投资组合优先与气候变化

Roberto Tallarita
{"title":"投资组合优先与气候变化","authors":"Roberto Tallarita","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3912977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate change is a quintessential market failure. Individual companies do not have economic incentives to reduce their carbon emissions and therefore produce more emissions than is socially desirable. However, according to a theory that is gaining increasing support among academics and market players, large asset managers (and, in particular, index fund managers) can become “climate stewards” and force companies to reduce their impact on climate change. This view is based on the premise that index fund portfolios mirror the entire economy and, therefore, internalize climate risk. According to this theory, by maximizing the value of their entire portfolio (portfolio primacy) rather than the value of the individual company (shareholder primacy), index fund managers have strong economic incentives to steer companies towards decarbonization. This Article offers the first systematic critique of this theory. First, it demonstrates that the composition of investment portfolios can distort the incentives of index funds with respect to climate risk. In particular, it shows that index funds’ incentives are strongly aligned with the interests of carbon emitters, rich countries, and large companies, but weakly aligned with the interests of firms and countries that are more vulnerable to climate change. Second, it shows that the stock market is a highly imperfect mechanism to address climate risk: stock prices do not accurately reflect future climate damages; private investors discount the distant future at a higher rate than the correct social discount rate; and public companies represent a limited (and increasingly smaller) portion of the economy. Therefore, index funds inevitably underestimate the costs of climate change and the benefits of mitigation measures. Third, it examines the agency problems and fiduciary conflicts of index fund managers, and it argues that even if index fund portfolios benefitted from climate stewardship, fund managers would have very weak incentives to take on such a role. The analysis of this Article reveals that portfolio primacy offers no adequate answer to the crucial threat of climate change. If policymakers want to use corporate governance as a tool to fight climate change, they should change the incentives of individual companies rather than trust the portfolio incentives of index funds.","PeriodicalId":22151,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Corporate Governance (Topic)","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Portfolio Primacy and Climate Change\",\"authors\":\"Roberto Tallarita\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3912977\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Climate change is a quintessential market failure. Individual companies do not have economic incentives to reduce their carbon emissions and therefore produce more emissions than is socially desirable. However, according to a theory that is gaining increasing support among academics and market players, large asset managers (and, in particular, index fund managers) can become “climate stewards” and force companies to reduce their impact on climate change. This view is based on the premise that index fund portfolios mirror the entire economy and, therefore, internalize climate risk. According to this theory, by maximizing the value of their entire portfolio (portfolio primacy) rather than the value of the individual company (shareholder primacy), index fund managers have strong economic incentives to steer companies towards decarbonization. This Article offers the first systematic critique of this theory. First, it demonstrates that the composition of investment portfolios can distort the incentives of index funds with respect to climate risk. In particular, it shows that index funds’ incentives are strongly aligned with the interests of carbon emitters, rich countries, and large companies, but weakly aligned with the interests of firms and countries that are more vulnerable to climate change. Second, it shows that the stock market is a highly imperfect mechanism to address climate risk: stock prices do not accurately reflect future climate damages; private investors discount the distant future at a higher rate than the correct social discount rate; and public companies represent a limited (and increasingly smaller) portion of the economy. Therefore, index funds inevitably underestimate the costs of climate change and the benefits of mitigation measures. Third, it examines the agency problems and fiduciary conflicts of index fund managers, and it argues that even if index fund portfolios benefitted from climate stewardship, fund managers would have very weak incentives to take on such a role. The analysis of this Article reveals that portfolio primacy offers no adequate answer to the crucial threat of climate change. If policymakers want to use corporate governance as a tool to fight climate change, they should change the incentives of individual companies rather than trust the portfolio incentives of index funds.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22151,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SRPN: Corporate Governance (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SRPN: Corporate Governance (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3912977\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Corporate Governance (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3912977","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

气候变化是典型的市场失灵。个别公司没有减少碳排放的经济激励,因此产生了超过社会期望的排放量。然而,根据一种越来越受到学术界和市场参与者支持的理论,大型资产管理公司(尤其是指数基金管理公司)可以成为“气候管家”,迫使企业减少对气候变化的影响。这一观点的前提是,指数基金的投资组合反映了整个经济,因此将气候风险内部化。根据这一理论,通过最大化其整个投资组合的价值(投资组合优先)而不是单个公司的价值(股东优先),指数基金经理有很强的经济激励来引导公司走向脱碳。本文首次对这一理论进行了系统的批判。首先,它证明了投资组合的构成会扭曲指数基金在气候风险方面的激励。特别是,它表明指数基金的激励措施与碳排放国、富裕国家和大公司的利益密切相关,但与更容易受到气候变化影响的公司和国家的利益不太相关。其次,它表明股票市场是一个非常不完善的应对气候风险的机制:股票价格不能准确反映未来的气候损害;私人投资者对遥远未来的贴现率高于正确的社会贴现率;上市公司在经济中所占的份额有限(而且越来越小)。因此,指数基金不可避免地低估了气候变化的成本和缓解措施的好处。第三,它考察了指数基金经理的代理问题和信托冲突,并认为,即使指数基金投资组合受益于气候管理,基金经理承担这一角色的动机也非常弱。本文的分析表明,投资组合优先对气候变化的关键威胁没有提供充分的答案。如果政策制定者希望利用公司治理作为对抗气候变化的工具,他们就应该改变个别公司的激励机制,而不是相信指数基金的投资组合激励机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Portfolio Primacy and Climate Change
Climate change is a quintessential market failure. Individual companies do not have economic incentives to reduce their carbon emissions and therefore produce more emissions than is socially desirable. However, according to a theory that is gaining increasing support among academics and market players, large asset managers (and, in particular, index fund managers) can become “climate stewards” and force companies to reduce their impact on climate change. This view is based on the premise that index fund portfolios mirror the entire economy and, therefore, internalize climate risk. According to this theory, by maximizing the value of their entire portfolio (portfolio primacy) rather than the value of the individual company (shareholder primacy), index fund managers have strong economic incentives to steer companies towards decarbonization. This Article offers the first systematic critique of this theory. First, it demonstrates that the composition of investment portfolios can distort the incentives of index funds with respect to climate risk. In particular, it shows that index funds’ incentives are strongly aligned with the interests of carbon emitters, rich countries, and large companies, but weakly aligned with the interests of firms and countries that are more vulnerable to climate change. Second, it shows that the stock market is a highly imperfect mechanism to address climate risk: stock prices do not accurately reflect future climate damages; private investors discount the distant future at a higher rate than the correct social discount rate; and public companies represent a limited (and increasingly smaller) portion of the economy. Therefore, index funds inevitably underestimate the costs of climate change and the benefits of mitigation measures. Third, it examines the agency problems and fiduciary conflicts of index fund managers, and it argues that even if index fund portfolios benefitted from climate stewardship, fund managers would have very weak incentives to take on such a role. The analysis of this Article reveals that portfolio primacy offers no adequate answer to the crucial threat of climate change. If policymakers want to use corporate governance as a tool to fight climate change, they should change the incentives of individual companies rather than trust the portfolio incentives of index funds.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Portfolio Primacy and Climate Change Does Social Trust Mitigate Insiders’ Opportunistic Behavior? Evidence from Insider Trading The Role of Corporate Governance Failure in the Grenfell Tower Fire Sustaining Competitive Advantage Through Good Governance and Fiscal Controls: Risk Determinants in Internal Controls A Study on Performance Evaluation of Equity Share and Mutual Funds
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1