Connect with us

Finance

A general introduction to lending and secured finance in USA

Published

on

A general introduction to lending and secured finance in USA

All questions

Overview

The present US company lending market stays refined, extraordinarily giant and extremely diverse, having quite a few kinds of debtors, mortgage merchandise and lenders. In 2021, the US mortgage market continued its robust rebound that began within the fourth quarter of 2020 after the coronavirus (covid-19) pandemic had brought about the US company lending market to plummet earlier in 2020. All through 2021, the US mortgage market was characterised by document or multi-year highs of provide of credit score, demand for credit score, low default charges and excessive mergers and acquisitions (M&A) exercise. In accordance with Refinitiv LPC, leveraged loans to company debtors in america accounted for roughly US$1.3 trillion in 2021, a rise of over 84 per cent over 2020. Debtors span each trade, and the mortgage markets they’ll entry relies upon largely on their capitalisation and credit score profile. Mortgage merchandise span from unsecured revolving credit score amenities for investment-grade firms and broadly syndicated covenant-lite time period mortgage amenities for large-cap leveraged mortgage debtors to extra conventional ‘membership deal’ senior secured credit score amenities for middle-market debtors (usually outlined as debtors with lower than US$500 million in annual gross sales or lower than US$50 million in earnings earlier than curiosity, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA)). Lenders embrace conventional banks, finance firms and institutional traders comparable to collateralised mortgage obligations (CLOs), hedge funds, mortgage participation funds, pension funds, mutual funds and insurance coverage firms.

Throughout 2021, the leveraged mortgage market climbed to new heights in lots of classes on account of traders in search of increased yields, low rates of interest, document quantities of provide, together with dry powder at non-public fairness companies, and different elements. The US economic system had adjusted to covid-19, M&A exercise was robust and supported the mortgage market, and rates of interest inspired debtors to refinance current debt or incur new debt. M&A exercise ramped up from 2020 with large exercise from non-public fairness companies, and mortgage issuance quantity soared in 2021. In accordance with the twice annual Monetary Stability Report, issued in November 2021 of the Federal Reserve (the Fed), the first measures of vulnerability from enterprise debt, together with debt-to-gross home product, gross leverage and curiosity protection ratios, have for essentially the most half returned to their pre-pandemic ranges, and enterprise debt has decreased on internet. This discount, along with earnings recoveries, low rates of interest, authorities help through the pandemic and monetary stimulus has restored many enterprise’ steadiness sheets. Nonetheless, the Fed acknowledges that dangers to the financial outlook stay, particularly for small companies and industries that had been most affected by the pandemic. As well as, default charges on leveraged loans fell on the similar time that underwriting requirements lessened. After rising quickly throughout 2020, the default fee declined to beneath pre-pandemic ranges through the first half of 2021. On the similar time, the typical credit score high quality of excellent leveraged loans continued to enhance. The US mortgage market has continued to learn from a current rest of quite a few US banking laws – specifically, the leveraged lending tips issued by federal regulators in March 2013, which had been additional clarified in November 2014 by a FAQ issued on the steerage and had beforehand had a powerful affect on the mortgage markets, have been considerably curtailed, as mentioned in additional element beneath. Extra developments over current years had the impact of easing sure elements of the chance retention guidelines and the Volcker Rule, however the Biden administration and different authorities officers have proposed rising the regulation of leveraged lending by banks and non-bank lenders.

Leveraged mortgage issuance ranges for M&A elevated dramatically throughout 2021. Refinitiv LPC famous that leveraged mortgage issuances for M&A greater than doubled in 2021, and leveraged buyout (LBO) exercise (which accounted for roughly 50 per cent of all M&A mortgage issuances in 2021) was up 154 per cent. Refinitiv LPC additionally stories an increase out there from leveraged refinancing exercise, which elevated by 43 per cent in 2021 due partly to low rates of interest, and a rise out there from new cash leveraged loans, which elevated by 69 per cent. Debtors skilled much less monetary misery in 2021, and the default fee fell to 0.6 per cent in 2021, the bottom in a decade based on FitchRatings, with the defaulted mortgage quantity reducing 85 per cent in 2021.

