Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 130

Sustainable, responsible or ethical – what’s the difference?

There is a lot of confusion when the subject of ‘responsible’ investing comes up. The term is often used as an alternative to ‘ethical’ investing, though these aren’t necessarily the same thing. To add to the confusion, so-called ‘impact’ or ‘social benefit’ investing are different again. This article aims to shed some light.

Responsible investing involves ESG

Responsible investing is a broad church of investment processes that have one important feature in common: when they make the usual investment decisions – stock picking, etc. – a ‘responsible investor’ explicitly takes account of environmental, social and governance factors (ESG).

  • An example of E might be: is the business involved in an industry that creates a lot of pollution and thus might be the target of changes in government regulations or tax regimes?
  • An example of S might be: does the business have a poor workplace health and safety record, which could result in it having low staff morale which can adversely affect customer service?
  • An example of G might be: does the business have a poorly articulated process for selecting Board members and thus may struggle to implement strategy successfully.

ESG considerations are in addition to the usual financial and macroeconomic drivers that analysts look at. Adherents believe that these sorts of factors have an effect on how a company will perform over time for its shareholders and debt investors. Responsible investors also believe that focussing investments on positive ESG-rated companies is good for business because it helps to enhance the world in which the company operates.

This is why responsible investing is often called ‘sustainable’ investing – the idea that a company with strong ESG ratings will be a more robust business that not only contributes towards sustaining the environment and the health of society, but is therefore a sustainable business. It’s not just about surviving the economic cycle, but the trends in society that are addressing issues like: more honesty and positive ethics in business; cleaner air and abundant water for everyone; and a better partnership between labour and capital than the acrimonious relationships of the past.

Use of ESG rankings

The responsible investment universe is occupied by a wide field of individual styles and approaches. For instance, you can have equity managers who favour growth stocks and those who favour value stocks, and there are many different ways that ESG ratings on companies are taken into account.

The most common is to attach a higher risk factor to the return projections for the lower ESG ranked companies. Under this approach, the manager will still invest in a poor ESG rated company, but only if the share price is low enough to provide a higher expected return for the risk. (If it’s a corporate bond being looked at, a wider credit spread would be needed to compensate for risk.)

Another approach is to use ESG rankings to bias the degree of overweight or underweight position the fund will take in a company. High ESG ratings enable a larger overweight to a company with positive financials and short term return prospects than low ESG ratings.

Yet another is to use ESG ratings as a screen – excluding the bottom X% of ESG rated companies in a sector, for instance. This is where the issue of fossil fuel divestment comes in. Some managers believe strongly enough that this particular ‘E’ factor warrants exiting these investments. Mostly this isn’t because of a ‘moral crusade’, but a view that governments around the world are likely to move towards policies encouraging less use of fossil fuels and that this will result in the assets of these companies falling in economic value over time.

Whichever of these approaches a manager may take, most of them also use ESG research as a tool to guide their engagement with the companies they invest in. For example, they hold shares in company B that has a poor ‘S’ rating because of poor compliance with workplace health and safety requirements. Rather than selling their shares, they will meet the management and discuss the negative impact of this on the company’s performance, encouraging them to lift their game. If you don’t own shares you can’t engage in this way.

What are ‘ethical’ investors?

Among those who use ESG as a screening device may be found the majority of ethical investors. Ethical investors usually screen out certain companies because they’re involved in activities with negative ‘S’ characteristics (eg they’re involved in gambling or illicit drug supply) and explicitly favouring of certain types of businesses regarded as being positive for society. Some ethical investors also screen out on ‘Environmental’ grounds as well, though not all use ‘E’ factors in that way.

Ethical investing is a minority group within the responsible investment universe. It’s an approach that doesn’t translate well into the public offer managed funds space. There’s a place for it and some fund managers are achieving some success with ethical offerings. However, the question of ‘whose ethics do you use?’ tends to get in the way of them being broadly accepted. Even among ethical investors, the list of excluded and preferred activities varies.

Ethical approaches are common when all the funds being managed are ‘in-house’ in some sense. This can range from an individual’s SMSF through private family office funds to self-contained institutions like church denominations where the synod or assembly agrees the ethical principles to be adopted.

Impact investing is different again

Impact investing is about making decisions that, while sound financially, also have direct, measurable and meaningful social outcomes. Normally it requires government involvement as it’s usually government that wants the cheapest option for delivering social policy outcomes and is prepared to pay the income on an impact investment if the programme is successful. For example, if a programme to help rehabilitate prisoners is successful then that will save governments money from not having to return those people to jail. If the programme is funded by private investors, then their return comes from government payments that reward the success of the programme.

A personal comment

My former employer was one of the first Australian signatories to the United Nations Principles of Responsible Investment (UNPRI). They thus committed to incorporating ESG into their processes. They are one of the largest fund managers in Australia. My current employer is not one of the largest, but requires the church’s investments to be in accord with a set of ethical principles that reflect the values of the members of the denomination. In both cases, the funds these organisations manage deliver strong, competitive returns to investors. It doesn’t prove the case by any means, but in my experience, being a responsible investor in no way detracts from investment performance.

 

Warren Bird is Executive Director of Uniting Financial Services, a division of the Uniting Church (NSW & ACT). He has 30 years’ experience in fixed income investing. He also serves as an Independent Member of the GESB Investment Committee. This article is general education and does not consider any personal circumstances.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Four reasons ESG investing continues to grow

Beyond the acronym, navigating important ESG choices

Elevating responsible investing to solve real world challenges

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

Tariffs are a smokescreen to Trump's real endgame

Behind market volatility and tariff threats lies a deeper strategy. Trump’s real goal isn’t trade reform but managing America's massive debts, preserving bond market confidence, and preparing for potential QE.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Getting rich vs staying rich

Strategies to get rich versus stay rich are markedly different. Here is a look at the five main ways to get rich, including through work, business, investing and luck, as well as those that preserve wealth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Superannuation

The huge cost of super tax concessions

The current net annual cost of superannuation tax subsidies is around $40 billion, growing to more than $110 billion by 2060. These subsidies have always been bad policy, representing a waste of taxpayers' money.

Planning

How to avoid inheritance fights

Inspired by the papal conclave, this explores how families can avoid post-death drama through honest conversations, better planning, and trial runs - so there are no surprises when it really matters.

Superannuation

Super contribution splitting

Super contribution splitting allows couples to divide before-tax contributions to super between spouses, maximizing savings. It’s not for everyone, but in the right circumstances, it can be a smart strategy worth exploring.

Economy

Trump vs Powell: Who will blink first?

The US economy faces an unprecedented clash in leadership styles, but the President and Fed Chair could both take a lesson from the other. Not least because the fiscal and monetary authorities need to work together.

Gold

Credit cuts, rising risks, and the case for gold

Shares trade at steep valuations despite higher risks of a recession. Amid doubts that a 60/40 portfolio can still provide enough protection through times of market stress, gold's record shines bright.

Investment strategies

Buffett acolyte warns passive investors of mediocre future returns

While Chris Bloomstan doesn't have the track record of his hero, it's impressive nonetheless. And he's recently warned that today has uncanny resemblances to the 1990s tech bubble and US returns are likely to be disappointing.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.