Despite impact funds now regularly raising $1 billion-plus and giant asset owners like ABP targeting huge impact portfolios, institutional investors are still cautious about such strategies.
Private market assets are making up larger shares of portfolios for diversification purposes, and lifers like Dai-ichi Life have ventured deeper into alternatives this year.
The Malaysian pension fund is seeking out social and environmental gains while making investment returns. It is likely to benefit both risk management and long-term performance.
Few investable products and persistent hesitancy by private investors is creating a mismatch between commitments and deployment of catalytic capital, noted a senior Asia executive at the world-renowned foundation.
Asset owners across Asia Pacific (APAC) are rethinking markets, reallocating portfolios and responsibly investing amid dramatic shifts in the macroeconomic and geopolitical landscape, according to Nuveen.
ESG integration, at its most basic level, is identifying the risks associated with environmental, social and corporate governance issues. So why has it become such a political topic?
The latest release of Schroders’ flagship Institutional Investor Study shows just how quickly the approaches to sustainable investing have evolved in the Asia Pacific (APAC) region. In short, institutional investors are moving beyond simple exclusionary and integration approaches to incorporating active ownership, measuring impact and setting net zero targets.
The environmental impact of investment portfolios dominated headlines in 2021, but institutions will only increase their risk if they fail to address the social and governance principles of ESG as well, according to New Zealand’s sovereign wealth fund.
Measuring the environmental impact of investments is difficult, and measuring the social impact is harder still. However, this hasn’t stopped asset owners and managers from searching for better measurement techniques.