ESG Industry Report Card: Power Generation
ESG Industry Report Card: Power GenerationMay 13, 2019(Editor's Note: Our ESG Industry Report Cards include an analysis of ESG factors for a selection of companies. We intend toexpand our ESG Industry Report cards to include more companies throughout the year.)PRIMARY CREDIT ANALYSTSPierre GeorgesParisKey Takeaways- The transition away from coal generation--a leader of carbon dioxide (CO2)emissions--is ongoing. But despite being a global focus, the pace of carbon reduction isnot uniform throughout the sector and we expect that, by the next decade, coalgeneration will still represent over 25% of total generation.- Nuclear generation, while a zero-carbon emitter, still has significant environmental risksbecause of its higher-risk operations and nuclear waste.- Although natural gas generation emits about half the CO2 as coal, we view gas-firedgeneration as a bridge to a carbon-neutral environment and as an effective interimmeans to handle the intermittency of renewable generation.- The sector has a considerable influence on local communities, including on customers'electric bills, as a local employer, as a significant contributor to local taxes, and byensuring safe operations at generating facilities.(33) 1-4420-6735pierre.georges@spglobal.comClaire Mauduit-Le ClercqParis 33 14 420 7201claire.mauduit@spglobal.comKarl NietveltParis(33) 1-4420-6751karl.nietvelt@spglobal.comGabe GrosbergNew York(1) 212-438-6043gabe.grosberg@spglobal.comAneesh Prabhu, CFA, FRMNew York(1) 212-438-1285The ESG Risk AtlasTo calibrate the relative ranking of sectors, we use our environmental, social, and governance(ESG) Risk Atlas (see "The ESG Risk Atlas: Sector And Regional Rationales And Scores," publishedMay 13, 2019). The Risk Atlas provides a relative ranking of industries in terms of exposure toenvironmental and social risks (and opportunities). The sector risk atlas charts (shown below)combine each sector's exposure to environmental and social risks, scoring it on a scale of 1 to 6. Ascore closer to 1 represents a relatively low exposure, while 6 indicates a high sectorwideexposure to environmental and social risk factors (for details see the Appendix). This report cardexpands further on the Risk Atlas sector analysis by focusing on the credit-specific impacts, whichin turn forms the basis for analyzing the exposures and opportunities of individual companies inthe @spglobal.comJulyana YokotaSao Paulo 55 11 3039 9731julyana.yokota@spglobal.comSee complete contact list at end of article.May 13, 20191
ESG Industry Report Card: Power GenerationNon-Coal GenerationEnvironmental exposure (Risk Atlas: 4)The environmental risks from power generation (excluding coal-fired generation) have a materialimpact on the sector's credit quality, primarily due to emissions (in the case of gas-fired power)and waste from nuclear power. Social factors are important too, as power generators create localjobs, affect local property taxes, and provide of an essential service that must remain competitiveand reliable. We assess the non-coal power sector as being significantly exposed to environmentalfactors, even though the industry already has taken substantial transformative steps over thepast decade to deal with the rising share of renewable generation, which will likely continue. Wemake the following distinctions across asset classes:Gas: We see gas-fired power's environmental exposure stemming mainly from the fact that itcreates CO2 emissions. That said, we differentiate gas from coal because gas emits half of theemissions and we believe gas-fired generation is a vital bridge to a carbon-neutral environment,notably to handle the intermittency of renewable generation. This is especially the case in NorthAmerica given its plentiful shale gas reserves. Depending on the region, gas-fired powergeneration (like coal) may face headwinds from the rapid rise of renewable capacity and fromhigher carbon pricing/taxes. Longer-term risks could stem from potential targets for CO2emissions, as well as battery storage that supports further growth in renewables.Nuclear: Major environmental risks for nuclear generation center on the long-term storage ofnuclear waste and high water usage. The limited visibility on the technical (and financial) impact ofnuclear storage remains an important credit risk, in our view, with high amounts of assetretirement provisions on company balance sheets (unless transferred to the state, in somecountries). Finally, given nuclear plants' extreme safety requirements, risks stemming fromphysical climate change (including rising sea levels) may be low probability, longer-term