Advertisement

After the US leveraged mortgage market fell sharply in early to mid-2020, it recovered robustly in 2021 and has returned to be beneficial for debtors, in a multi-year pattern (excluding 2020) that has persevered for the reason that restoration from the monetary disaster (apart from the interval affected by covid-19). For instance, the market share of covenant-lite loans, which is dependent upon incurrence-based covenants slightly than upkeep covenants, has been rising persistently for the reason that hiatus through the monetary disaster. Different borrower-favourable phrases that stay prevalent within the US leveraged mortgage market embrace soft-call prepayment premiums, the flexibility to incur refinancing amenities, the flexibility to purchase again loans out there on a non-pro rata foundation, covenant baskets that may develop over time based mostly upon a proportion of adjusted EBITDA or consolidated whole property, the flexibility to reclassify basket capability below covenant exceptions, lodging designed to allow restricted situation transactions, and loosened collateral necessities. As well as, many debtors, particularly these owned by giant monetary sponsors, proceed to take the lead in drafting mortgage commitments and definitive mortgage documentation, and procure dedicated covenant ranges and baskets on the dedication stage.

Authorized and regulatory developments

Throughout most of 2021, the US authorities continued to supply some reduction to company debtors, different enterprise debtors and people affected by covid-19 by way of quite a few reduction payments together with the Coronavirus Help, Reduction and Financial Safety Act (CARES Act), the Paycheck Safety Program (established below the CARES Act) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA). In late 2021 and into 2022, a number of the support offered below these payments was tapered or discontinued.

Essentially the most important regulatory focus of 2021 was the continued transition from LIBOR as the idea for rates of interest for loans. On 5 March 2021, the ICE Benchmark Administration introduced that it’s going to stop publication of one-week and two-month US LIBOR settings on 31 December 2021 and stop publication of the remaining US LIBOR settings on 30 June 2023. US regulators suggested US lenders to not difficulty any LIBOR-based loans after 31 December 2021 and to transition away to different reference charges, comparable to SOFR (secured in a single day financing fee), as quickly as doable. Throughout 2021, ARRC (Various Reference Charges Committee, convened by the US Federal Reserve Financial institution and by the New York Federal Reserve Financial institution) issued supplemental variations of its really helpful hardwire alternative language for US LIBOR syndicated and bilateral loans. Later in 2021, ARRC formally endorsed Time period SOFR, a ahead wanting SOFR Charge, produced by the CME Group, as a serious part of the hardwire language. In consequence, many institutional market members started incorporating the hardwired language, and SOFR loans appeared available on the market within the final quarter of 2021 with some regularity. Some LIBOR transition points are nonetheless negotiated together with the precise timing of the transition, the unfold adjustment on the transition time (since SOFR will not be credit-sensitive) and whether or not and the way a lot discretion must be given to lenders. Different potential replacements for LIBOR embrace credit-sensitive charges together with the American Interbank Provided Charge (Ameribor) and Bloomberg Quick-Time period Financial institution Yield Index fee (BSBY). Many mortgage agreements would require amendments in 2022 to implement the transition away from LIBOR. On 24 March 2021, the New York State legislature enacted a invoice that gives a framework and secure harbours for all contracts which might be ruled by New York regulation that use LIBOR as a benchmark and don’t embrace any fallback provisions. The New York State Governor signed the invoice into regulation on 6 April 2021. On 15 March 2022, the Adjustable Curiosity Charge (LIBOR) Act was signed into regulation by President Biden, establishing a nationwide framework for the alternative of LIBOR because the benchmark rate of interest for contracts missing efficient fallback provisions which might be both not possible or virtually not possible to amend previous to the tenor cessation date. By operation of regulation, the LIBOR Act will exchange remaining references to the commonest LIBOR tenors within the ‘legacy’ contracts with SOFR. In lots of respects the federal statute parallels the New York laws. The federal statute pre-empted in lots of respects a number of states’ laws ending a patchwork system of state-by-state legal guidelines.

