Mock Exam 2 Flashcards

Question

No.26 A company's Scope 3 emissions are: A. emissions from purchased energy. B. direct emissions from core operations. C. emissions produced by suppliers and customers.

Answer 1

Answer C: Emissions produced by suppliers and customers. Explanation: Scope 3 emissions are indirect emissions that occur in a company’s value chain, both upstream (e.g., emissions from suppliers) and downstream (e.g., emissions from customers using the company’s products). Examples include emissions from raw material production, transportation, product use, and disposal. In contrast: Emissions from purchased energy refer to Scope 2 emissions, which include indirect emissions from the generation of purchased electricity, steam, heating, or cooling. Direct emissions from core operations are Scope 1 emissions, which come from sources owned or controlled by the company (e.g., emissions from company vehicles or facilities).

Answer 2

Answer A: Statement 1 Explanation: Double materiality refers to the concept of assessing the two-way impacts between a company and its external environment, including climate change, the environment, and society. It considers: How sustainability issues impact the company’s financial performance (financial materiality). How the company’s activities impact the environment and society (environmental and social materiality). In contrast: Statement 2: This focuses only on financial results, which aligns with traditional materiality but not double materiality. Statement 3: This misrepresents double materiality, as costs and sustainability goals are not always perfectly aligned, and navigating sustainability often involves complex trade-offs.

Answer 3

Answer B: Higher return required for investments in high-carbon companies. Explanation: The carbon risk premium refers to the higher return investors require to compensate for the risks associated with investing in high-carbon companies. These risks can include regulatory changes, carbon taxes, reputational damage, or shifts in consumer preferences toward low-carbon alternatives, which can negatively impact the financial performance of high-carbon companies. In contrast: Higher price consumers pay for carbon-neutral products: This reflects consumer behavior but is unrelated to the concept of the carbon risk premium. Discount applied to risky company cash flows when valuing green bonds: This is not accurate, as green bonds are typically associated with lower risk and may trade at a premium rather than applying a discount.

Answer 4

Answer B: sustainability bond. Explanation: A sustainability-linked bond is a type of bond where the issuer commits to achieving sustainability or ESG targets, but the use of proceeds is not tied to specific projects. Instead, the bond's terms are linked to the company's overall sustainability performance, such as improving working conditions or other ESG-related outcomes. In contrast: Transition bond: This is used specifically to finance the transition from high-carbon to low-carbon operations, which is not the focus here. Sustainability bond: This is a type of green or social bond where the proceeds are explicitly allocated to specific sustainability-related projects, which is not the case since no specific commitments or outcomes were made.

Answer 5

Answer C: Carbon sequestration. 碳封存 Explanation: Deforestation significantly reduces carbon sequestration, as forests act as natural carbon sinks by absorbing and storing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. When trees are removed or burned, this capacity is lost, and stored carbon is often released back into the atmosphere. In contrast: Water stress: Deforestation can increase water stress by disrupting local water cycles, reducing rainfall, and depleting water resources. The risk of drought: Deforestation can exacerbate droughts by reducing moisture in the air and altering precipitation patterns, not reducing the risk.

Answer 6

Answer A: Blue bond. Explanation: A blue bond is a type of debt instrument specifically issued to finance projects that support the sustainable use of ocean and water resources, such as sustainable fishing, marine conservation, or clean water infrastructure. In contrast: Green bond: While related to environmental projects, green bonds focus more broadly on renewable energy, energy efficiency, and other general environmental initiatives, not specifically ocean-related projects. Social bond: These focus on projects with direct social benefits, such as affordable housing, education, or healthcare, and are not tied to marine or water sustainability.

Answer 7

Answer C: Consider different ESG factors for companies in the same sector. Explanation: When using standardized frameworks to assess materiality (e.g., SASB or GRI), analysts often recognize that ESG factors can vary in materiality even within the same sector, depending on the specific business model, geographic location, or operational practices of a company. This ensures a tailored approach to ESG analysis. In contrast: Include factors that are not financially material: Standardized frameworks aim to focus on material factors, especially those that are financially relevant, to avoid including non-material considerations. Stop using proprietary materiality assessments: Analysts often combine standardized frameworks with proprietary assessments to refine their analysis, rather than abandoning custom approaches altogether.