riskfactors. At the same time, we recognize the low-carbon impact of nuclear power. For example,nuclear plants generated nearly 20% of the U.S.'s overall electricity and 63% of its carbon#freeelectricity. It thus remains the largest producer of zero-carbon electricity in the U.S., avoiding over545 million metrics tons (mt) of GHG emissions in 2017, which would have been emitted if allnuclear generation been produced at the national average emissions rate. This compared tohydroelectricity, which avoided 200 million mt, wind (175 million mt), and solar (about 40 millionmt).Renewables/hydro: Renewable power generation has a stronger environmental assessment thanthe power industry in general. Key factors we focus on are methane emissions for large hydro (intropical areas), while land use and its effect on biodiversity also is a growing focus. Generally,hydro, wind, and solar use exponentially more land mass to produce the same amount ofelectricity as electricity from fossil fuels or nuclear. Such large land use, in certain circumstances,can significantly alter the ecosystem and hurt the environment. This risk has been reduced by theincreasing use of land in non-greenfield areas.Social exposure (Risk Atlas: 4)We assess social exposure as meaningful. This incorporates the important role that this sectorwww.spglobal.com/ratingsdirectMay 13, 20192
ESG Industry Report Card: Power Generationplays within communities as a provider of an essential service that must remain affordable andreliable. Any disruption of these services, as well as any negative impact they may have on nearbycommunities, could trigger local criticism or political pressures. These sectors are generallyinvested in having significant community engagement because the company may be a large localemployer (that sometimes has unionized staff) and significant contributor to the local property taxbase. Renewables/hydro may have somewhat better social acceptance given its environmentalbenefits. Still, the planning of wind farms is sensitive to local community acceptance while largehydro can face severe opposition if it disrupts the peoples' lifestyles or the landscape.On the other hand we believe nuclear plants have higher social exposure given the sensitivityaround safety. A less likely but high-impact severe nuclear incident could jeopardize a company'slicense to operate. Although we believe the nuclear industry has made positive strides to improveoperations and security, the 2011 Fukushima nuclear incident underscores the severity offinancial impacts and abrupt changes to national social and energy policies.Coal-Fired GenerationWe view environmental risk to the power generation sector, which has material exposure tocoal-fired generation, as an important ratings driver. We believe that the environmental risks fromadvancing regulations will significantly raise costs and create regulatory constraints forwww.spglobal.com/ratingsdirectMay 13, 20193
ESG Industry Report Card: Power Generationgenerators with coal-fired exposure. Social exposure to this sector is significant too, underscoringthe importance of utilities as large recruiters in their local communities and as providers of anessential service that must remain competitive and reliable.Environmental exposure (Risk Atlas: 6)In terms of ESG factors, environmental risks are main issue for power generators because of theirexposure to fossil fuels. Coal-based power generation causes significant environmental damageas one of the leading CO2 emitters. Even with materially higher electricity generated throughrenewables and better energy storage, we continue to expect that coal-fired fossil fuel powergeneration will continue to represent more than 25% of all electricity generated over the nextdecade. This also takes into account the need for consistent, non-intermittent base loadgeneration and the security of supply issues, as several countries (notably China) have abundantdomestic coal supplies.The industry has taken many steps over the past decade to reduce many non-CO2 pollutants(albeit the pace of carbon reduction is not uniform). We nevertheless view the coal power sector asvulnerable to cost escalations (e.g. a higher carbon tax) or increasing regulatory constraintscombined with direct governmental policies (requiring the phase-out or shuttering of themost-polluting coal plants while increasing the share of renewables). However, we expect theexposure will vary greatly based on regional emissions standards. For example:- We estimate that high emissions costs in the form of a carbon or environmental tax couldultimately reduce EBITDA by as much as 10% for U.S. coal generators. A major step has beenthe industry's effort to retrofit several of its coal-fired conventional generation units to acceptnatural gas (coal-to-gas conversion).