From the aftermath of the 2007 monetary disaster till not too long ago, federal regulators had elevated their concentrate on the US company lending market, and leveraged lending specifically. In March 2013, federal regulators issued new leveraged lending tips to handle issues that lenders’ underwriting practices didn’t adequately tackle dangers in leveraged lending with acceptable allowances for losses. These tips apply to federally supervised monetary establishments which might be substantively engaged in leveraged lending actions. Compliance with the rules was required by Might 2013, however the full power of their influence solely began being felt by the market in 2014, notably within the fourth quarter. In November 2014, regulators launched an FAQ on the steerage, and of their Shared Nationwide Credit score Report issued the identical month, they chastised lenders for non-compliance. A lot of the consideration regarding federal steerage is concentrated on their assertion that ‘a leverage degree in extra of 6x Whole Debt/EBITDA raises issues for many industries’. In February 2018, these tips had been declared by the chair of the Fed and the top of the Comptroller of the Forex to not be legally binding on federally supervised monetary establishments which might be substantively engaged in leveraged lending actions. In accordance with Refinitiv LPC, for LBO transactions accomplished in 2021, 81 per cent had common debt-to-EBITDA ranges of six instances or increased. The Shared Nationwide Credit score Report issued in February 2022, which covers the primary and third quarters of 2021, discovered that although credit score danger improved modestly in 2021, banks’ credit score danger publicity to leveraged loans remains to be too excessive and lots of loans comprise phrases and buildings which might be too dangerous. The report famous that banks that originate and take part in leveraged lending transactions, and handle dangers effectively, make use of danger administration processes that adhere to regulatory security and soundness requirements and adapt to altering financial circumstances. Within the present credit score setting, efficient danger administration processes would be sure that reimbursement capability assessments are based mostly on lifelike assumptions of financial restoration and appropriately incorporate new debt that many debtors added to construct liquidity on account of covid-19 financial stress. The report famous that danger in 2022 can be affected by continued success in managing covid-19, inflation, provide chain points, excessive debt ranges, rising rates of interest and labour challenges.

Advertisement

Appointments to federal financing businesses below the Biden administration, such because the appointment of Janet Yellen because the Secretary of the Division of the Treasury, Jerome Powell because the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the Federal Reserve) and Lael Brainard because the Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve, are prone to lead to elevated regulation and enforcement of economic regulation. Some appointees and different politicians have mentioned reviving the 2013 leveraged lending steerage. This might lead to an elevated capability for non-bank lenders to lend to extremely levered debtors and should restrict leverage out there from regulated banks as effectively.

In December 2013, the ultimate Volcker Rule was issued, which limits the variety of buying and selling and funding actions of banking entities. Banking entities may even be required to adjust to in depth reporting necessities in respect of permitted buying and selling and funding actions. The Volcker Rule compliance interval started in July 2017, and the reporting necessities grew to become efficient in June 2014. In December 2016, danger retention guidelines that had been made relevant to CLOs got here into impact, initially casting a big shadow over the leveraged mortgage market (on condition that CLOs are a distinguished supply of capital for leveraged lending transactions), however a federal court docket resolution in February 2018 invalidated the principles insofar as they apply to open-market CLOs. In January 2020, 5 regulatory businesses authorised a proposal recommending that senior AAA CLO debt liabilities that meet sure necessities ought to now not be thought-about equity-like ‘possession pursuits’ below the Volcker Rule, and that the ‘mortgage securitisation’ carve-out from the definition of ‘lined funds’ ought to permit a small holdings of non-loan property, comparable to bonds, and in June 2020, these businesses revealed the ultimate guidelines. The mortgage securitisation exclusion was amended to permit CLOs to carry loans, money equivalents and as much as 5 per cent in debt securities (apart from ABS and convertibles), measured on the time such safety is acquired. Possession pursuits won’t embrace CLO notes that permit the removing and alternative of the supervisor for trigger even within the absence of an occasion of default. As well as, senior debt securities with sure traits won’t be thought-about prohibited possession pursuits so long as they’ve sure enumerated traits. These adjustments profit the CLO and mortgage markets. Additionally in 2018, the Financial Progress, Regulatory Reduction, and Client Safety Act was enacted and exempted smaller establishments. Regulators revised the Volcker Rule, efficient 1 January 2020, to simplify compliance and take away burdens to compliance whereas conserving the general function of the rule intact. Senator Elizabeth Warren proposed the Cease Wall Avenue Looting Act of 2021 which might successfully reimpose the risk-retention requirements for US CLO managers. The invoice would outline managers of CLOs as securitisers and require them to buy and maintain not less than 5 per cent of the worth of their managed CLOs.

