Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 141

Key investment take-outs from Paris Climate Conference

Between 30 November and 11 December 2015, 45,000 delegates, including heads of state, from over 100 countries, met in Paris for the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The Paris agreement is an historic deal that will lead to significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions across the global economy through a universal system of governance for climate change. While individual country commitments have still fallen short of the stated temperature target, they are sufficient to accelerate the shift to a low carbon economy which technology is driving forward regardless.

What did countries agree to?

The highlights of the agreement include:

  • A change in target from 2oC to ‘well below’ 2oC with an aim of 1.5oC which was arguably the most significant outcome. While it may seem academic, the importance of acknowledging that 2oC was not a ‘safe’ target further emphasises the urgency for action
  • A five-year review mechanism with a clear expectation of more ambitious targets. This ratcheting approach should factor into investment analysis as it increases the likelihood of accelerating change
  • A commitment from developed nations to grow their financial assistance for developing nations to manage climate change to more than US$100 billion a year from 2020. Much of this finance will have an explicit goal of attracting additional private investment.

Other noteworthy outcomes from the COP were outside the negotiating rooms with hundreds of companies, sub-national governments and investors making significant commitments. For the first time, the scale of private sector support reflected what is needed to achieve more ambitious climate action.

Implications for investors

The fact that greenhouse gas emissions have continued to grow despite clear evidence of the damage caused is a classic market failure. The Paris agreement establishes a predictable framework for correcting this. Indeed, at no time over the last 21 years of climate negotiations have investors had greater confidence in the necessary changes ‘really’ happening this time.

While this will be positive for low carbon investments as it signals a reduction in regulatory and market risk, the largest investment implications sit with the primary part of most investors’ portfolios - bonds and listed equities.

As the market failure is corrected, the playing field will be tilted from high to low carbon, which will impact all sectors in different ways. The nature of correcting market failures means passive portfolios are particularly vulnerable as changes in index constituents may lag.

Government regulation and international agreements are not the only factors driving this transition, and technology remains critical. Battery and solar price declines are expected to continue, further disrupting energy markets. However, the cheapest form of carbon abatement is the energy not used, making energy efficient will be an important company differentiator.

The combination of international political momentum, private sector support and technological change stand to disrupt many industry sectors faster than expected. The risk of ‘stranded assets’ has been flagged by everyone from the Governor of the Bank of England to leading sell-side analysts.

Expectations of investors will continue to grow

Scrutiny of investors from asset owners, retail investors and the public has increased over the last few years and this scrutiny will grow post-Paris. The industry itself is lifting standards, with investors representing $10 trillion in assets committing to portfolio carbon disclosure through the Montreal Pledge.

While these commitments are positive, investors need to understand the limitations of these tools. For example, carbon footprinting does not identify stranded asset risk or risks to industries like auto-manufacturing where the greatest threats are upstream or downstream. A suite of quantitative and qualitative indicators will be required to properly understand the opportunities.

What can investors do?

Leading investors are already taking actions which are low cost and process-orientated. Establishing a holistic framework which captures investment process improvements, member engagement, industry collaboration and policy advocacy will aid in the identification and prioritisation of actions for individual investors.

Actions include:

  • Integrating and documenting carbon risk and climate change adaptation into investment processes and governance using tools like carbon footprinting and the assessment of stranded asset risks
  • Formalising individual and collaborative engagement programmes with investee companies to benchmark the management of climate change and other key Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors
  • Collaborating with other investors to improve industry knowledge and skills and to influence the policy response by government
  • Engaging with end investors to reassure them that their assets are well-positioned for the great shifts climate change will mean for the economy and society.

Research we have undertaken shows that investors are concerned about these issues. If funds are not providing sufficient information in an understandable form, investors may move to funds that do.

Final thoughts on Paris

The full effects of the Paris agreement will take time to ripple through the economy. Investors are already seeing the related structural changes that are unfolding due to existing policies and technological development.

