Most super funds are still not making public their sustainability policies in their investment portfolios and internal operations, a SuperRatings review found.
The 2014 SuperRatings’ Annual Fund Sustainability Review found that while funds have improved in measuring their progress against sustainability in areas like energy consumption, waste disposal, carbon emissions and water usage, the quality of funds reporting fluctuated across the industry.
“Sustainability remains an area that often goes unrecognised by many members,” SuperRatings said.
“However, the Review recognises that there are a dedicated group of funds making strong progress in improving their sustainability credentials.
“Generally, these funds have been able to achieve this while offering competitive investment returns and fees.”
The review said 18 per cent more funds have adopted a whole-of-fund environmental, social and governance approach instead of just applying it within a specific investment option.
It also found 69 per cent of funds have a dedicated sustainability manager or committee that looks after sustainable practices.
The policy of 'reduced travel’ was implemented by 19 per cent more funds since 2008, while recycling of computer goods shot up 25 per cent since 2008.
All respondents applied paper and ink saving techniques (71 per cent in 2008).
The property group, owned by industry super fund Aware Super, has announced two new projects with a total construction value of $320 million that will add more than 700 homes to Melbourne’s rental market.
While institutional investors, including super funds, unanimously acknowledge the energy transition as a significant challenge, their perspectives on the extent of their involvement in addressing the substantial capital requirements vary widely.
Despite a period of increased volatility, several considerations suggest that the bull market will remain intact and the trend in shares will remain up, an economist has suggested.
HESTA has slammed Woodside’s climate transition action plan, pointing to “significant” gaps.
Add new comment