Many federal monetary businesses search extra in depth regulation of the ‘shadow-banking’ sector. Some businesses have mentioned rising the ability of the Monetary Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) together with by amending Dodd Frank to increase the FSOC’s authority to designate a non-bank monetary establishment for regulation based mostly on each entity-specific standards and activity-based standards. If leveraged lending had been decided to pose a risk to monetary stability, any entity collaborating in leveraged lending may grow to be topic to regulation by the Fed. The FSOC recognized climate-related monetary dangers in 2021.

Federal regulators have additionally continued to implement sanctions and anti-corruption and anti-terrorism legal guidelines, and have not too long ago reinvigorated their efforts. In consequence, and in response to ever-increasing fines for violations, lenders have expanded the compliance phrases included in credit score documentation. These efforts have included broader representations and warranties with fewer materiality and data qualifiers, in addition to affirmative and unfavourable covenants that require compliance with sanctions laws and anti-bribery legal guidelines, and limit borrower actions in restricted international locations or with restricted entities to the extent that such actions would contain mortgage proceeds.

US banks additionally proceed to handle the Basel III necessities. Basel III requires banks to satisfy quite a few capital necessities to strengthen a financial institution’s liquidity and comprise its leverage. Amongst different issues, Basel III requires banks to extend their holdings of Tier 1 capital to not less than 7 per cent of their risk-weighted property to satisfy further liquidity and capital necessities. In December 2014, the Fed proposed that the eight largest US banks ought to adjust to capital necessities which might be much more restrictive than these outlined by Basel III, together with an extra capital cushion. In accordance with the Fed, many of the companies both already met the brand new necessities or had been taking steps to satisfy them by the top of a phase-in interval that ran from 2016 to 2019. The Fed issued revised steerage on 15 January 2021 describing intimately the upper requirements of capital planning expectations relevant to US financial institution holding firms topic to Class 1 requirements below the Fed’s framework versus these topic to Class 2 or 3 requirements. These are the bigger, extra systemically vital US financial institution holding firms. The Fed introduced that it’s going to attempt to finalise the final section of Basel III capital reforms by January 2023 with new necessities for ‘capital neutrality’ throughout the US banking system.

Advertisement

Outlook and conclusions

On the time of writing, members within the US leveraged mortgage markets are 2022 with guarded optimism given the improved well being circumstances and low default charges. Nonetheless, this optimism is offset by geopolitical dangers, widespread and excessive inflation, provide chain points, rising rates of interest, and potential new covid variants. Many direct lenders nonetheless have capital to place to make use of, however M&A exercise has stalled through the first and second quarters of 2022. Right now, the pattern of borrower-friendly debt phrases continues.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

New finance goal needed to sustain climate momentum from Trump

Published

on

New finance goal needed to sustain climate momentum from Trump

Comment: The victims of the climate crisis will need support, and the energy transition will need to be funded, whoever is elected as the next US president

Mohamed Adow is the founder and director of Power Shift Africa 

There’s no getting around it. The recently concluded climate talks in Bonn have left the goal of limiting global heating to under 1.5C in peril.  The reason: rich countries are backtracking on their financial pledges.   

The crucial deadline for next year’s new national climate plans, known as NDCs – which are the bedrock for the collective global effort to tackle climate change – are now in danger. This is because developing countries have no assurances that the climate finance they were promised, and which fund the NDCs, will be there.  

The theme of this year’s COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, is supposed to be climate finance. It is the meeting where the world is tasked with agreeing a new long-term global finance goal.  

Advertisement

This goal is the key ingredient to tackling climate injustice, and how we help vulnerable people adapt to the climate crisis and fund the transition to a zero-carbon energy system. However, at the mid-year talks in Bonn this month, rich countries dragged their feet, blocked progress and deliberately offered only vague signals about their intentions.  

UN climate chief warns of “steep mountain to climb” for COP29 after Bonn blame-game

They also attempted to unpick the commitment they made at COP28 in Dubai: to have an annual dialogue specifically on climate finance. They are now suggesting it cover other issues.  

Rich countries also used up valuable time arguing about who should pay the bill, trying to get some developing countries to also be included in the donor base. This was something they continued to talk about in the G7 summit communique issued this weekend. Delay and fudging on the new climate finance goal are hugely dangerous because the Bonn session was crucial to ensuring a successful COP29. 

