As climate change and human rights issues have become ever more pressing, the public has become increasingly aware of sustainable development. Some businesses have joined the trend and formulated sustainability roadmaps for the next five to 10 years, to implement a range of activities, from procuring raw materials, reducing water and energy wastage and reducing greenhouse gases to improving working conditions and labor management.
An increasing number of investors are looking at the effects of sustainability on their financial assets and shifting their attention to so-called “environmental, social and governance” (ESG) investments. Meanwhile, many companies that are oriented toward green technology and focused on human rights, including ensuring safe and secure working conditions, have outperformed the market average amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Companies with sustainable development strategies focus on improving their business model and product lifecycle. In some cases, companies aim to address these issues along their entire supply chain.
As a result, investment in sustainability, or ESG investing, leads to a fundamental shift in the companies’ business management, corporate culture, financial strength and investment valuation, making them more likely to address their operations’ effect on environmental and socio-economic issues.
Some ESG funds have performed well, despite market volatility, and in some cases they have outperformed their traditional index-based counterparts.
Firms that are well prepared for ESG shocks have demonstrated the ability to mitigate downside risks, and companies with sound ESG profiles tend to attract investors with better performance.
Nevertheless, skepticism also accumulates regarding whether companies have honored their sustainability pledges and whether ESG fund managers have exercised influence on behalf of their investors over issues essential to long-term sustainability.
As of the end of May, 14 securities firms in Taiwan were offering 21 ESG funds, with combined assets under management of NT$110.2 billion (US$3.94 billion). Since then, the Financial Supervisory Commission has approved five more funds, which are likely to enter the market soon.
Early this month, the commission said that ESG funds would be held to stricter disclosure requirements. Some managers had launched funds without detailing how the portfolios or investment strategies lined up with sustainability goals, and the commission said it would give them six months to ensure that their actions matched their rhetoric. The move came after the commission last month said that, from next year, publicly listed companies must disclose their electricity and water consumption, as well as waste management, to allow investors to evaluate their ESG performance.
The stricter requirements are needed, given that investors are demanding that companies’ ESG profiles meet their expectations, and considering that some firms continue to abuse the environment or their workers even though they have pledged to stop doing so.
Managers of ESG funds can make a tremendous difference by using their shareholder power to influence corporate behavior, while delivering long-term competitive returns and positive social change to investors.
As ESG investing looks at risks and opportunities through the lens of sustainability, rather than business models and development strategies, companies must follow through on their pledges and regulators must effectively oversee the funds.
Some companies make ESG promises just for public relations, rather than to gain a competitive advantage and differentiate themselves from their rivals. Such tricks must come with a regulatory price — and sooner rather than later.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath