Stay informed with free updates

Simply sign up to the Business education myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.

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.

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.

Climate risk management is required even of investors with a narrower duty to maximise returns

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.

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.

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.

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

Though I write about the housing market and mortgages for a living, I’m a Gen Zer renting my first New York City apartment. I’m also new to the workforce and living in a Brooklyn neighborhood where the median rent is above $4,000. 

Housing is unaffordable right now, for both renters and buyers. Personal finance experts often recommend that you avoid spending more than 30% of your pretax income on housing. But that’s usually out of our control. And when you don’t live in a rent-stabilized property in NYC, your housing expenses could increase hundreds of dollars with each lease renewal. 

I learned that the hard way. 

When our lease was up in April, my roommate and I saw that our landlord was proposing a 4.5% annual increase, raising our rent by $200 a month, and costing us each an additional $1,200 over the next year. 

We could’ve easily accepted the increase, but all it took was a bit of research, a well-written email and a quick phone call to get our landlord to budge.

My easy strategy for negotiating rent 

Since our apartment doesn’t have rent-stabilized protections, there’s no legal limit on how much our landlord can increase our rent. Still, the proposed 4.5% bump was much higher than we expected. 

I knew we’d be leaving money on the table if we didn’t at least try to negotiate. Landlords can often appear superhuman, impervious to normal business haggling. But that’s not always true. Here’s what we did to negotiate our rent.

I did research on average rent increases

I started by researching how much average rents had increased in our Brooklyn neighborhood over the last year. I found that average rental prices went up by less than 3% during that time, giving us pretty good leverage to negotiate. I also noted in my email that a 4.5% increase was above the current pace of inflation, which was at 3.4%.

I built my case as a responsible tenant

In many cases, it’s more convenient for a landlord to renew a lease with a responsible tenant than to deal with a vacancy. My roommate and I always pay our rent on time and in full. We alert management to any issues, like a leaking faucet, to prevent further damage or costs to the building. So we had that going for us. 

I figured it was also worth noting recent issues with the apartment. For instance, last fall, there was some pretty major flooding in our bathroom. We’d been disappointed by how long it took the building super to reply to our requests and follow through on the repairs. 

I was prepared to make concessions 

I knew we wouldn’t be able to avoid a rent increase entirely. So I suggested an increase that I felt was in line with the local rental market, the pace of inflation and our reliable rental history.

Instead of 4.5%, I proposed a 2% increase as our starting point. That left us with some wiggle room in our budgets in case our landlord came back with a higher number.

I wrote a professional email 

After we sent the email, the building’s management took about a week to respond. They asked if we could hop on a brief phone call to discuss the terms of our renewal. Our landlord offered an increase of just above 2%, meaning our rent would be going up only $100 a month as opposed to $200. 

A little self-advocacy can go a long way

The rising cost of living —  for housing, medical expenses and other essentials — isn’t something we can control. But there are small measures we can take to save money and make informed financial decisions that benefit us in the long run.

You’re allowed to ask questions about the bills you receive and advocate for yourself. It won’t eliminate high costs altogether, but it could help you keep more money in your pocket.  

Here are some other costs that are worth negotiating: 

Medical bills and health care costs

You can contact your health care provider, insurer or hospital to negotiate medical costs. Your provider may lower your bill, offer a payment plan or provide financial assistance if you’re a low-income patient or uninsured. Always carefully review your medical bills and look for mistakes, and if you have any questions about the charges, ask your provider. 

Credit card fees and interest

You may be able to get a better interest rate or reduced fees by simply calling your credit card issuer. Before you hop on the phone, though, be sure to research your account’s history and terms, in addition to competing credit card offers, so you can make a strong argument. 

Cable, internet and phone 

Cable, internet and phone providers often lure you in with a low introductory rate. But after a year, your price goes up. You can either contact your provider to see if it has any deals available, or mention you’re considering canceling your service. Your provider would rather keep you as a customer for a lower price than lose your business altogether. 

In my opinion, self-advocacy is an underrated personal finance tool. By speaking up for myself, I avoided spending an extra $1,200 this year. And I won’t be afraid to do it again when my internet provider’s promotional offer expires this summer.