Catalyzing Sustainable Investment

Paul Rose
{"title":"Catalyzing Sustainable Investment","authors":"Paul Rose","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3885054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Calls for increased focus on ESG issues—and more particularly, on the kind of sustainable investing that will help achieve the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—run up against durable legal rules and norms of profit maximization. Corporate law, and especially Delaware law, remains committed to a shareholder wealth-maximizing orientation, and corporate directors typically can only consider other parties’ interests to the extent that considering such interests can be justified as benefiting the shareholders. Trust law, which governs the behavior of many investment intermediaries, also generally requires a commitment to wealth maximization, as trustees generally may adopt ESG investing only if doing so will benefit the beneficiary by improving risk-adjusted returns. Thus, there is a tension between directors’ and trustees’ obligations under the law and the need to mobilize the trillions of dollars necessary to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, at least to the extent that such investments sacrifice returns. Private capital will invest in sustainable projects, but only if the projects provide a market-rate risk-adjusted return. To direct capital to critical, sustainable projects, some have called for changes in legal doctrine and governance norms that would allow for greater flexibility in investment decisionmaking, such that fiduciaries could invest in ESG projects even if they do not provide an at-market return. This article describes a different approach: the catalyzation of sustainable investment by governments, using unique advantages that enable sovereign entities to directly invest in sustainable projects and broker sustainable investments by taking on deal risk and reducing transaction costs for other investors. Rather than attempting to reform or re-orient market forces, governments can (and do) use existing market strategies that are successfully applied in private contexts. In other words, rather than expecting investors to sacrifice returns to achieve the SDGs or other public ESG benefits, governments are catalyzing sustainable investment by harnessing a profit-maximizing orientation.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Economic Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3885054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Calls for increased focus on ESG issues—and more particularly, on the kind of sustainable investing that will help achieve the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—run up against durable legal rules and norms of profit maximization. Corporate law, and especially Delaware law, remains committed to a shareholder wealth-maximizing orientation, and corporate directors typically can only consider other parties’ interests to the extent that considering such interests can be justified as benefiting the shareholders. Trust law, which governs the behavior of many investment intermediaries, also generally requires a commitment to wealth maximization, as trustees generally may adopt ESG investing only if doing so will benefit the beneficiary by improving risk-adjusted returns. Thus, there is a tension between directors’ and trustees’ obligations under the law and the need to mobilize the trillions of dollars necessary to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, at least to the extent that such investments sacrifice returns. Private capital will invest in sustainable projects, but only if the projects provide a market-rate risk-adjusted return. To direct capital to critical, sustainable projects, some have called for changes in legal doctrine and governance norms that would allow for greater flexibility in investment decisionmaking, such that fiduciaries could invest in ESG projects even if they do not provide an at-market return. This article describes a different approach: the catalyzation of sustainable investment by governments, using unique advantages that enable sovereign entities to directly invest in sustainable projects and broker sustainable investments by taking on deal risk and reducing transaction costs for other investors. Rather than attempting to reform or re-orient market forces, governments can (and do) use existing market strategies that are successfully applied in private contexts. In other words, rather than expecting investors to sacrifice returns to achieve the SDGs or other public ESG benefits, governments are catalyzing sustainable investment by harnessing a profit-maximizing orientation.
促进可持续投资
呼吁加强对ESG问题的关注,特别是对有助于实现联合国可持续发展目标(SDGs)的可持续投资的关注,与持久的法律规则和利润最大化的规范背道而驰。公司法,尤其是特拉华州的法律,仍然致力于股东财富最大化的方向,公司董事通常只能考虑其他各方的利益,因为考虑这些利益可以被证明是有利于股东的。管理许多投资中介机构行为的信托法通常也要求对财富最大化的承诺,因为受托人通常只有在这样做会通过提高风险调整后的回报而使受益人受益的情况下才会采用ESG投资。因此,董事和受托人在法律下的义务与动员实现可持续发展目标所需的数万亿美元的需求之间存在紧张关系,至少在这种投资牺牲回报的程度上。私人资本将投资于可持续项目,但前提是这些项目提供市场利率风险调整后的回报。为了将资本引向关键的、可持续的项目,一些人呼吁改变法律原则和治理规范,允许更大的投资决策灵活性,这样受托人就可以投资于ESG项目,即使它们不能提供与市场相当的回报。本文描述了一种不同的方法:政府利用独特的优势催化可持续投资,使主权实体能够直接投资于可持续项目,并通过承担交易风险和降低其他投资者的交易成本来促成可持续投资。与其试图改革或重新调整市场力量,政府可以(而且确实)使用在私人环境中成功应用的现有市场战略。换句话说,政府不是期望投资者牺牲回报来实现可持续发展目标或其他公共ESG利益,而是通过利用利润最大化的导向来促进可持续投资。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信