U.S. governmental foot-dragging on climate-change issues continues to delay the implementation of new measures, such as a federal cap-and-trade system in the U.S., it has helped spur another novel idea — using investors’ clout to impose on companies the climate-related regulations that governments have yet to introduce.
7月中旬，澳大利亚伦理投资，6.4亿美元（6.09亿美元）投资公司在20多年前推出了社会负责投资的投资公司，推出了气候倡导基金。作为世界上第一个在世界上，新基金承诺将传统方法转向斯里的首先。基金将通过正式化进程与这些公司合作，通过正式的进程与这些公司合作，而是简单地拒绝投资它，而不是简单地拒绝投资于有害的健康或环境，以实现它想要看到的变化。
By tracking the S&P/ASX 200 index, the Climate Advocacy Fund pulls into its portfolio many of the companies that Australian Ethical has never touched before. Once the new fund invests in companies with which it finds fault, it will use its shareholder muscle to present formal resolutions at their general annual meetings. For the first few years, the fund will focus primarily on climate-change issues and largely on disclosure — for example, writing resolutions that would require a company to publish a report about its carbon emissions.
詹姆斯那executive director of Australian Ethical and the brains behind the fund, says that in the absence of governmental implementation of the kinds of climate regulations he believes are needed — such as cap and trade and mandatory emissions reporting — the country’s large investors must take a more active role. “One of the reasons we formed the fund is that we think individuals need to act if government doesn’t,” Thier, 54, tells Institutional Investor.
在澳大利亚，也是一个谈话和贸易系统，最近被路边落下，然后是凯文·鲁德总理在四月下降了该计划，引起了不可逾越的政治和公众对该想法的反对。
但气候倡导基金的想法是在此之前的工作中。2006年，他们收到了澳大利亚的丘吉尔奖学金，他曾经研究过的方法，使SRI成为更好的变革代理。他在寻找答案的美国和欧洲寻求答案，并结束了一个混合基金，其中来自一些SRI车型，但有自己的扭曲。
随着气候倡导基金，地理制定了一种新型股东倡导。它不是斯里世界的原始概念，但两件事将Thier的基金分开：首先，它将在圆桌会议约为20个科学，环境和社会顾问的圆桌会议的帮助下写作并提交自己的决议。虽然有一些其他资金制定了自己的决议，但这些文件通常用于引发基金和董事会之间的私人谈话。达到某种协议后，分辨率往往撤回。“这个决议本身通常被视为只需进入谈判的楔子，”。
第二个差异涉及气候倡导基金采用的正式过程。它并不打算通过快速撤回并迁入闭门背后的讨论，提交决议。“这需要不仅仅是坐在桌子周围并进行讨论，”Thier Notes。“这是一个更加正式的，更严格的过程，在法律和监管结构内。”
Leslie Lowe, who recently left her position as director of the environment program at the New York–based Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, which sponsors shareholder resolution discussions, is encouraged by Thier’s new fund — though she says it’s too early to say whether the structure will catch on as a trend. If it does, investors need to watch carefully to be sure that SRI firms aren’t adopting the structure just to boost returns by getting around the pesky limitations that negative screening can present. “If you really are an advocacy fund, what did you do to change Exxon and Chevron?” she says. “And can you demonstrate that to me?”