As part of our research in collaboration with Verisk Maplecroft, we have been looking at how markets actually price in ESG risks – not how they should price them in, theoretically.

The results point to an investment blind spot – environmental risk.

As shown in the left-hand chart, which summarises the relationship between overall E, S or G performance and spreads, investors tend to either ignore countries’ environmental performance or in some cases actively penalise better environmental performance.

Separate analysis of overall E, S & G performance shows major differences in impact

Source: Verisk Maplecroft, 2019

Looking at each ESG component separately – environment, social and governance – we also analysed the difference in spreads associated with a country being a low or medium performer, rather than a high performer, in each of the nine dimensions in our ESG scores.

We believe disaggregating ESG factors in this way is particularly important in relation to the ‘E’ factor, because of the likely mismatch between the time horizons of most investors and the timeframe in which a given environmental risk could materialise.

That mismatch of time horizons is implied in the way that markets ignore current environmental performance, encompassing factors such as water stress and air quality.

However, our results also show that investors actively penalise better performance in the future environmental dimension with higher spreads.

What could be driving these surprising results?

The future environmental performance clustering is largely driven by two predictor variables:

1. Exposure to physical climate change risk

2. Levels of terrestrial biodiversity

Those countries with the most exposure to physical climate change risk (which we categorised as low performers) also have the highest levels of biodiversity.

The regression analysis we conducted on climate change exposure and biodiversity individually shows that, all else being equal, investors price the debt of more climate change-exposed countries more cheaply.

When countries have similar levels of climate change exposure, investors then prefer countries with higher biodiversity.

This suggests that biodiversity weighs much more in the balance for markets than climate change exposure.

While investors are unlikely to be focused on biodiversity in literal terms, in a world experiencing environmental degradation in response to unsustainable economic pressures, it can act as a broad proxy for a country still having significant natural resources available for exploitation.

More broadly, the lack of incorporation of environmental factors by investors may reflect the challenge of managing ‘public goods’, which many environmental resources are, and so suffer from the ‘tragedy of the commons’. This is not helped by the many uncertainties regarding the impacts, which can be dispersed, have long latency or unclear scale.

But perhaps of more significant concern is the fact that markets appear to penalise environmental resilience, including environmental regulation and carbon policy, in all but the strongest economies.

Investors still prefer countries that have ineffective environmental regulations, manage water and waste poorly and which are not making an effort to decarbonise – except when their economies are robust enough to absorb the cost of high performance in these areas.

The bottom line

Our findings suggest that the growing focus of large institutional investors on environmental and climate risk has yet to translate into meaningful changes in market behaviour, at least in sovereign debt.

However, as our research only represents a snapshot of a few years, and climate action has only accelerated in the last few, we may start to see the situation alter. This could occur gradually, although it is also plausible that investors will eventually face an abrupt repricing of some environmental risks, especially those related to climate change, when either the risks themselves or market perceptions of their materiality cross a tipping point.

To read more on our research, download the full report

https://www.bluebay.com/en/insights/role-of-esg-factors-in-sovereign-debt-investing/

 

 

This document is issued in the United Kingdom (UK) by BlueBay Asset Management LLP (BlueBay), which is authorised and regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), registered with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and is a member of the National Futures Association (NFA). This document may also be issued in the United States by BlueBay Asset Management LLC which is registered with the SEC and the NFA. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Unless otherwise stated, all data has been sourced by BlueBay. To the best of BlueBay’s knowledge and belief this document is true and accurate at the date hereof. BlueBay makes no express or implied warranties or representations with respect to the information contained in this document and hereby expressly disclaim all warranties of accuracy, completeness or fitness for a particular purpose. This document is intended for “professional clients” and “eligible counterparties” (as defined by the FCA) only and should not be relied upon by any other category of customer. Except where agreed explicitly in writing, BlueBay does not provide investment or other advice and nothing in this document constitutes any advice, nor should be interpreted as such. No BlueBay Fund will be offered, except pursuant and subject to the offering memorandum and subscription materials (the “Offering Materials”). If there is an inconsistency between this document and the Offering Materials for the BlueBay Fund, the provisions in the Offering Materials shall prevail. You should read the Offering Materials carefully before investing in any BlueBay fund. This document does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase any security or investment product in any jurisdiction and is for information purposes only. No part of this document may be reproduced in any manner without the prior written permission of BlueBay Asset Management LLP. Copyright 2019 © BlueBay, the investment manager, advisor and global distributor of the BlueBay Funds, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Bank of Canada and the BlueBay Funds may be considered to be related and/or connected issuers to Royal Bank of Canada and its other affiliates. ® Registered trademark of Royal Bank of Canada. RBC Global Asset Management is a trademark of Royal Bank of Canada. BlueBay Asset Management LLP, registered office 77 Grosvenor Street, London W1K 3JR, partnership registered in England and Wales number OC370085.