All about the wider issues that come out of the sustainability transitions including human rights
It's not getting easier for many automotive companies. Sales are will likely remain below pre covid levels for some time, and margin pressure looks unlikely to abate. And EV investment needs are rising. Can we expect them to be able to fund the EV transition - or does the future lie elsewhere?
More frequent climate extremes will impact our food supplies. Arguably we are past just mitigation and well into adaptation. One crop that could be materially impacted are bananas. The possible future for banana's gives us insights into the risks and opportunities for the wider food supply chain.
We 'know' that a company's share price is determined by what happens in the future. And that this is where sustainability issues play their part, changing the likely course of the future. But how the share price responds depends on what investors are already expecting. Consensus matters.
Climate events such as floods are now more frequent. While globally a small % of the population lives close to the coast, for some countries (including New Zealand) this figure is much higher. Analysis of the NZ situation can help us frame our response. We need to take climate adaptation seriously.
Investors know that soft factors, such as having a happy and motivated workforce, are important drivers of a company valuation. But how do we include factors such as diversity into our investment cases? The first step is to understand the linkages. Not all soft factors are financially material.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Financial markets exist to provide liquidity, and to enable companies to raise new financial capital. Or do they? Are they more a mechanism to generate financial returns. If so, what might this mean for sustainability.
If a CEO knows they might not be in the job for long, they might focus on short term wins over long term value creation. As shareholders we need to be vocal in our support of good investment, even if it has a long payback.