- The U.K. instituted a specific carbon tax of 16 per tonne for 2019, hitting coal-fired plantshardest since their carbon intensity is over twice as much as gas-fired plants. Germany justannounced its strategy to phase out lignite power plants by 2036. Even if there remains politicalsupport for coal-plants in several Eastern European countries (supported by the importance oftheir domestic coal mining industries), it's very likely there could be shift in sentiment or directconstraints coming from Europe-wide objectives over the next decade.- In China, coal-generation still accounts near 70% of power generation, but it's already beendecided that the most-polluting assets will be taken offline because renewable and nuclearnew builds have become the national priority. China's national emissions trading scheme,launched in December 2017, aims to cover emitters across the coal power sector at the outset;until the ramifications are finalized and trading kicks start, the impact on generators remainsto be seen.- Chile, where the installed capacity is 21% coal-based and 12% diesel, started to apply a greentax of US 5.00 for every tonne of CO2 pollutants emitted (under Law 20.780/2014) as a way toreduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 30% by 2030 compared to 2007. Itparticularly affects generators operating thermal plants with installed capacities equal orlarger than 50 megawatts (MW).Social exposure (Risk Atlas: 4)Ineffective management of the sector's social risk could also represent a significant credit risk, inour view. The sector plays an important role within communities because it provides an essentialservice that must remain competitive and reliable. Any significant disruption of these services, aswww.spglobal.com/ratingsdirectMay 13, 20194
ESG Industry Report Card: Power Generationwell as effects on air pollution in nearby cities, could trigger local criticism or political pressures.This sector is generally socially intertwined with local communities because power generators areusually significant local employers that sometimes include highly unionized staff. It's essentialthat power generators ensure that their services remain safe and viably economical. Workforcedemographics are also changing, as younger employees prefer to work on cleaner, moresustainable technologies. Coal-fired generation is also more likely to create upstream risksbecause of its capital-intensive mining operations.GovernanceGovernance risk is best assessed on an independent company-by-company basis. One specificsector-related governance complexity is the importance of oversight and focus on sustainability,requiring interactions with various stakeholders. For nuclear operators, this implies strict policiesaligned with national safety regulators and governmental policies.www.spglobal.com/ratingsdirectMay 13, 20195
ESG Industry Report Card: Power GenerationNorth Tony oalAtlantic Power Corp. (B /Positive/--)Natural gas-fired assets contribute to a large portion of APC's generation capacity. While these assets are more environmentally friendly thancoal, they still rely on fossil fuels and contribute to GHG emissions. Legislative or regulatory changes in the U.S. and Canada may require lowerGHG emissions in the natural gas sector, possibly affecting APC's natural gas businesses. We believe APC's exposure to conventionalgeneration is partially offset by the portfolio's diversity in fuel type, with hydro and biomass in the mix.Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P. (BBB /Stable/--)BIP has subsidiaries that operate ports and terminals, toll roads, telecommunication and broadcasting towers, utilities, midstream andpipelines, and district heating and cooling, to mention a few. These subsidiaries are involved in using, handling, or transporting substances thatare toxic, combustible, or otherwise hazardous to the environment, and therefore we believe environmental factors are key drivers of itsoperational and financial performance. Any leaks, spillage, or emissions may result in regulatory infractions, damage to the environment,injury, or loss of life. That said, BIP along with its parent Brookfield Asset Management, has various policies and steps that minimize itsoperations' environmental impact and utilize resources more efficiently. BIP has also been taking steps to better the environment, includinginstalling a closed-loop chilled water system for heating or cooling in over 150 buildings in Toronto, reducing energy use by approximately 90%compared to conventional in-house fuel-based or electrical cooling systems. It also began constructing a green highway overpass in Brazil tohelp wildlife in the surrounding areas safely pass across the highway, which had seen more than 3,000 wildlife fatally injured over the previous10 years. BIP has demonstrated its satisfactory governance assessment by executing its strategy and achieving results consistent with itspublic guidance.Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P. (BBB /Negative/A-2)Most of BEP's generation assets are renewable, with about 75% hydro, 20% wind, and the rest solar power. With GHG emissions of about 0.3million metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent in 2018, BEP is one of the lowest GHG emitters among global power generation companies. BEP'sportfolio depends on the availability of natural resources like wind and hydrology levels and it is exposed to the physical impacts of climatechange, like droughts. BEP has to manage its underlying water resources efficiently to minimize biodiversity changes and maintain the naturalecology to minimize its environmental impact. Temporary water stresses could be alleviated by efficient water management practices. About55 of its hydro facilities (out of approximately 218) have received the Low Impact Hydropower Institute Certification. BEP has a relatively strongmanagement and governance, reflecting its clear strategy for developing renewable assets and its execution process.Calpine Corp. (B /Stable/--)Calpine is one of the larger U.S. independent power producers at 26 GW of generation capacity, which is highly efficient relative to assets inpeer portfolios. While this lack of diversity is a risk since it relies on a single fuel, from an environmental perspective, we see the reliance onnatural gas generation assets--and some geothermal generation--as a significant advantage. Transparency and governance issues arose whenthe company was taken private by Energy Capital Partners. Although the company has remained consistent on its deleveraging targets and isgenerating cash flow (and deleveraging), transparency of disclosures has declined. In response to lender concerns, Calpine has committed todebtholders that it will schedule quarterly earnings releases and will attend industry conferences to provide greater transparency to itsfinancials. We expect that, going forward, the company will provide greater transparency on its consolidated cash flow build-up.Clearway Energy Holding (BB/Stable/--)CWEN has a relatively low carbon footprint relative to other power industry peers, as about 3.3 GW of its overall 5.4-GW fleet is engaged in solaror wind generation. The company's growth plans--currently slowed by its exposure to PG&E--also focus more on renewable energy, althoughlong-term contracted gas-fired generation is also a preferred investment. We consider CWEN's governance as favorable from a bondholder'sperspective. Despite focusing on maximizing current yield, CWEN's board acted quickly to revise its dividend payments--which are nowequivalent to an 80% pay-out of the company's cash flow available for debt service (excluding PG&E)--following PG&E's bankruptcy filing. Wesee this as credit protective because it provides the company with a capital cushion for balance sheet management if its projected cash flowsare compromised or restricted for a prolonged timeframe. We believe it's important for companies like CWEN with diverse portfolios (includingrenewable and conventional generation) to provide enhanced disclosures. This is because many investors have advised us that they areunwilling to invest in green offerings from a YieldCo because they also have conventional businesses, and that funds raised through greenofferings get comingled in the company's general revenues.Covanta (BB-/Stable/--)www.spglobal.com/ratingsdirectMay 13, 20196
ESG Industry Report Card: Power GenerationCovanta uses exclusively energy-from-waste (EfW) and renewable assets (concentrated in the Northeast U.S.), which not only reduce GHGemissions, but EfW is a technologically advanced method for waste disposal (by avoiding methane from landfills). Since 2007 Covanta hasreduced emissions by more than 50%, which we believe is a competitive advantage. Additionally, we view governance as a relative strengthgiven modest growth targets, prudent risk management, and a strong development pipeline that provides visibility into future growthprospects. As an EfW company, we view Covanta's current safety management system to be in line with industry standards. Communitypartnership and outreach programs have