Waiting for US election? 

COP summits take a huge amount of preparation with negotiators taking all year to lay the groundwork for the final landing zones that will be finalised this year in Baku. Leaving it all to the last minute would be disastrous and could result in a failure that derails international momentum on climate change just as Donald Trump is elected US President. 

The infuriating go-slow in Bonn seems to be because countries are waiting for the result of this election before making any finance commitments. This is folly.   

Advertisement

The need for a coalition of the sensible – to counter the ignorance and malice emanating from a potential Trump White House – will only be greater should the Republican candidate win.  

The victims of the climate crisis will need support, and the energy transition will need to be funded, whoever is elected as the next US president. Dragging out the process to the point where Baku might end up being a chaotic rush will only make things worse.  

COP29 host lacks influence 

The horrors of climate change continue to rage daily. Heatwaves mercilessly ravage lives, with over 100 people reported dead in India and over 50 lives claimed in Sudan during the Bonn talks. These are not just statistics; they are human lives from vulnerable countries, who once dared to hope for a better tomorrow.  

The dark clouds forming over Baku are compounded by the fact that the Azeri presidency for COP29 is inexperienced, with few diplomatic allies and lacking in geopolitical or economic weight to knock heads together as needed. The lack of a strong host in 2024 means we need to see leadership from other quarters. 

Bonn talks on climate finance goal end in stalemate on numbers

Those other would-be leaders must ensure that the negotiators see the coming dangers ahead and work to catch up and avoid them. The crucial opportunities for this are the UN General Assembly summit in September and the pre-COP meeting in Baku. It’s vital that much clearer and more ambitious negotiations take place so that ministers have a streamlined process when they get to Baku in November.   

Advertisement

Without that, we risk getting an underwhelming finance goal or even a failed COP. That would imperil millions of people who need climate finance, as well as taking the wind out of the sails of the NDCs from developing countries, which are due to be published next year.  How can these poorer countries be expected to slay the climate dragon with paper swords, having gotten zero assurances on the long-term finance they need?  

If countries can set a clear and unambiguous path for future finance in Baku, then the world will be set up for a hope-filled and ambitious round of climate action plans next year. This is the best way to protect the world from the volatility of the US election. The work to achieve that starts now.  

Continue Reading

Finance

Feeling the Stones: Chinese Development Finance to Latin America and the Caribbean, 2023 – The Dialogue

Published

on

Feeling the Stones: Chinese Development Finance to Latin America and the Caribbean, 2023 – The Dialogue


Chinese Finance Update 2023 Report Cover

Continuing the recent trend, China’s development finance institutions (DFIs)—China Development Bank (CDB) and the Export-Import Bank of China (Ex-Im Bank)—issued relatively limited amounts of finance to Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) governments or state-run companies in 2023, according to findings from the Inter-American Dialogue’s Asia & Latin America Program and the Boston University Global Development Policy Center (GDP). This is reflective of an ongoing recalibration on the part of the many Chinese financial institutions and companies that engage with the LAC region.

Our newly published report, Feeling the Stones: Chinese Development Finance to Latin America and the Caribbean, 2023, examines China’s newest DFI lending to the region, individual country debt scenarios, and the growing importance of other-than-DFI sources of Chinese finance in LAC.

See the newly updated Chinese Loans to Latin America and the Caribbean Database for information on China’s sovereign lending to LAC since 2005.

Main findings:

  • In 2023, China’s development finance institutions (DFI) issued two loans totaling US$1.3 billion to Brazil. Chinese DFI lending in 2023 was slightly higher than the US$863 million issued by CDB and Ex-Im Bank in 2022. Despite this slight increase, China’s sovereign lending to LAC remains modest.

  • Economic and political turbulence would appear to have impeded Chinese lending in parts of the region. Argentina’s political uncertainties have had a dampening effect on Chinese lending there over the past few years.

  • In other cases, LAC interest in Chinese DFI loans has dwindled. China has been an important lender to Jamaica over the years, having issued 10 loans to the country since 2005. But Jamaica’s efforts to reduce its debt-to-gross domestic product (GDP) ratios by 40 percentage points in a span of five years have naturally limited Jamaican interest in more Chinese finance.

