Davis Polk ESG co-heads, Joseph A. Hall and Betty M. Huber, and Katherine J. Brennan and Connor Kuratek of Marsh & McLennan Companies are authors of the 13th edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide: Corporate Governance 2020: Legal Liability for ESG Disclosures – Investor Pressure, State of Play and Practical Recommendations, the second chapter in the guide. The chapter discusses litigation related to ESG voluntary disclosures and what companies can do to limit that risk. It also describes the current pressure leading to more ESG disclosures and the SEC response to these trends.
The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented health risks and has led to global economic disruptions. The World Economic Forum (WEF), an international organization that fosters public-private cooperation on global, regional and industry agendas, released this month the “Stakeholder Principles in the COVID Era” (Stakeholder Principles) as part of its COVID Action Platform and called businesses to action stating that, during this time of crisis, “[t]he business community’s contribution: [is] to be leaders of responsiveness and stewards of resilience.” In January 2020, the WEF made headlines by issuing its Davos Manifesto 2020, challenging companies to incorporate stakeholders into their corporate purpose, as well as issuing, through its International Business Council (IBC) a draft corporate sustainability disclosure framework, “Towards Common Metrics and Consistent Reporting of Sustainable Value Creation.”
On March 18, 2020, Congress passed the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), a sweeping legislative bill to address the growing concerns surrounding the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The FFCRA includes measures aimed at expanding paid employee leave in connection with the coronavirus emergency and providing employers with tax credits to cover the cost of those benefits
Read the full alert here.
Law Clerk Elizabeth Smith contributed to this publication.
Last week, a global insurance company identified what it believes are the risk trends in 2020 that “have significant implications” to directors and officers (D&Os). The firm’s perspective provides a window into the types of trends insurers and underwriters are watching.
1. “Bad news” events resulting in more litigation
The insurer notes that there has been a rise in nonfinancial-based claims against D&Os stemming from what the firm calls “bad news” events, such as cybersecurity attacks, toxic culture (i.e., #MeToo movement), product liability, corruption and environmental disasters. The insurer warns that “bad news” events can prompt a regulatory investigation or cause share prices to fall, which the report states can “often result in significant securities or derivative claims.
Davis Polk recently contributed a chapter to The International Comparative Legal Guide: Corporate Governance 2019 titled ESG in the US: Current State of Play and Key Considerations for Issuers. With the growing importance of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues to public companies and their investors, this chapter aims to provide insights on the current ESG landscape – from the voting policies and ESG investing platforms of top asset managers to the dizzying array of ESG disclosure regimes and third-party raters.
On April 12, 2019, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a World Bank Group, officially launched their Operating Principles for Impact Management (the Principles). As of the official launch date, 60 global investors have committed to the Principles. The first adopters range from large asset managers, private funds to non-profit investment firms. The focus of the Principles is on impact investing, a term that IFC defines as “investments made into companies or organizations with the intent to contribute to measurable positive social or environmental impact, alongside a financial return.” IFC adapted this definition from GIIN and notes that impact investing focuses on more than just avoiding harm or managing environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks; it aims to utilize investing’s ability to positively impact society by “choosing and managing investments to generate positive impact while also avoiding harm.”
We’ve written previously about Climate Action 100+, an investor led group representing over $32 trillion in assets under management, and its campaign against 161 or so of the largest publicly traded companies seeking to have these companies improve their greenhouse gas emitting practices.
Climate Action 100+ has experienced recent successes in its engagement efforts with a few companies, the details of which are available on its website. In particular, a few companies have agreed to increased public reporting of their climate change strategies and, most notably, to adopt executive compensation metrics tied to greenhouse gas reduction targets. Recently, the group issued a report describing what it believes the steel industry should do to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and related public disclosure of those efforts.
Citing concerns of climate change’s impact on the financial sector, California passed SB 964 last week requiring the country’s two biggest pension funds to publicly disclose and analyze their climate-related investment risks. Under the new law, The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) must review and report “climate related financial risks” that are “material” to the stability of their public market portfolios. Such “climate-related financial risks” include “intense storms, rising sea levels, higher global temperatures, economic damages from carbon emissions, and other financial and transition risks due to public policies to address climate change, shifting consumer attitudes, changing economics of traditional carbon-intense industries.”
Sixteen banks from four continents commit to furthering the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosure push for improved climate risk disclosure. In addition, Climate Action 100+ invigorates its push on 161 large companies with either high greenhouse gas emissions or the potential to impact clean energy to improve their climate change disclosures and governance. More details as follows:
16 Banks From Four Continents Commit to TCFD Pilot Project
Sixteen banks (Australia and New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ), Barclays, Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BBVA), BNP Paribas, Bradesco, Citi, DNB, Itaú Unibanco, National Australia Bank, Rabobank, Royal Bank of Canada, Santander, Société Générale, Standard Chartered, TD Bank Group and UBS) have joined a United Nations Environment Programme – Finance Initiative pilot project to help banks disclose their climate related financial risks in line with the recommendations of the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (“TCFD”).