helped Covanta operate seamlessly where its facilities are located. In the near term, we don't believesocial risks from communities or the workforce will hamper its credit quality.Edison International (BBB/Watch Neg/A-2)U.S.GabeGrosbergU.S.Safina AliU.S.GabeGrosbergCanadaLuqman AliU.S.GabeGrosbergU.S.AneeshPrabhuBecause climate change has intensified the severity and frequency of wildfires in California, environmental factors have become an integralpart of our credit analysis on the state's electric utilities. Inverse condemnation exacerbates the operational and financial risks that climatechange introduces for the company. Furthermore, the company’s service territory has already faced catastrophic wildfires in both 2017 and2018, demonstrating its susceptibility and exposure to wildfires and climate change. As such, we believe the company is more exposed toenvironmental risk compared to the vast majority of peers. In our view, the company's social risks are also high reflecting its communities'susceptibility to wildfires and the potential for higher customer bills in the near-term due to the need to invest in wildfire mitigation hardening,technology, and the uncertainty of how costs will be socialized.EGR IV LLC (B/Watch Neg/--)renewable assets--of which about 45% are solar, 45% are wind, and 10% are biomass--over the debt term. With a portfolio of all renewables,EGR IV is relatively better positioned in terms of carbon emissions than peer companies that primarily hold coal and natural gas assets. In ourbase-case forecast, we consider the variability in EGR IV's cash flows due to the intermittent nature of renewable assets. We also consider theoperating cost structure to be less complex and more predictable than coal/gas generators because it's simpler to operate solar and windassets. From a governance standpoint, we believe EGR IV's sponsor, Exelon Corp.'s, governance practices are consistent with other publiclytraded utilities.Exelon Corp. (BBB /Stable/A-2)Exelon's large nuclear generation portfolio (over 80% of its generation output) exposes the company to significant environmental riskscompared to peers because nuclear operations present significantly higher operating risks and unique risks related to nuclear wastemanagement. However, the company has significantly lower emissions than peers with a material generation portfolio since it depends onzero-emissions nuclear generation, as well as a portfolio of wind, solar, and hydro assets. Exelon is the largest generator of zero-emissionelectricity in the U.S., producing almost two times more zero-carbon megawatt hours (MWh) than the second-largest producer. Furthermore,about 65% of the company comprises transmission and distribution operations with minimal exposure to environmental risk. From a socialperspective, the company is investing over 5 billion annually to modernize its utility electric and natural gas transmission and distributioninfrastructure, which has contributed to increased reliability and customer satisfaction across its utility service territory. At the same time, thecompany's ability to continue to invest in infrastructure improvements while managing sustainable increases in customer bills is key tomaintaining credit quality. We believe governance factors support Exelon's investment-grade credit quality and are in line with peers.Innergex Renewable Energy (BBB-/Negative/--)Innergex's power generation assets are mostly renewable, with net installed capacity of approximately 2.1 GW as of December 2018. About38% is hydro, 55% wind, 2% solar, and 5% geothermal. With the focus on renewable energy, governments have introduced various measureslike portfolio standards and other incentives to increase renewable capacity in the electricity generation supply mix. Innergex is committed toproducing energy exclusively from renewable sources in all countries where it operates and has only added renewable capacity since 2014.From a governance standpoint, we believe Innergex's management has a good operating history, with policies to oversee management andbusiness affairs. The company has not been subject to any material investigations on bribery or corruption in the past. In addition, we do notsee any social factors having a material impact on credit.NextEra Energy Inc. (A-/Stable/--)NextEra's owns over 45 GW of generation capacity through its regulated utility operations and competitive businesses. While the vast majorityof the company's generation is from natural gas (about 45%) and renewables (about 40%), about 15% of the company's generation mix is fromnuclear, which although carbon-free, exposes the company to