However, preventing dangerous levels of global warming remains an unprecedented challenge. While individual country commitments fall short of what is required, the improvements in global governance of climate change achieved in Paris should provide investors with greater confidence that future action will more closely resemble what is necessary.

Arguably, the biggest challenges for investors will be blocking out short-term noise and instead focusing on applying the strategies needed to achieve long-term investment objectives in what are sure to be extraordinary times ahead.


Pablo Berrutti is Head of Responsible Investment, Asia Pacific at Colonial First State Global Asset Management.


Phil K
February 05, 2016

It's all nonsense. You can't "target" a level of change in global average temperature by fiddling around with just one of the hundreds of factors that can affect climate. Carbon dioxide is just one greenhouse gas and industrial activity is just one small contributor to that one greenhouse gas. You could exterminate the human race and still find that temperatures rise. (Well, you wouldn't be in a position to find anything I suppose since you'd be exterminated). The whole edifice of the climate change religion is supported by not much other than computer modelling. I'm surprised that my funds management colleagues have (officially at least) been taken in by all this since they seem like intelligent people and I thought they'd understand how computer modelling works.

PS. The Orwellian substitution of the term "carbon" for "carbon dioxide", "climate change" for "global warming" and the deliberate misuse of the word "pollution" should be enough to ring the alarm bells. If we're "fighting" (or is it "tackling") climate change then presumably we will at some stage be trying to get the temperature up to avoid the next ice age. I guess then we'll be madly running around re-opening coal mines and paying companies to "pollute" the atmosphere.

Nicholas M
February 05, 2016

I couldn't disagree with you more, Gary M. Incredibly clear targets, and the first universal and legally binding agreement on decarbonising the global economy. Never before in history have we seen such a large number of world leaders come together and state their commitment to addressing the issue. Time to stop taking the Herald Sun as gospel and get educated on the implications.

Gary M
February 04, 2016

Will probably achieve nothing long term – vague targets, meaningless measures, unenforceable, etc, etc. All I want to see from a pro-climate investment strategy is their RESULTS. Nothing else matters.


Leave a Comment:



The green lining of COVID-19: a time for change

Invest more in mining to deal with climate change

Lack of policy direction hurting renewables


Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

The sorry saga of housing affordability and ownership

It is hard to think of any area of widespread public concern where the same policies have been pursued for so long, in the face of such incontrovertible evidence that they have failed to achieve their objectives.

Latest Updates


$1 billion and counting: how consultants maximise fees

Despite cutbacks in public service staff, we are spending over a billion dollars a year with five consulting firms. There is little public scrutiny on the value for money. How do consultants decide what to charge?

Investment strategies

Two strong themes and companies that will benefit

There are reasons to believe inflation will stay under control, and although we may see a slowing in the global economy, two companies should benefit from the themes of 'Stable Compounders' and 'Structural Winners'.

Financial planning

Reducing the $5,300 upfront cost of financial advice

Many financial advisers have left the industry because it costs more to produce advice than is charged as an up-front fee. Advisers are valued by those who use them while the unadvised don’t see the need to pay.


Many people misunderstand what life expectancy means

Life expectancy numbers are often interpreted as the likely maximum age of a person but that is incorrect. Here are three reasons why the odds are in favor of people outliving life expectancy estimates.

Investment strategies

Slowing global trade not the threat investors fear

Investors ask whether global supply chains were stretched too far and too complex, and following COVID, is globalisation dead? New research suggests the impact on investment returns will not be as great as feared.

Investment strategies

Wealth doesn’t equal wisdom for 'sophisticated' investors

'Sophisticated' investors can be offered securities without the usual disclosure requirements given to everyday investors, but far more people now qualify than was ever intended. Many are far from sophisticated.

Investment strategies

Is the golden era for active fund managers ending?

Most active fund managers are the beneficiaries of a confluence of favourable events. As future strong returns look challenging, passive is rising and new investors do their own thing, a golden age may be closing.



© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

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. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.