The shift to renewables is not just about cost or emissions. One argument used to support the shift is energy security - reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels. It's broadly correct. But it should be used with care, it doesn't apply to all countries.
The building industry faces two big sustainability challenges, greener building operation, and encouraging the use of greener construction materials. And within each challenge lies a massive opportunity. It's not all about quantity, we can also build better - utilising best practice.
How the financial markets have reacted to the current tariff 'war' gives us some useful insights into how the sustainability transitions might play out. Of the three main alternative scenarios we suggest only one will deliver progress. The other two would lead to negative outcomes.
A lack of supply chain resilience is one of the most material investment risks faced by companies in food related industries. Within this deforestation is becoming more prominent. Put simply, if there is material deforestation taking place within a company's supply chain, the time to act is now.
Adequate insurance is a crucial part of many financial investments, including homebuying. We take it for granted, until it's no longer available. The impact of climate change is prompting private insurers to exit some markets. But this is not inevitable - resilience investments can reduce the risks.
Companies (and many of their shareholders) respond best to issues that impact their long term profitability. Sustainability issues are often strategic issues for companies, with clear valuation creation implications. But not all sustainability issues have financial implications.
The data for 2024 electricity trends is out. And coal use has grown. Is this a permanent shift away from sustainability toward energy security, implying a new dawn for coal use? Probably not. Investors would be wise to exercise caution - coal mining is likely to remain a sector in terminal decline.
The key issues for food companies - healthier diets and climate resilient supply changes. Do you really understand where the food companies you are invested in, or involved with, stand on these key issues.
As an investor I would rather be roughly correct than precisely wrong. Or more strictly I would rather be broadly right about the two or three things that really matter to a company, even if it meant that I got everything else wrong.
We often use too much jargon, and as a result instead of informing investors, we just end up confusing them. This is not a good thing at a time when we want more money to come into sustainability solutions.
A bad company does not always make a bad investment. If we want to persuade investors that a low sustainability company is too risky, we need to understand the difference between price & value.
Most politicians follow not lead. And so we need to think less about our message, and more about if our proposal speaks to the values and aspirations of the wider population.