potentially higher operating risks and longer-term nuclear waste storage risks.The company also operates its utilities in a region of the U.S. prone to frequent hurricanes, which could increase the company's risk exposurebecause climate change is intensifying the severity and frequency of these natural disasters globally. However, the company minimizes theserisks through storm hardening and effectively managing regulatory risk by allowing for the timely recovery of storm costs. NextEra's ability todeliver safe and reliable services to customers while maintaining customer bills at 30% less than the national average is a positive socialfactor. Furthermore, the company's recent acquisition of Gulf Power and its intent to proactively lower customer bills while reducing its carbonfootprint further demonstrates its commitment to local communities. Overall, we believe that NextEra's management of social risks isconsistently better than peers. We view governance factors as supporting NextEra's investment-grade credit quality and in line with peers.NextEra Energy Partners (BB/Stable/--)www.spglobal.com/ratingsdirectMay 13, 20197
ESG Industry Report Card: Power GenerationWe see NEP's blend of wind (59%), solar (22%), and gas pipelines (19%) by aggregate distribution as a healthy mix from an environmentalperspective, offering the company diversity across fuel type, geography, and scale. The geographical diversity across 16 states is also betterthan peers. NEP's wind and solar power plants give it a competitive edge environmentally since it means reduced emissions; however, its gaspipelines could experience spills or leaks that affect biodiversity. Significant ownership by parent NextEra Energy Inc. (NEI) raises governanceissues and NEP has taken elaborate steps to distance itself from NEI. Management believes that because NEP's size and scale have grownsignificantly, it's now independent of NEI. NEP GP ceded control of NEP through certain governance changes in 2017, which including a cutbackto 5% of NEP GP's voting power. The board can oversee and direct NEP's operations, policies, strategies, and management without oversightfrom NEP GP. Moreover, the board comprises seven directors: three NEP GP-appointed directors and four independently elected directors.While we see the distancing of NEP from NEI as favorable from a governance perspective, there are still many business interrelationshipsbetween them, including a management services agreement, an operations and maintenance agreement, and an administrative servicesagreement. There are also no NEP employees, for instance, unlike peers like Atlantica Yield, which have clearly delineated the operations of theYieldCo from Abengoa. While such services can be provided by third parties, we still see believe NEP depends on NextEra Energy Resources andNEI.Pattern Energy Group ergU.S.Luqman AliU.S.AneeshPrabhuGiven that PEGI is a power generator, environmental and governance factors dominate our ESG assessment of the company, with social havinga secondary credit impact. While carbon is currently not priced throughout the U.S. at this point and despite the unwinding of the Clean PowerPlan, long-term environmental risks for generating assets remain significant longer term. PEGI invests in exclusively renewable assets (withmuch of the portfolio in the U.S.), which is a competitive advantage. Current power purchase agreements (PPAs) largely support state-levelrenewable mandates, which will likely heighten over time. While not likely during the next few years, a longer- term price on carbon benefits aportfolio like this one at the expense of fossil-fuel fired generation. Additionally, PEGI's governance is a relative strength given modest growthtargets, prudent risk management, and a strong development pipeline that provides visibility into future growth prospects. As a (renewable)generator and not a load-serving entity, we do not see social risks from communities or workforce as material for PEGI. In our view, PEGIbenefits from a lower cost structure than fossil fuel-tilted peers given its leaner workforce for renewable assets relative to conventional powerplants.Sempra Energy (BBB /Negative/A-2)Because climate change has intensified the severity and frequency of wildfires in California, environmental factors have become an integralpart of our credit analysis on Sempra. Sempra's largest subsidiary, San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (SDG&E), reduced this risk by developing andimplementing sophisticated analytics and an advanced wildfire warning system that includes weather stations and fire cameras. Thetechnology can identify the