to transition the economy towards renewables. C goal. .
In June, the Church of England Pensions Board (CoEPB) and Church Commissioners announced that they will divest from oil and gas firms for failing to align with climate goals. However, individual, specific, and isolated divestments do not make a significant difference due to the abundance of liquidity in the market. billion (US$13.2
And while there are instructive parallels with the catalytic impact of the ParisAgreement on identifying and mitigating climate risks by the private sector, there are also important differences. For investors and companies with assets within those key biodiversity areas, this raises the issue of strandedassets.
University activists are increasingly citing the oil and gas industry’s targeting of kids in the classroom as another reason to divest from fossil fuels. The divestment solution. Divestment is an increasingly popular approach to combating the fossil fuel industry’s influence. The case for divestment is persuasive.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content