Search -
Valuing Corporate Responsibility: How Do Investors Really Use Corporate Responsibility Information?
Valuing Corporate Responsibility How Do Investors Really Use Corporate Responsibility Information Author:Rory Sullivan Investors have taken a long time to pay attention to corporate responsibility (CR). As the CR phenomenon flourished, mainstream investors' interest in governance issues was, on the whole, piqued only in those situations where a major accident or scandal hit the headlines. This has changed dramatically. Over 500 large investment institutions (ass... more »et managers and pension funds) have signed the UN-backed Principles for Responsible Investment, and similar numbers support the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP). It can now be plausibly argued that 'responsible investment' has become mainstream. This change is potentially of huge significance and the investment community is now widely seen as one of the key audiences for the many thousands of annual corporate responsibility reports produced by companies across the spectrum. However, despite the volume of such reporting - and the progress on standardised indicators (e.g. the GRI) and reporting tools (e.g. AA1000) - these reports' usefulness to investors is often marred by the following: * Inconsistency in terms of scope and content * A 'pick and mix' approach to the indicators used * A focus primarily on good news rather than a balanced assessment * The business implications of social and environmental issues not being discussed in the context of the company's strategy and key value drivers * Difficulty in assessing companies' performance against their own commitments * Lack of clarity about what resources (human, financial, etc.) have been allocated towards corporate responsibility objectives * Lack of transparency about the processes for assessing materiality (or financial significance) * No explanation of what has been excluded from the scope of reporting The consequence of this is that the theoretical potential of corporate responsibility reporting remains unrealised. This book seeks to remedy this systematic communication failure. It aims (1) to provide investors with the basic skills that they need to make sense of the information they receive, now and in the future, on companies' corporate responsibility performance; (2) to provide companies with practical suggestions on how they can make their reporting more useful for investors. 'Valuing Corporate Responsibility' will explain what responsible investment looks like in practice and, from this analysis, explain what sort of corporate responsibility information investors are interested in and how this information might be used. It will describe to investors some of the practical difficulties faced by companies when preparing corporate responsibility reports and the implications for the quality and utility of the data provided in these reports. And it will also explain how issues such as materiality and investment time-frames impact on the dialogue that investors have with companies on corporate responsibility matters. The book is divided into four parts. The first (Chapters 2, 3 and 4) describes the major responsible investment strategies that may be adopted by investors and the implications for corporate responsibility reporting. It starts with a broad overview of the responsible investment field and follows with a series of case studies and examples of how investors use corporate responsibility information in practice. The second part (Chapter 5) focuses on the key technical issues - uncertainty in emissions estimation, the scope of reporting, assurance - that impact on the quality and utility of the data provided in corporate responsibility reports. The third (Chapter 6) focuses on investment practice, and the implications for companies' reporting and performance. The final part (Chapter 7) draws together the key themes of the book, offering some practical proposals on how corporate responsibility reporting can be made more useful for investors and on how investors can have a more constructive dialogue with companies on corporate« less