wildfire's GPS coordinates, which can then be communicated to the appropriate state agencies to extinguish thefire at its earliest stage. In our view, wildfire mitigation and prevention investments over the past decade have reduced the risk of catastrophicwildfires in the communities it serves, thereby reducing social risks compared to peers. Governance issues are neutral in our ESG analysis.TerraForm Power (BB-/Stable/--)While carbon is not priced throughout the U.S. at this point, despite the unwinding of the Clean Power Plan, long-term environmental risks forgenerating assets remain significant longer term. TERP's investment in exclusively renewable assets (with much of the portfolio in the U.S.) is acompetitive advantage. Current PPAs largely support state level renewable mandates, which will likely heighten over time. While not likelyduring the next few years, a longer-term price on carbon benefits a portfolio like this one at the expense of fossil fuel-fired generation.Additionally, TERP's governance is now a relative strength. Under previous ownership, the issuer created targets for growth that led todebt-fueled acquisitions, weakening credit quality and limiting the financial flexibility this business model requires. The issuer was also, for atime, unable to file financial statements on time; governance, thus, became a very material credit risk. However, growth targets are much moremodest now under Brookfield's ownership, and TERP has provided greater transparency to the market, such that unexpected negative financialperformance for reasons other than resource adequacy is less likely. Because TERP is a generator and not a load- serving entity, its social risksare somewhat more remote.CoalAES Corp. (BB /Stable)Environmental risks are most relevant to our assessment of AES' credit quality. With 29% of its capacity generated via renewables, we viewAES' ca
May 15, 2019 · ESG Industry Report Card: Power Generation May 13, 2019 (Editor's Note: Our ESG Industry Report Cards include an analysis of ESG factors for a selection of companies. We intend to expand our ESG Industry Report cards to include more companies throughout the year.) Key Takeaways - The tra
ESG Industry Report Card: Consumer Products And Agribusiness May 21, 2019 (Editor's Note: Our ESG Industry Report Cards include an analysis of ESG factors for a selection of companies.We intend to expand our ESG Industry Report
May 15, 2019 · ESG Industry Report Card: Autos And Auto Parts May 13, 2019 (Editor's Note: Our ESG Industry Report Cards include an analysis of ESG factors for a selection of companies.We intend to expand our ESG Industry Rep
ESG PORTFOLIO EXTENDED SUMMARY REPORT December 03, 2020 Portfolio Benchmark Weighted Avg ESG Score 6.20 6.03 Adjustment ESG Trend Positive 4.74% 15.81% LAGGARD AVERAGE LEADER Distribution of MSCI ESG Fund Ratings Universe Adjustment Total 0.81% 0.88% Score Adjustment 0.05 - ESG Trend Negative 2.02% 7.49% - ESG Laggards 1.91% 7.44% ESG Quality .
stated to apply to ESG ratings providers may apply to ESG data products providers, and vice versa. 1. The term ESG ratings and data products providers, as used in this report, covers providers who offer ESG ratings and/or ESG data products. Where there is a need to single out ESG data products providers who
Portion of cases where ESG affected portfolio construction LE 6.1 150/150 Pre-investment phase ESG risk management Compliance processes for negative screening LE 8 200/200 Post-investment phase ESG risk management Incorporation of ESG in regular reviews LE 9 150/150 Post-investment phase ESG risk management Identification of ESG incidents LE .
ESG quality, from the asset allocation mix, a question similarly posed by Schroders [2019]7. DWS Approach to ESG in SAA On the aforementioned point of inclusive versus exclusive ESG SAA approaches, we take the more inclusive approach. First, ‘ESG integration’ as for PRI is primarily a risk
ESG and financial variables is interpreted as ESG being the cause and financial value the effect, however the transmission can be interchanged. COMPONENTS/CRITERIONS OF ESG: 3 key components of ESG are - Environmental, Social and (corporate) Governance aspects. Since ESG factors are often interrelated, there may be scenarios
in Prep Course Lesson Book A of ALFRED'S BASIC PIANO LIBRARY. It gives the teacher considerable flexibility and is intended in no way to restrict the lesson procedures. FORM OF GUIDE The Guide is presented basically in outline form. The relative importance of each activity is reflected in the words used to introduce each portion of the outline, such as EMPHASIZE, SUGGESTION, IMPORTANT .