Answer 8

Answer A: Support research on climate risks. Explanation: In property investments, understanding and managing climate risks (e.g., flooding, rising sea levels, extreme weather) is critical because real estate is directly impacted by environmental changes. Supporting research on climate risks helps investors make informed decisions and mitigate long-term risks. In contrast: Screen investments for an ESG tilt as engagement is not possible: This is inaccurate because engagement is possible in property investments, such as working with property managers or developers to improve sustainability practices (e.g., energy efficiency, green building standards). Prioritize engagement based on the property developer's credit quality: While credit quality is relevant for assessing financial risk, prioritizing engagement based solely on this factor overlooks broader ESG considerations that are crucial in property investments. Final Assessment: Supporting research on climate risks is the most accurate action for property investors.

Answer 9

Answer C: Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Explanation: The Enron and WorldCom scandals, which involved significant corporate fraud and accounting irregularities, led to the creation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) in 2002. This U.S. legislation introduced stricter financial reporting requirements, enhanced the accountability of corporate executives, and established stronger internal controls to prevent corporate fraud. In contrast: Dodd-Frank Act: This was introduced in 2010 in response to the 2008 financial crisis, focusing on financial regulation and systemic risk rather than corporate fraud. Greenbury Report: This was a UK report published in 1995, focusing on executive remuneration and corporate governance, unrelated to the Enron and WorldCom scandals.

Answer 10

Answer: Action 1 only. Explanation: Escalation of engagement refers to actions taken by investors to influence a company's behavior or practices, typically when previous engagement efforts have not achieved the desired results. Action 1: Making a public statement in advance of general meetings: This is considered an escalation of engagement because it increases pressure on the company by publicly addressing concerns, signaling dissatisfaction, and potentially influencing other stakeholders. Action 2: Formally adding a company to an exclusion list: This is not an escalation of engagement. Exclusion (or divestment) typically occurs after engagement efforts have failed, and the investor chooses to sever ties rather than continue engagement. Final Assessment: Only Action 1 qualifies as an escalation of engagement.

Answer 11

Answer A: ESG ratings. Explanation: Secondary ESG data sources refer to information that has been processed, analyzed, or aggregated by a third party, rather than coming directly from the company itself. ESG ratings are a classic example, as they are derived from external analysis and interpretation of raw data (e.g., public disclosures, surveys) by organizations such as MSCI, Sustainalytics, or ISS. In contrast: Company surveys: These are primary data sources, as they involve direct communication with the company to obtain specific information. Public documents sourced from the UN Global Compact: These are also primary data sources, as they provide raw information directly from an organization's disclosures or commitments. Final Assessment: ESG ratings are best categorized as a secondary ESG data source.

Answer 12

Answer: A qualitative indicator of its ESG practices. Explanation: An issuer's use of a broadly accepted ESG reporting framework (e.g., GRI, SASB, or TCFD) is a qualitative indicator that reflects the company's commitment to transparency, accountability, and alignment with ESG best practices. It demonstrates how the company approaches ESG issues and communicates them to stakeholders. In contrast: A quantitative indicator of its ESG practices: ESG reporting frameworks primarily provide qualitative insights into the company's policies, goals, and strategies, although they may include some quantitative metrics (e.g., carbon emissions). However, the use of the framework itself is not quantitative. An indicator that its ESG reporting is always audited: ESG reports are not always audited, even if they follow a recognized framework. The use of a framework does not guarantee independent verification. Final Assessment: The use of a broadly accepted ESG reporting framework is a qualitative indicator of its ESG practices.

Answer 13

Answer A: Materiality thresholds are often inconsistent across companies in the same industry. Explanation: In the current state of ESG disclosures: Materiality thresholds are often inconsistent across companies in the same industry: This is true because companies often use different ESG reporting frameworks (e.g., GRI, SASB, TCFD) or interpret material ESG factors differently, leading to inconsistent disclosures within the same industry. In contrast: Reporting standards and requirements for ESG risks and opportunities are not available: This is incorrect. There are several well-established ESG reporting standards (e.g., GRI, SASB, TCFD), although their adoption and enforcement vary by region and industry. Financial statements and sustainability disclosures are usually published at the same time: This is incorrect. Sustainability disclosures are often released separately from financial statements, though there is a growing push for integration (e.g., through frameworks like the Integrated Reporting Framework).