  • Advertisement
  • In general, Chinese DFI finance to Brazil, a main recipient of recent Chinese loans, has moved from a focus on the energy sector to other forms of financial assistance. Brazil’s Petrobras, a recipient of sizable CDB loans, has nevertheless signaled an interest in doing more with Chinese DFIs in the coming years.

  • There is little to indicate a resurrection of the multi-billion-dollar, oil-backed lending that once represented the bulk of China’s financial engagement with the region. However, if 2023 is any indication, CDB and Ex-Im Bank will remain committed to issuing smaller loans that are closely linked to Chinese and host country development objectives, whether as concerns transport infrastructure development, generating investment, or boosting trade in priority emerging industries.

 


Advertisement




 

Chinese Finance to LAC, 2005-2023

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT HERE:

The Politics Of Disaster Relief

After a 7.0 magnitude earthquake struck Haiti, the aftershock reached China in ways that few anticipated.The earthquake forced Chinese leaders to navigate the tricky politics of disaster relief.

˙

Rising Brazil: The Choices Of A New Global Power

What should we expect from a newly powerful Brazil? Does the country have the capacity and leadership to be a central actor in addressing critical global and regional problems?

Advertisement

˙Peter Hakim

US-Brazil Relations: Expect More Conflict

President Lula da Silva triumphantly announced that he and his Turkish counterpart had persuaded Iran to shift a major part of its uranium enrichment program overseas—an objective that had previously eluded the US and other world powers. Washington, however, was not applauding.

˙Peter Hakim

Continue Reading

Finance

The growing case to embed climate risk in finance teaching

Published

on

The growing case to embed climate risk in finance teaching

Stay informed with free updates

Chief financial officers, chief ­investment officers and their teams are in a prime position to help embed ­sustainability in their organisations — from strategy and operations to financing and reporting. Yet the change required for many finance teams is ­substantial.

A recent survey of senior finance professionals by the charity Accounting for Sustainability suggests that the profession is responding: 88 per cent agree that it is “very important” or “essential” to transform financial decision making to address the opportunities and risks posed by environmental and social issues.

Most organisations have developed at least some tools to integrate sustainability, alongside traditional financial data, into decision making.

Advertisement

But only 9 per cent reported they were able to do so in a fully comprehensive way. Fifteen per cent felt they had the tools and techniques in place that they needed, though 46 per cent said these were under development.

Those of us who teach and conduct research in finance and accounting have a role to play to meet this demand.

We took part in a recent discussion between finance and accounting —professors and the Financial Times about best practices, successful innovations, and important concepts and themes.

It is now relatively uncontroversial to argue that climate change and nature loss bring direct risks to the profitability and cash flows of companies.

Physical risks arise from direct manifestations of climate change and include risks to firm facilities, operations, and supply chains.

Advertisement

Transition risks and opportunities arise for business as regulatory incentives and consumer preferences push towards, for example, a lower emissions economy.

Mobilising private capital towards mitigation of, and adaptation to, environmental change is vital. The rules of the road, as defined in finance textbooks, must be refined to help understand and manage these risks.

But there are divergent views on how to respond. Some participants in the discussion felt a responsibility as professors to inspire a fundamental overhaul of finance and accounting pedagogy, and thought the fiduciary duty of financial officers must be redefined to view climate and social action through the lens of “citizen investors”, who consider many non-financial objectives.

For them, a core course in finance would seek to question the very purpose of finance. Ideally, it would pursue what appropriate actions financial officers could take to fulfil their more ­broadly defined duties, what powers they should exercise, what purpose they serve, and what evidence there is of what works.

Other finance professors — a larger group that includes the authors of this article — argue that a stronger focus on climate risks is justified within the existing frameworks we teach, and no big overhaul is needed. Students should consider new sources of extra-market risk, which require a multidisciplinary understanding and fall under the ­conventional responsibilities of both investment and corporate managers.

Advertisement

When we teach about the cost of ­capital, for example, we highlight that stocks exposed to risks require a higher expected rate of return to be attractive, thus reducing the attractiveness of certain investments. Replacing discussion of macroeconomic risks (beyond the standard market risk factors) with others focused on climate and nature would highlight factors managers should take into account.

