That the emission of greenhouse gases by humans is contributing to global warming with unpredictable and dangerous impacts on the global environment is now beyond dispute. Hence, as a society, we clearly need a credible plan to mitigate these emissions.
With that qualification out of the way, we can proceed to our argument by way of example.
Let’s take a family of four going on holiday from London to Morocco. The carbon emissions of the return flights are 1,480kg according to the International Civil Aviation Organization. Or take New York to Cancun - that’s 1,600kg. Let’s assume that our family of four are creatures of habit and go on the same trip every year for five years. That’s 7,400-8,000kg of carbon.1
By contrast, take a family in Peru that over that same five years patiently save up the profits from the store they run in order to build themselves a 500-square-foot home with cement, replacing their more makeshift dwelling made from scrap materials. Our research suggests they might require 350 bags of cement, which has a carbon footprint of nearly 8,000kg.2
While we don’t mean to argue that international travel is frivolous or entirely wasteful, it is hard to argue that the restorative effects of a fortnight’s getaway has the same societal utility as a literal roof over one’s head. A decade hence, the fond memories of a family holiday have long since faded, while the home remains standing and providing continued benefits to the inhabitants.
In financial terms, one is an annual operating expense and the other is a long-term capital investment. Thus, the assertion in our title that not all carbon is created equal. This is important because the investment industry is increasingly obsessed with counting carbon, based on the premise that the lower the carbon output of a portfolio of companies, the better.
Another premise that ought to be made explicit, is that people (particularly in democracies) typically expect their quality of life to go up over time, or at least not decline. So, if you accept that premise, it follows that we as a society are not going to attempt, nor achieve, zero carbon emissions. Our ancestors didn’t burn much carbon, but nor did they have central heating or a super-computer in their pockets.
Thus, if we are to transition to a lower carbon intensity economy in an equitable way without materially reducing the quality of life of millions of people, particularly in developing countries, we have to think in a more nuanced way about our global carbon footprint.
Some carbon emissions can be fairly easily replaced by better alternatives - coal-fired power plants can be run on natural gas - or eliminated entirely by reducing single-use plastic bags, without much societal hardship. However, other technologies like cement (and in many cases oil) are much more difficult to substitute. While there are many promising technologies, such as innovative uses of wood, these are not likely to be available at commercial scale within the next ten years.
At Stewart Investors, we strongly believe there is no perfect company, with zero negative impacts. Every business is a series of trade-offs between competing stakeholders, be they shareholders, employees, the environment or broader society.
Looking at investments purely through the lens of carbon intensity ignores those trade-offs. Businesses provide products that improve consumers’ quality of life, create employment opportunities, and pay taxes that fund governments.
Perhaps they produce products that are harmful such as junk food, pay low wages or avoid taxes. These are all serious concerns when making an investment, not least because of the risk of regulatory action to end these negative externalities.
"There is no perfect company. Every business is a series of trade-offs between competing stakeholders, be they shareholders, employees, the environment or broader society."
Similarly, a business model that is premised on producing a high level of greenhouse gases is clearly risky, given the likelihood of a carbon tax (or a higher tax where one already exists) or other regulation in the future, and evidently something to consider carefully when making an investment. However, we don’t believe a business’s carbon emissions ought to be regarded in isolation.
Instead, a company needs to be assessed holistically, weighing all of its positive and negative impacts. This requires meticulous analysis, as well as meetings with management teams over many years to understand motivations and value systems in order that we can have comfort that those running the businesses we invest in are thinking sufficiently broadly about the risks to their operations.
We gladly invest in several emerging market cement manufacturers which, despite being criticized for the carbon intensity of the cement production process, are providing a necessary, useful good that improves the quality of life of millions around the world - especially in poorer nations. They are investing in their plants to run off lower carbon fuels and sponsoring new innovations to further reduce the carbon intensity of their products. We will continue to support them in these endeavours and encourage them to be bolder in pursuing such investments to protect their long-term right to operate.
Dominic St George
View our list of investment terms to help you understand the terminology within this document.
This material is for general information purposes only. It does not constitute investment or financial advice and does not take into account any specific investment objectives, financial situation or needs. This is not an offer to provide asset management services, is not a recommendation or an offer or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security or to execute any agreement for portfolio management or investment advisory services and this material has not been prepared in connection with any such offer. Before making any investment decision you should consider, with the assistance of a financial advisor, your individual investment needs, objectives and financial situation.
We have taken reasonable care to ensure that this material is accurate, current, and complete and fit for its intended purpose and audience as at the date of publication. No assurance is given or liability accepted regarding the accuracy, validity or completeness of this material and we do not undertake to update it in future if circumstances change.
To the extent this material contains any expression of opinion or forward-looking statements, such opinions and statements are based on assumptions, matters and sources believed to be true and reliable at the time of publication only. This material reflects the views of the individual writers only. Those views may change, may not prove to be valid and may not reflect the views of everyone at First Sentier Investors.
About First Sentier Investors References to ‘we’, ‘us’ or ‘our’ are references to First Sentier Investors, a global asset management business which is ultimately owned by Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group. Certain of our investment teams operate under the trading names FSSA Investment Managers, Stewart Investors and Realindex Investments, all of which are part of the First Sentier Investors group.
We communicate and conduct business through different legal entities in different locations. This material is communicated in:
- Australia and New Zealand by First Sentier Investors (Australia) IM Limited, authorised and regulated in Australia by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (AFSL 289017; ABN 89 114 194311)
- European Economic Area by First Sentier Investors (Ireland) Limited, authorised and regulated in Ireland by the Central Bank of Ireland (CBI reg no. C182306; reg office 70 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2, Ireland; reg company no. 629188)
- Hong Kong by First Sentier Investors (Hong Kong) Limited and has not been reviewed by the Securities & Futures Commission in Hong Kong
- Singapore by First Sentier Investors (Singapore) (reg company no. 196900420D) and has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. First Sentier Investors (registration number 53236800B) is a business division of First Sentier Investors (Singapore)
- Japan by First Sentier Investors (Japan) Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Service Agency (Director of Kanto Local Finance Bureau (Registered Financial Institutions) No.2611)
- United Kingdom by First Sentier Investors (UK) Funds Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (reg. no. 2294743; reg office Finsbury Circus House, 15 Finsbury Circus, London EC2M 7EB)
- United States by First Sentier Investors (US) LLC, authorised and regulated by the Securities Exchange Commission (RIA 801-93167)
- In other jurisdictions, where this document may lawfully be issued, by First Sentier Investors International IM Limited, authorised and regulated in the UK by the Financial Conduct Authority (reg. no. 122512; reg office 23 St. Andrew Square, Edinburgh, EH2 1BB; reg company no. SC079063).
To the extent permitted by law, MUFG and its subsidiaries are not liable for any loss or damage as a result of reliance on any statement or information contained in this document. Neither MUFG nor any of its subsidiaries guarantee the performance of any investment products referred to in this document or the repayment of capital. Any investments referred to are not deposits or other liabilities of MUFG or its subsidiaries, and are subject to investment risk, including loss of income and capital invested