Answer 14

Answer C: Rely on established datasets for construction that lack comparability and regional breadth. Explanation: A key drawback of ESG index-based investment strategies is that their construction often relies on established ESG datasets, which may suffer from limitations such as: Lack of comparability: Different ESG data providers use varying methodologies, metrics, and scoring systems, leading to inconsistent evaluations of companies. Limited regional breadth: ESG datasets may not fully cover certain regions, especially emerging markets, where ESG disclosures are less developed or standardized. In contrast: Focus only on environmental factors: ESG index strategies typically include environmental, social, and governance factors, not just environmental ones. Cannot accommodate factor-based investing styles: ESG index strategies can often be combined with factor-based styles (e.g., value or momentum), though this depends on the specific index design. Final Assessment: ESG index-based strategies rely on datasets that lack comparability and regional breadth, which is a significant drawback.

Answer 15

Answer A: Japan Explanation: In Japan, companies commonly appoint three or more statutory auditors as part of their corporate governance structure. This is a legal requirement under the Japanese Companies Act for companies that adopt a statutory auditor system, which is distinct from board-level committees used in other countries. These auditors are responsible for overseeing the company’s accounting and governance practices. In contrast: France: French companies typically follow a governance system with a board of directors or a dual board structure (management board and supervisory board), but they do not commonly appoint three or more statutory auditors. The Netherlands: Dutch companies also do not generally appoint three or more statutory auditors. Instead, they have a supervisory board under the two-tier board system that oversees management. Final Assessment: Japan is the correct answer, as companies there commonly appoint three or more statutory auditors.

Answer 16

Answer B: A scorecard can take a qualitative judgment and put a quantitative score to it. Explanation: ESG scorecards are tools that allow investors to evaluate ESG factors by assigning quantitative scores to qualitative aspects of a company or issuer’s performance. This makes qualitative judgments more systematic and comparable. For example, a company’s governance quality could be assessed subjectively but translated into a numerical score for analysis. In contrast: The scorecard technique can only be used on public companies: This is incorrect because ESG scorecards can also be applied to private companies, sovereign bonds, and other asset classes. The scorecard technique cannot be used to score countries for sovereign bonds: This is also incorrect. Scorecards are widely used to evaluate ESG risks and opportunities in sovereign bond issuers (e.g., assessing a country's environmental policies or governance). Final Assessment: The most accurate statement is that a scorecard can take a qualitative judgment and put a quantitative score to it.

Answer 17

Answer C: Remuneration committee. Explanation: Virtually all major companies have three principal board committees, which are: Audit committee: Oversees financial reporting, internal controls, and the audit process. Nomination committee: Manages board composition, including director appointments and succession planning. Remuneration committee: Oversees executive compensation and aligns it with company performance and shareholder interests. In contrast: Risk committee: While some companies, especially in highly regulated industries (e.g., banking), may have a risk committee, it is not one of the three principal committees universally found in major companies. Sustainability committee: This is emerging as an important committee in companies focused on ESG issues, but it is not yet a standard among all major companies. Final Assessment: The remuneration committee is one of the three principal board committees that virtually all major companies have.

Answer 18

Answer C: Operating expenditures. Explanation: Enhanced water pollution disclosure requirements imposed by the government are likely to increase a company's operating expenditures because: Companies may need to invest in monitoring systems, reporting processes, and compliance measures to meet the new requirements. Additional costs may include hiring specialists, upgrading water treatment facilities, or implementing new technologies to reduce pollution and meet stricter standards. In contrast: Taxes: Enhanced disclosure requirements typically do not directly affect a company's tax liabilities, unless linked to specific environmental taxes or penalties for non-compliance. Revenue: While improved ESG practices can enhance a company’s reputation and potentially attract more customers or investors over time, enhanced disclosure requirements themselves do not directly increase revenue. Final Assessment: Enhanced water pollution disclosure requirements will most likely result in an increase in a company’s operating expenditures.

Answer 19

Answer A: Improved data availability. Explanation: The growth of the ESG market has been significantly driven by improved data availability, which has: Enabled investors to better assess and compare ESG risks and opportunities across companies and industries. Increased transparency, allowing for more robust ESG integration into investment strategies. Supported the development of ESG ratings, indices, and analytical tools, making ESG investing more accessible and actionable for a wide range of investors. In contrast: The ability for even small asset owners to integrate ESG: While this has played a role, it is largely a result of improved data availability and tools, rather than a primary driver of growth. A willingness of consultants and advisors to provide options: This is helpful but secondary to the foundational improvements in data, which make such options feasible and credible.

Answer 20

Answer C: The use of mathematical modeling and data analysis to examine large datasets. Explanation: Quantitative ESG analysis involves applying mathematical modeling, statistical techniques, and data analysis to large ESG datasets. It is used to: Identify patterns, correlations, and trends in ESG factors. Assess risks and opportunities in a measurable and comparable way. Provide objective metrics, such as carbon emissions intensity, gender diversity percentages, or ESG scores. In contrast: Observations and conclusions in the form of words rather than numbers: This characterizes qualitative ESG analysis, which focuses on narratives, policies, and subjective assessments. Impartiality and non-judgment, as it involves numbers rather than words: While quantitative analysis focuses on numbers, it can still involve assumptions, biases in data selection, or modeling choices, so it is not inherently impartial. Final Assessment: Quantitative ESG analysis is best characterized by the use of mathematical modeling and data analysis to examine large datasets.

Answer 21

Answer C: Delivery of corporate purpose and culture through effective oversight. Explanation: High-quality engagement dialogues between investors and companies aim to: Improve corporate governance and accountability. Align the company’s actions with its stated purpose, culture, and long-term strategy. Encourage better ESG practices by providing oversight and guidance on material issues. In this context, such dialogues are most likely to contribute to the delivery of corporate purpose and culture through effective oversight, as they enhance the alignment between corporate behavior and stakeholder expectations. In contrast: Changed investor decision-making: While engagement may influence investors’ decisions, the primary goal of engagement is to improve corporate practices rather than directly alter investor actions. Efficient capital allocation by investors: Engagement dialogues do not directly drive capital allocation; instead, they aim to improve corporate performance, which may indirectly impact investment decisions over time. Final Assessment: High-quality engagement dialogues are most likely to result in the delivery of corporate purpose and culture through effective oversight.

Answer 22

Answer B: Growth opportunities. Explanation: Equity investors are primarily focused on growth opportunities because their returns are tied to the company's ability to generate profits and increase its value over time. ESG factors that influence a company's long-term growth potential, such as innovation in sustainable products, market expansion, or strong governance practices, are particularly important to equity investors. In contrast: The risk of default: This is of greater concern to fixed-income investors, as it directly impacts the company's ability to meet its debt obligations. Balance sheet strength: While this is important to both equity and fixed-income investors, it is typically more critical for fixed-income investors, as it reflects the company's ability to remain solvent and service its debt. Final Assessment: Equity investors most likely place greater emphasis on ESG factors that affect growth opportunities.

Answer 23

Answer A: Reducing deforestation. Explanation: Climate change mitigation refers to actions aimed at reducing or preventing the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the atmosphere, thereby addressing the root causes of climate change. Reducing deforestation is an example of mitigation because: Forests act as carbon sinks, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Preventing deforestation helps reduce GHG emissions caused by tree loss and land-use changes. In contrast: Building flood defenses: This is an example of climate change adaptation, as it involves preparing for and reducing the impacts of climate change (e.g., flooding). Developing drought-resistant crops: This is also an example of adaptation, as it focuses on managing the consequences of climate change, such as increased droughts. Final Assessment: Reducing deforestation is an example of climate change mitigation.

Answer 24

Answer B: The 2010 UK Stewardship Code. Explanation: The 2010 UK Stewardship Code provides guidelines for institutional investors on how to engage with companies to protect and enhance shareholder value. It outlines principles for: Active ownership and engagement with investee companies. When and how investors should escalate their activities if concerns about a company's practices or governance arise. Promoting transparency and accountability in stewardship practices. In contrast: The Paris Agreement: This is a global treaty focused on addressing climate change by limiting global temperature rise. It does not provide guidance on investor engagement or stewardship. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): These are a set of global goals aimed at addressing broad sustainability challenges, but they do not specifically address when and how investors should escalate activities to protect shareholder value. Final Assessment: The 2010 UK Stewardship Code promotes guidelines on when and how investors should escalate their activities to protect and enhance shareholder value.

