Part One of a three-part series. Read Part Twohere。第三部分here。

字母e，s和g已经与可持续性世界交织在一起，以至于三个字母的首字母缩写ESG几乎可以意味着任何东西，有时根本没有任何内容。竞彩足球app怎么下载但是，当涉及公司环境，社会和治理政策和绩效的评级时，这些定义可以确定数万亿美元资本的命运。

So, what exactly are ESG ratings? Who creates them and on what basis? What do they mean? How are they used?

正如我在过去的几个月中，回答那些看似简单的基本问题需要理解ESG评级的非常复杂的世界。人们发现的 - 我发现的是一种练习，似乎大致平等艺术和科学。尽管这些收视率的供应商统一地以其方法论的透明度和对评级公司的整体方法的透明度感到自豪，但这些评级在很大程度上被许多人以外的人甚至在其中的某些人所误解。

What exactly are ESG ratings? Who creates them and on what basis? What do they mean? How are they used?

In this three-part series, I’ll share what I learned, including what’s working well and what could work better. I hope to demystify the ratings for non-investor readers and provide some much-needed context about what the ratings themselves are — and aren’t.

该系列将分为三个部分：

• 第1部分（下面）着重于评级和评级机构的整体观点以及他们面临的一些挑战。
• Part 2dives into how ratings are created.
• Part 3asks, "Are ESG ratings really necessary?"

The basics

ESGratings are created by both commercial and nonprofit organizations to assess how corporate commitments, performance, business models and structures align with sustainability goals. They are used, first and foremost, by investment firms to screen or assess companies in their various funds and portfolios. The ratings may also be used by job seekers, customers and others in assessing business relationships and by the rated companies themselves to better understand their strengths, weaknesses, risks and opportunities as they seek to align their business strategy with societal expectations and planetary boundaries.

尽管有很多评级机构，但我交谈过的大多数公司和投资公司与五个最大的公司合作：ISS ESG，ISG，机构股东服务部，代理咨询公司；穆迪（Moody's）是一家古老的信用评级公司；MSCI，为全球投资市场发布了数百个指数；标普Global，这家金融分析公司以其股票指数而闻名；以及Morningstar的一个部门Sustainalytics，提供了一系列的投资研究服务。其他值得注意的包括彭博ESG披露得分，惠誉气候脆弱性得分，FTSE Russell的ESG评级以及CDP的气候，水和森林评分。

Each firm assesses thousands of companies — sometimes 10,000 or more — across a broad range of ESG topics and assigns each a rating — a letter grade similar to those used in credit ratings (AAA, A, BB, CCC, etc.), a grade like those used in schools (A-minus, B, C-plus, etc.) or a numerical score (53 out of a possible 100, for example).

Those ratings can loom large for rated companies, helping determine such things as the cost of capital or whether their stock will be included in any of the hundreds of ESG-themed mutual funds or exchange-traded funds. The ratings show up on hundreds of thousands of Bloomberg terminals and other devices. They may be used by media organizations in compiling lists of "best" or "most sustainable" companies; by watchdog groups to ferret out greenwash; and by job seekers to decide which companies to pursue (or avoid). The ratings firms may also confer special status to highly rated companies. ISS, for example, grants "Prime" status to those that "fulfill ambitious absolute performance requirements."

Among the challenges, and a source of frustration to many sustainability professionals, is the complex ratings ecosystem itself: how ratings are created, the methodologies used to rate companies and how difficult it can be for rated companies to change or amend information that’s outdated, incomplete or just plain wrong.

Growing scrutiny

These and other concerns have garnered regulators’ attention on both sides of the Atlantic. The European Commission is in the midst of a有针对性的咨询在欧盟的ESG评级市场上。一位委员会官员说，在这些问题中，他们要求不要被命名：“方法论，数据源，潜在利益冲突的方法缺乏透明度” - 一些评级组织还为他们评估的公司提供咨询服务 - ”投资者对这个市场的运作缺乏信心。”2月，欧洲证券和市场管理局（称为ESMA）began an inquiryinto how ESG ratings work and has raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

Both efforts align with that of IOSCO — the International Organization of Securities Commissions — which in November issued areport通过“ ESG评级和数据产品提供商的作用和影响”详细介绍了一些挑战。一项事实调查的练习发现“定义几乎没有明确和一致性，包括打算衡量的评级或数据产品”和“缺乏对这些评级为基础的方法的透明度”。

There is little clarity and alignment on definitions, including on what ratings or data products intend to measure.

同时，在美国，证券交易委员会是scrutinizing美国信用评级机构围绕如何汇编ESG评级。1月，它发布了report指出评估者“不得遵守其方法或政策和程序，始终应用ESG因素，对在评估行动中应用ESG的使用进行充分披露，或维持涉及ESG相关数据评级的有效内部控制来自分支机构或非附属第三方。”（SEC没有回应多个置评请求。）

All of these watchdogs seek to level the playing field to ensure that companies are being consistently and accurately rated — "to bring further transparency, clarity and credibility" to ratings, as the EU official put it.

风险和回报

一个重要的混乱点是评级本身的实际含义。许多观察家可能会惊讶地发现，他们没有反映的一件事是，公司是否正在对当今紧迫的社会和环境挑战（或公司善良）产生积极影响，因为缺乏更好的期限。

That’s worth repeating: ESG ratings do not necessarily measure whether a highly rated company is an actual leader in reducing its impacts on people and the planet, or whether it is working to build a more just and sustainable world.

评分的确反映的是：风险。也就是说，“公司接触特定于行业的材料ESG风险以及公司管理这些风险的能力”puts it。That, in turn, can help inform whether a company’s environmental, social and governance policies and practices will likely positively or negatively affect its shareholders, or whether a portfolio of highly rated companies will provide superior returns to investors.

作为MSCI解释在其网站上，“ ESG收视率专注于公司的底线财务风险。这是通过设计来帮助机构投资者评估此类风险并以最大程度地利用其时间范围投资回报的方式部署资本。”

That fact seems to have eluded many sustainability professionals, and even some investors, who believe that investing in an ESG-themed fund means putting their money to work to solve vexing environmental and social problems. And to some extent, that misconception is understandable. MSCI, for example, the largest purveyor of ESG data, touts "Better investing for a better world" on its ESG investinghomepage。从妈妈和投资公司到经纪人庞然先锋队，成千上万的财务顾问和投资公司都将振兴该营销信息。解释on its website，“越来越多的人（尤其是千禧一代和妇女）将社会和环境影响视为其投资决策的重要组成部分。”

One can rightly assume that the prime motivation of those millennials and women, among others, is to use their investments to make a positive impact in the world, not merely to minimize the risks associated with those investments.

“I think a lot of people don't get that,” Evan Harvey, global head of sustainability for Nasdaq, told me. “I think lawyers get it. I think if you have a sustainability function that's anchored under the CFO … I think that they definitely understand that. But the sustainability people, the corporate citizenship people, the impact people on some level — I don't know that they have that worldview.”

“ESG has nothing to do with making the world a better place,” explained Aniket Shah, managing director and global head of ESG at Jefferies Group, the investment banking firm. “It's a very tough thing for me to say. This is not why I came into this space myself. What ESG has to do within the capital markets is ensuring that you, as an allocator of capital, understand the risks associated with environmental, social and governance issues from the perspective of how do you make the most amount of money in your investments?”

Pointing a finger

The gaping delta between the “better world” meme and what ESG ratings actually measure was the subject of aLandmark BusinessWeek调查去年进入MSCI。其记者分析了MSCI从2020年1月至2021年6月 - 总共155家公司中授予标准普尔500指数公司的所有ESG评级升级。

他们总结说：“该系统最引人注目的功能是，公司在气候变化方面的记录似乎很少妨碍其爬上ESG梯子的途径，甚至根本无法考虑。”例如，它引用了麦当劳公司（McDonald's Corp.但是，MSCI以该公司的环境实践为由，给了麦当劳的评级升级。

《商业周刊》写道：“ MSCI在计算麦当劳评级的任何考虑因素中删除了碳排放后做到了这一点。为什么？因为MSCI确定气候变化既不构成风险，也不会为公司的底线提供“机会”。”这是关于牛肉和其他商品的主要买家，其影响并受到气候危机的影响。

据《商业周刊》报道，在51项升级中，“ MSCI强调了涉及道德和公司行为的政策，其中包括禁止已经是犯罪的事情，例如洗钱和贿赂。公司还升级了就业实践，例如进行年度员工调查，以减少营业额。”

当我问MSCI的ESG和气候研究全球负责人Linda-Lee时，关于BusinessWeek她声称，她指着那些正在使用这些评分的人，她指着那些没有打算的目的。

她说，这些评分是为付款的客户理解实际含义的客户而创建的。“这些评级现在正在被不一定按预期使用的人更加公开消耗的事实 - 我认为人们在投影他们认为的挑战中存在着挑战。而且我认为世界正在寻找一种衡量他们认为是公司善良的衡量标准 - 例如好阵容清单或坏事列表或类似的东西。我们都知道，在媒体上，人们喜欢创建这些列表，部分原因是公众喜欢这类列表。”

