Publication Cutting Carbon: What the rush to divest fossil fuels means for emissions reduction and engagement: 6. Carbon exposure metrics

The net-zero frameworks discussed in the previous section and many of the commitments announced by institutional investors to date, include targets to reduce carbon exposure. This usually involves reducing investments (either in dollar or percentage terms) in companies with relatively higher carbon footprints or carbon intensity.

S&P Dow Jones Indices define and calculate four “carbon exposure metrics”^[1] for its suite of indexes:

1. Carbon Footprint (metric tonnes CO2e/USD 1 million invested)

   The aggregation of operational and first-tier supply chain carbon footprints of index constituents per USD 1 million invested.

2. Carbon Efficiency (metric tonnes CO2e/USD 1 million revenues)

   The aggregation of operational and first-tier supply chain carbon footprints of index constituents per USD 1 million in revenue.

3. Weighted Average Carbon Intensity (metric tonnes CO2e/USD 1 million revenues)

   The weighted average of individual company intensities (operational and first-tier supply chain emissions over revenues), weighted by the proportion of each constituent in the index.

4. Fossil Fuel Reserves (metric tonnes CO2e/USD 1 million invested)

   The carbon footprint that would be generated if the proven and probable fossil fuel reserves owned by index constituents were burned per USD 1 million invested.

There does not appear to be a standard measure against which Australian investors report, despite the fact that these metrics have been in common use for several years.

Carbon footprint analysis became prominent in the investment sector after the founding of the Montreal Pledge,^[2] a voluntary initiative launched in 2014 that encourages asset owners (such as superannuation funds) and investment managers to “measure, disclose and reduce their portfolio carbon footprints.” Australian signatories include Australian Ethical, HESTA, Catholic Super, Local Government Super, UCA Funds Management (now U Ethical), VicSuper (now part of Aware Super), Solaris Investment Management, Commonwealth Super Corporation and BT Financial Group. However, commitments to the Montreal Pledge appear to have waned in recent years, superseded by more comprehensive disclosure frameworks such as the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).^[3]

Currently, within Australia’s superannuation sector, reporting of carbon exposure metrics is limited in several respects: the low number of funds disclosing; the variability of metrics used for disclosure; the infrequency of disclosures, and; the presentation of data.

Of the thirty largest superannuation funds, just eleven funds disclose any of the four carbon exposure metrics defined by S&P Dow Jones.

Of those eleven funds, only seven disclose the actual carbon exposure metric (which varies) of their portfolio, while the other four disclose a measure relative to their own benchmark. Catholic Super^[4], Local Government Super^[5] and Vision Super^[6] disclose the most comprehensive suite of metrics. Australian Ethical^[7] also discloses the Weighted Average Carbon Intensity of its portfolio.

The Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommends that asset owners and asset managers “report to their beneficiaries and clients” the Weighted Average Carbon Intensity metric (metric tons CO2e/USD 1 million revenues) and consider reporting other metrics.^[8] Weighted Average Carbon Intensity captures the relationship between carbon emissions and company revenue, which allows for greater comparability between companies and markets. It is also less volatile than the Carbon Footprint, which is based primarily on a company’s market value rather than its revenues.

Just six funds report Weighted Average Carbon Intensity: Australian Ethical, Catholic Super, Cbus, Local Government Super, Sunsuper and Vision Super. These metrics are displayed below, alongside various equity indexes. The lack of consistent metrics from superannuation funds and index providers is a problem that could be addressed through standardised, regular disclosure by all parties.

Carbon footprint—the amount of carbon emissions per dollar invested—is also commonly disclosed by some superannuation funds. AustralianSuper*, Colonial First State and UniSuper describe this metric as “carbon intensity”. This lack of common language is confusing for members but could be easily addressed through an industry standard.

Just five Australian superannuation funds report the actual carbon footprint of their listed equities portfolios: BT Financial Group, Commonwealth Super Corp, Local Government Super, Sunsuper and Vision Super. Another four funds report a relative figure, i.e. the relative difference between each of its investment options and the relevant benchmark, but not the actual carbon footprint: AustralianSuper, AMP, Aware Super and UniSuper. This lack of disclosure across the sector prevents meaningful comparison between funds.

Publication information

Download Publication 1 MB PDF

Author

Dan Gocher and ACCR Staff

Published on

31st January 2021

Stay informed

Get email updates about new ACCR research and shareholder advocacy on specific topics of interest to you.

Subscribe for email updates

We use Mailchimp for email updates and the Mailchimp privacy policy applies.