Challenges faced by investors in integrating ESG into decision-making

Integrating environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations into investment decision-making have become increasingly popular in recent years. However, the integration has been slow and there are still several challenges associated with effectively integrating ESG factors.

Some of the key challenges faced by investors for ESG integration are:

  1. Lack of standardized ESG data and metrics. ESG data comes from a variety of sources and rating agencies, and as a result, there is often inconsistent information and difficulties in comparing and benchmarking investments. This lack of standardization makes it difficult for investors to assess the materiality of ESG factors in their investment decisions. Additionally, the lack of uniformity in ESG data, definitions, and methodologies presents a major challenge for investors seeking to integrate ESG factors into investment analysis and decision-making. According to the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance’s 2020 Global Sustainable Investment Review, “the lack of uniformity in ESG data, definitions and methodologies presents a major challenge for investors seeking to integrate ESG factors into investment analysis and decision-making.”
  2. Complexity of ESG issues: The complexity and the need for specialized expertise to fully understand and assess their impact on investments. ESG issues can range from climate change and biodiversity to human rights and labour practices. Understanding these issues requires a deep knowledge of the environmental and social impacts of different industries, as well as an understanding of the regulatory landscape. This complexity can make it difficult for investors to effectively integrate ESG considerations into their decision-making processes. As noted in a report by the Principles for Responsible Investment, “investors may find that ESG analysis requires a greater level of detail and specialized expertise than traditional financial analysis.”
  3. Reduced financial returns: There is a concern that focusing too much on ESG factors could lead to reduced financial returns. Companies that prioritize ESG issues may face additional costs or have lower profitability in the short term. There is a risk that too much emphasis on ESG factors may come at the expense of financial returns, particularly if investors focus too much on short-term ESG concerns that do not align with long-term financial performance. This concern can make investors hesitant to fully integrate ESG considerations into their decision-making processes.
  4. ESG considerations with investment objectives: Finally, there is the challenge of balancing ESG considerations with other investment objectives. While ESG factors are important, investors also have other objectives such as achieving financial performance targets or meeting liquidity requirements. Investors must strike a balance between their fiduciary duty to maximize financial returns and their responsibilities to incorporate ESG considerations into their investment processes. As noted in a report by the Principles for Responsible Investment, “investors must also ensure that their investment approach aligns with the objectives and needs of their clients or beneficiaries.”

Addressing concerns:

To address these challenges, a holistic approach is necessary. This approach involves collaboration among different stakeholders, including investors, asset managers, companies, regulators, and standard-setters. The integration of ESG factors into investment analysis and decision-making is a process that requires the involvement of multiple parties, including investors, asset managers, companies, and regulators.

There also needs to be a greater emphasis on developing standardized ESG metrics, improving data quality and availability, and increasing education and training on ESG issues. The Principles for Responsible Investment’s guide on ESG integration for equity investing notes that “investors can improve their ESG integration approach by developing more specific and actionable ESG metrics that are relevant to their investment processes.” Additionally, the guide recommends that investors seek out specialized expertise on ESG issues and invest in training and education for their staff.

Overall, successfully integrating ESG considerations into investment decision-making requires a multifaceted approach that addresses the challenges associated with standardized data, the complexity of ESG issues, financial returns and ESG consideration into investment objectives.

The impact of ESG on business valuations

ESG, which stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), has become one of the key criteria in the evaluation process, when assessing potential investments. Under the three ESG areas, a set of standards, is used to evaluate the organisation’s operations.  It is unlikely that an organisation scores the best in all ESG criteria.  Investors take the outcome of the evaluation and incorporate it both qualitatively and quantitatively into their decision making.

Although ESG and related performance of organisations has been included in mainstream investment decisions for more than a decade, an area which is still evolving is how ESG should be quantified and included in the business valuations. To understand the significance of including ESG impact in the valuation, let’s look at the two main traditional valuation methods – Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method and Multiple of Earnings method.