It's not just MSCI. Every rating agency has versions of this story — ESG scores that don’t adequately reflect a company’s actual policies and performance. And while it’s easy to tar the entire industry with a single brush, the reality is far more nuanced. ESG ratings, and the agencies that produce them, play a positive role for rated companies, investors and others. Critics (and reporters) may cite issues that seem to undermine these agencies’ credibility. But overall, the ratings are well-regarded, even by some of their critics.

Off the rack

大多数大型投资公司和货币经理不仅依靠ESG评级来评估其和客户投资组合中的公司和资金。相反，他们将评级用作数据点，这是他们可能将其投资建议和决策中的几个组成部分之一，以及公司可持续性报告，监管文件，媒体报告，内部研究以及与公司直接参与。竞彩足球app怎么下载ESG评级为大多数投资决策提供了信息，而不是驱动大多数投资决策。

纳斯达克的哈维解释说：“我知道很多机构投资者，他们进行了自己的分析。”“他们将进行自己的排名和评级，但是您从一所既定房屋中获得的评分本身，它确实使您进入篮子。因此，如果您不这样做，您甚至都不考虑从那种现成的评级中传递一定的障碍。”

仅仅因为评级评估风险并不意味着它们也不是对产生积极影响的公司的代表。

The ratings also are a handy way to roll up a lot of complex data into a single measure, including weighing seemingly conflicting attributes, explained Richard Mattison, president of S&P Global Sustainable1, the firm’s ESG division. "As we transition to a more sustainable future, we believe that you need to consider a number of different elements in that transition," he told me. "And that's why you look at ESG. You can't just look at one topic in isolation of something else. You'd be investing in companies with poor governance, potentially, but who have a good climate strategy. You’re going to have to balance these things together. It's like anything in the investment world: a balanced approach to assessing risk, a balanced approach to assessing opportunity — that’s what's required."

And simply because the ratings assess risk doesn’t mean that they aren’t also a proxy for companies making a positive impact, said MSCI’s Lee.

当您查看数据时，她说：“实际上管理其财务相关风险的公司更有效，他们倾向于以他们想要留下的方式来管理他们的员工，实际上您的领导才能更加多样化- 公司所做的所有这些事情实际上改善了股东的业务，我认为确实具有可衡量的积极外部性。这不是理论。”

Beyond grumbling

ESGratings don’t just benefit investors. Companies, too, for all their grumbling about the travails of working with ratings agencies, have a lot to gain.

I asked Emilio Tenuta, senior vice president and chief sustainability officer at Ecolab, about the benefits to his company from working with ratings agencies. Getting a good rating, he said, "builds our brand and recognizes us as a leader in ESG being core to everything we do."

He continued: "The ratings help us standardize the way we look at ESG metrics. ESG investors like to see there's a recurring thread that Ecolab is at the top of these lists." He noted that a good score also can attract talent. "Human capital management is a big deal for us. Half of our associates are in the field working alongside our customers."

普洛洛斯全球ESG副总裁Suzanne Fallender同意。A good rating "helps in talking to employees, it helps in talking to executives. When we are rated by outside groups that say, ‘You are strong across all these different ESG topics,’ it gives that validation that we're on the right track. It helps to have those discussions of where we want to continue to evolve or continue to invest in ESG integration across the business."

But Ecolab’s Tenuta also expressed frustrations. One is that the ESG raters place Ecolab in the same sectoral box as Dow, BASF and other large chemical companies, despite that "we have a very different business strategy." As a result, Ecolab gets assessed and rated on the same factors as Big Chemical. "That becomes challenging because we're evaluated against those criteria, which doesn't necessarily align with what we do."

Still, Tenuta had mostly good things to say about the ratings firms important to Ecolab. "They enhance our ability to engage as a convener. Our company wants to be recognized as a thought leader in water." The ratings, he said, "go a long way to recognize that leadership."

Next:How ESG ratings are built

Thanks for reading. You can find past articles2020欧洲杯八强竞猜。另外，我邀请你去follow me on TwitterandLinkedIn，订阅我的星期一早上的通讯，GreenBuzz, from which this was reprinted, and listen toGreenbiz 350, my weekly podcast, co-hosted with Heather Clancy.