Another dimension is cash flow. Investing in climate change and sustainability presents a range of opportunities to generate returns and make a positive impact on the environment. These include leveraging tax incentives to invest in renewable energy projects (a booming business for investment banks due to recent legislation in the US and Europe), green bonds, electric vehicles and infrastructure.

This less radical perspective does not mean that non-financial objectives should never be considered in decision making.

Rather, it highlights that ­climate and nature risk management is already required — even of those investors with a narrower fiduciary duty to maximise risk-adjusted returns.

Advertisement

Innovative teaching approaches on sustainability and finance through real-time case studies, industry speakers, data-driven exercises, out-of-the-box readings, and engaged, project-oriented learning experiences are welcome. The more creative, the better.

At our discussion with the FT, there was a shared belief that deans and other academic leaders in business schools should create more incentives for such forms of pedagogy.

We acknowledge that there is a still larger group of finance and accounting professors who are indifferent, opposed or of the view that sustainability has ­little or no place in core finance teaching and learning. We believe a broader debate will continue and welcome it.

This article is by Marcin Kacperczyk, a professor at Imperial College Business School; Andrew Karolyi, a professor and dean at Cornell University’s SC Johnson College of Business, and an advisory councillor to King Charles’s Accounting for Sustainability project; Lin Peng, a professor at Baruch College’s Zicklin School of Business; and Johannes Stroebel, a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business. We are grateful to our colleagues David Pitt-Watson, Megan Kashner and John Tobin for helpful comments

Finance and climate: recommended reading from the authors

Climate Finance,” by Harrison Hong, Andrew Karolyi, and José Scheinkman, Review of Financial Studies (Volume 33, Issue 3, March 2020)

Advertisement

Climate Finance,” by Stefano Giglio, Bryan Kelly, and Johannes Stroebel, Annual Review of Financial Economics (Volume 13, November 2021)

Seeking Virtue in Finance: Contributing to Society in a Conflicted Industry by JC de Swaan (Cambridge University Press, 2022)

What They Do With Your Money, How the Finance Industry Fails Us, and How to Fix It by Stephen Davis, Jon Lukomnik and David Pitt-Watson (Yale University Press, 2016)

The Ministry of the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson (Orbit Press, 2020)

Sustainable Investing in Equilibrium,” by Lubos Pastor, Robert Stambaugh and Lucian Taylor, Journal of Financial Economics (Volume 142, Issue 2, November 2021)

Advertisement

Responsible Investing: The ESG-Efficient Frontier,” by Lasse Heje Pedersen, Shaun Fitzgibbons and Lukasz Pomorski, Journal of Financial Economics (Volume 142, Issue 2, November 2021)

Global Pricing of Carbon-Transition Risk,” Patrick Bolton and Marcin Kacperczyk, Journal of Finance (Volume 78, Issue 6, December 2023).


Recommendations from a wider group of finance professors:

Investments by Bodie, Kane and Marcus

Principles of Corporate Finance by Brealey, Myers, Allen, Edmans 

Advertisement

Climate Finance by Giglio, Kelly and Stroebel

Managing Climate Risk in the US Financial System

Grow the Pie by Alex Edmans

Global Reporting Initiative “Double Materiality Concept – Application & Issues”

Woke Inc. by Vivek Ramaswamy

Advertisement

IPCC (2022) “Sixth Assessment Report”

Unsettled” by Steve Koonin BenBella Books

Net Zero Investing for Multi-Asset Portfolios by Hodges, Ren, Schwaiger and Ang Journal of Portfolio Management 

Aggregate Confusion by Berg, Kolbel and Rigobon Review of Finance

Do ESG Factors Influence Firm Valuation? Evidence from the Field by Karolyi, Bancel and Glavas

Advertisement

Biodiversity Finance: A Call for Research into Financing Nature by Andrew Karolyi and John Tobin-de-la-Puente (2023) Financial Management

The Future We Choose: The Stubborn Optimist’s Guide to the Climate Crisis by Christiana Figueres and Tom Rivett-Carn

How to Avoid a Climate Disaster by Bill Gates https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/317490/how-to-avoid-a-climate-disaster-by-gates-bill/9780141993010

False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor and Fails to Fix the Planet by Bjorn Lomborg


Disagree or want to suggest others? Use the comments section below

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending