WHEB Commentary

Impact investing and intentionality for purpose-led investors: an holistic response

The following is the text of a speech George Latham gave recently at the Faith in Finance conference hosted by the Alliance of Religions and Conservation, at which representatives from eight of the world’s leading faiths launched the Zug Guidelines to faith consistent investing.  For more coverage of the event, see ARC’s webpage on this link

What is the purpose of finance? What should our investments achieve? These are questions that purpose-led investors would do well to hold on to as they consider how to develop approaches to responsible investing. It may sound obvious, but I worry that much of the responsible investment industry has forgotten this basic challenge as different strategies have been developed over the past 30 years. Asset owners have asked narrow questions and fund managers have responded in kind, answering specific questions, but without thought to the underlying nature of the challenge. The industry is now at a crossroads, where the growing interest in Impact Investing is a real opportunity to form a more holistic and complete response. But we can only really seize this chance if we first understand where and how previous answers have fallen short.

A wide variety of methods characterise the industry collectively known as responsible investing. The first approach involved screening companies out on ethical grounds. From here we have seen the evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility, Socially Responsible Investing, Environmental, Social and Governance analysis, of Stewardship and Engagement. Typically, these strategies are used independently of each other and are not joined up. For example, many best-in-class ESG strategies reject the notion of ethical screens to focus on corporate behaviour as a means of differentiating good and bad, instead of the impact of a company’s product. Most of these strategies have been developed in response to clients’ demands.

The industry has developed a response not a solution; typically, ABC Fund Management has its flagship global equity strategy, which is the approach that it believes is the best way to invest… and then a church group or a foundation client comes along and says we want to invest in global equities but we cannot invest in armaments, tobacco, alcohol and gambling. ABCfm responds by creating an ‘ethical’ version of its investment strategy, which screens out these sectors.   I’ve seen similar conversations when clients tell fund managers that they must integrate ESG analysis, become UN PRI signatories, or vote all of their shareholding. What results is a sub-optimal version of ABCfm’s preferred investment strategy, or a module bolted on to the side which is extraneous to the actual process of selecting investments and building a portfolio.

More importantly, does screening out a few “sin” stocks really achieve the purpose that the church group or foundation client is asking at its core? If it is simply to protect the asset owner from reputational damage or an uncomfortable headline, then perhaps. Although even here, ethical screens have to be drawn tightly in order to cover all eventualities. Asset owners have tried to communicate their mission by defining the inputs into an investment strategy, but in the process have lost focus on the output or the actual impact. This is consistent with the reductionist way in which the financial services industry operates, looking to make sense of a complex system by reducing it down to a few simple, measurable building blocks.

Over the past 30 years the finance industry has ballooned in scale as it has become servant unto itself, losing sight of its wider social utility. The increasing ‘financialisation’ of investment through benchmarking, quantitative and short-term trading strategies and other abstract approaches has made money ever more separated from its end purpose – or work – within the real economy. In the end purpose-led investment should surely be about putting money to work to support higher standards of living and welfare throughout our society, as well as serving the investor.

The notion of impact investing has the potential to reconnect investments with this purpose precisely because it switches focus away from inputs and onto the end output, or impact of the portfolio. The question investors need to ask at the outset is “What do we hope to achieve, what is our mission?” At WHEB we have defined this through our corporate purpose – our mission is “to advance sustainability and create prosperity through positive impact investments.”

By starting out with a stated intentionality, the conditions are created by which sustainability, responsibility and purpose can become something more than a bolted on optional extra or, as I have heard it described, the icing on the cake. Instead it should become the foundation ingredient of the cake itself, built into the investment strategy and philosophy itself.

At WHEB, we believe that businesses which create positive social and environmental impact through their products and services are underpinned by long-term secular change and have structural growth characteristics that are superior to the rest of the economy. This framework can therefore be a powerful source of investment value. Secondly, our analysis of ‘ESG’ issues is driven by our desire to understand the fundamental quality of the businesses and other investment opportunities that we are researching. We have strong conviction in the impact of ESG issues on company performance either in their own right, or as a wider proxy for the quality of a business franchise, especially over a multi-year investment horizon. Our engagement activity with companies is driven fundamentally by a desire to understand them better, and to advocate for practices that we believe will help secure the company’s long-term success. The investment team scrutinises governance as a core part of our investment process and uses voting powers to push for better practices. These are tools that make us better investors in the pursuit of positive impact, rather than boxes to tick to comply with a set of criteria.

To develop a truly holistic strategy, intentionality and purpose must reach beyond the narrow confines of the investment product, and be embedded in the business which sits behind it. This we have sought to do at WHEB, for example by becoming a certified Benefit Corporation, embedding the notion that the interests of all of our stakeholders are important, not just our shareholders.

The intentionality of generating positive impact sits at the core of everything that we do. I believe that this has enabled us to consider our investment strategy in a more holistic context, and in so doing to create a more complete response to the challenges of mission alignment and purpose which lay behind those early requests to screen sin stocks out of portfolios.


Recent posts

  • Glasgow, Greta and GFANZ
  • The role of home health in the pandemic and beyond
  • Gas prices, ‘greenflation’ and governmental gatherings
  • We’ve been warned – climate crisis and weak links in the supply chain
  • Is ESG a waste of time?
  • Code Red from the IPCC
  • Extreme weather – a wake-up call on climate mitigation and adaptation
  • The price of civilisation
  • Delivering carbon reductions – moving beyond the targets
  • Is Amazon really a sustainable investment?
  • Archive

  • November 2021 (1)
  • October 2021 (3)
  • September 2021 (1)
  • August 2021 (2)
  • July 2021 (3)
  • June 2021 (1)
  • May 2021 (1)
  • April 2021 (3)
  • March 2021 (1)
  • February 2021 (1)
  • January 2021 (3)
  • December 2020 (1)
  • November 2020 (2)
  • October 2020 (3)
  • September 2020 (1)
  • August 2020 (2)
  • July 2020 (3)
  • June 2020 (2)
  • May 2020 (1)
  • April 2020 (3)
  • March 2020 (1)
  • February 2020 (2)
  • January 2020 (1)
  • December 2019 (1)
  • November 2019 (2)
  • October 2019 (3)
  • September 2019 (1)
  • August 2019 (2)
  • July 2019 (3)
  • June 2019 (2)
  • May 2019 (3)
  • April 2019 (1)
  • March 2019 (1)
  • February 2019 (2)
  • January 2019 (3)
  • December 2018 (1)
  • November 2018 (2)
  • October 2018 (4)
  • September 2018 (2)
  • August 2018 (4)
  • July 2018 (1)
  • June 2018 (1)
  • May 2018 (1)
  • April 2018 (2)
  • March 2018 (2)
  • February 2018 (1)
  • January 2018 (1)
  • December 2017 (3)
  • November 2017 (1)
  • July 2017 (3)
  • June 2017 (1)
  • May 2017 (1)
  • April 2017 (1)
  • February 2017 (2)
  • November 2016 (1)
  • August 2016 (1)
  • July 2016 (1)
  • June 2016 (1)
  • May 2016 (1)
  • April 2016 (2)
  • February 2016 (1)
  • December 2015 (1)
  • November 2015 (3)
  • October 2015 (1)
  • September 2015 (1)
  • July 2015 (2)
  • April 2015 (2)
  • February 2015 (2)
  • December 2014 (2)
  • November 2014 (3)
  • October 2014 (4)
  • August 2014 (1)
  • July 2014 (3)
  • June 2014 (1)
  • April 2014 (2)
  • March 2014 (2)
  • February 2014 (3)
  • January 2014 (4)
  • December 2013 (4)
  • October 2013 (5)
  • September 2013 (3)
  • July 2013 (4)
  • June 2013 (2)
  • May 2013 (4)
  • April 2013 (2)
  • March 2013 (4)
  • February 2013 (6)
  • January 2013 (2)
  • December 2012 (3)
  • November 2012 (1)
  • October 2012 (4)
  • September 2012 (2)
  • August 2012 (1)
  • July 2012 (3)
  • June 2012 (3)
  • May 2012 (6)
  • April 2012 (4)
  • March 2012 (5)