Discounted Cash Flow method

Under the DCF method, the Free Cash Flows of a company are discounted with the expected cost of capital to arrive at the valuation. In simple terms, Free cash flow (FCF) is the money a company has left over after paying its operating expenses and capital expenditures and Cost of Capital represents the risks related to the cash flows.

ESG impact can be included in either of the two main components, namely Free Cash Flow and the Cost of Capital, to influence the business valuation.  By doing this, the positive or negative impacts of ESG criteria evaluation, on the future cash flows of the company, and hence its valuation can be considered.  For instance, in the case of a company with higher ESG risks, cash flows can be adjusted down, or cost of capital can be increased, and vice versa. Often in making such adjustments, one need to consider the materiality of the impact of the relevant ESG criteria.  The materiality would be specific to the company and its industry. To reduce the subjectivity involved in determining the materiality, analysis of multiple scenarios and techniques such as weighted average analysis should be used.

Multiple of Earnings method

Under the multiple of earnings method, the value of a company is determined by applying a multiple to the company’s earnings. It is a relative valuation method and seeks to evaluate similar companies using the same set of standardised financial metrics. A commonly used multiple is Price-to-Earnings (P/E) multiple.

ESG impact can be included in the multiple used for the valuation.  The impact of ESG criteria results in a higher or lower multiple, relative to those achieved in comparable transactions.  For instance, a Private Equity buyer who considers the impact of ESG criteria, and the resulting risks and/or opportunities during the due diligence phase can optimise the price paid. Similarly, a corporate seller, doing a divestment of a non-core asset, can effectively use the positive impact of ESG criteria on the company’s operations, in influencing a higher valuation multiple for the transaction.  

As mentioned previously, multiples are influenced by the prices achieved for transactions involving comparable transactions in the market.  There is not yet full transparency regarding the influence of ESG criteria in both public and private transactions.  Hence there are limitations in identifying comparable transactions which included ESG criteria or the level of inclusion of ESG criteria.  In addition, there is the risk of arbitrary adjustments to the multiple.  As more data becomes available, inclusion of ESG criteria in multiples can be further refined.

The inclusion of ESG criteria in business valuation has gained more prominence recently.  There are several ways ESG is incorporated in the valuations, and it continues to evolve.  As more instances of ESG application in valuation becomes available, across various industries and geographies, best practice models are expected to emerge. 

Importance of ESG for investors and companies seeking potential investments

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria has become an essential part of the investment process.  Depending on the availability of data, ESG can be integrated into the investment process for making decisions.  It can also highlight companies that may carry a greater financial risk due to their environmental or social or governance practices.

In a nutshell, the ESG criteria is a set of standards for an organisation’s operations that can be used to evaluate the organisation. Investors look at a broad range of behaviours under the three topics of ESG:

  • Environmental: It considers how an organisation performs its responsibility towards environment and its sustainability. The criteria may include its use of energy, treatment and disposal of waste, handling of pollution, conservation of environment, preservation of natural resources, management of environmental risks and compliance with various environmental protection laws
  • Social: It considers how an organisation manages its conduct with customers, suppliers, employees, and the communities. The criteria may include its values and policies which drive business relationships with customers and suppliers, trade practices, working conditions of employees, health and safety records, consideration of community interests in projects, and so on.
  • Governance: It considers how an organisation deals with leadership, executive pay, internal controls, and shareholder rights. The criteria may include transparency of accounting methods, appointment of board members, conflicts of interests, anti-bribery and corruption policies, political relationships, and protecting shareholder interests.

It is unlikely that an organisation scores the best in all criteria. It is still an evolving topic, and most companies are on a journey to transform their businesses, in support of ESG considerations. Depending on industry sector and geographies in which they operate, some companies would have progressed well in some of the criteria whilst still working on the others. In the meantime, investors, of course, need to decide what’s most important to them in making their investment decisions.