Answer 25

Answer C: Both systematic and discretionary. Explanation: ESG integration is appropriate for both systematic and discretionary investment strategies, as it can be applied in different ways depending on the investment approach: Systematic strategies: ESG factors can be incorporated into quantitative models to adjust portfolio construction, factor weightings, or risk management. Examples include using ESG scores, carbon intensity metrics, or controversy indicators as part of a rules-based strategy. Discretionary strategies: Portfolio managers can use ESG analysis to inform their active decision-making and evaluate risks and opportunities on a case-by-case basis. This approach often involves qualitative assessments, such as evaluating a company’s governance practices or environmental impacts. Final Assessment: ESG integration is appropriate for both systematic and discretionary investment strategies.

Answer 26

Answer B: May provide investment opportunities if recognized early. Explanation: Material social risks: Refer to social factors that can significantly impact a company’s financial performance, such as labor practices, employee relations, community impact, or customer welfare. If these risks are identified and managed early, they can create investment opportunities, such as gaining a competitive advantage, improving stakeholder trust, or capitalizing on trends like consumer demand for ethically sourced products. Other options explained: “Have similar impacts across different sectors”: This is incorrect because material social risks vary significantly by sector. For example, supply chain labor practices are more critical in the retail and manufacturing industries, while data privacy is more relevant in the technology sector. “Are not considered in a financial materiality assessment”: This is incorrect because material social risks are assessed if they have a direct or indirect impact on a company’s financial performance. Final Assessment: Material social risks may provide investment opportunities if recognized early.

Answer 27

Answer B: Start with an issue and seek to engage with all the companies affected by that issue. Explanation: Passive investors, such as those managing index-tracking funds, cannot sell the shares of companies included in their benchmark index as a form of expressing disapproval. Instead, they often adopt an issue-based engagement style, where they: Start with a specific issue (e.g., climate change, human rights, or governance practices). Seek to engage with all companies affected by that issue, using their influence to drive changes across a broad range of companies. In contrast: "Do not have an engagement style": This is incorrect, as passive investors often actively engage with companies on ESG issues to protect long-term value. "Start with the company and its business issues and develop a tailored engagement approach": This approach is more typical of active investors, who have the flexibility to focus on specific companies and tailor their engagement strategies accordingly. Final Assessment: Passive investors start with an issue and seek to engage with all the companies affected by that issue.

Answer 28

Answer C: Global Real Estate Standards Board (GRESB) ESG benchmark. Explanation: The Global Real Estate Standards Board (GRESB) ESG benchmark is specifically designed for assessing ESG performance in real assets, including infrastructure and real estate. It provides a standardized framework to evaluate sustainability and governance practices in infrastructure projects and portfolios, making it the most appropriate choice for infrastructure investments. In contrast: MSCI benchmark: MSCI provides ESG benchmarks and ratings for a wide range of asset classes, but it is not specifically tailored to infrastructure investments. Sustainalytics benchmark: Sustainalytics focuses on ESG risk ratings and research across companies and sectors but does not specialize in infrastructure-focused benchmarks. Final Assessment: The GRESB ESG benchmark is most appropriate for investments in infrastructure.

Answer 29

Answer C: Both ESG investment beliefs and expected investment returns. Explanation: Portfolio guidelines are designed to provide a framework for managing investments in alignment with the portfolio's objectives. These guidelines typically include: ESG investment beliefs: Reflect the investor’s philosophy and approach to incorporating environmental, social, and governance factors into the investment process. May outline specific ESG criteria, restrictions (e.g., exclusion of certain industries), or sustainability goals that guide portfolio construction. Expected investment returns: Define the financial targets or benchmarks the portfolio aims to achieve. Include considerations such as risk tolerance, time horizon, and performance metrics. By addressing both ESG investment beliefs and expected investment returns, portfolio guidelines ensure a balance between financial objectives and sustainability principles. Final Assessment: Portfolio guidelines most likely focus on both ESG investment beliefs and expected investment returns.

Answer 30

Answer B: Stock price performance is positively correlated with good sustainability practices. Explanation: "Good ESG standards tend to increase the company's cost of capital": This is incorrect. Good ESG standards typically reduce a company's cost of capital because companies with strong ESG practices are often viewed as less risky by investors. Lower perceived risk leads to lower borrowing costs and equity capital costs. "Stock price performance is positively correlated with good sustainability practices": This is correct. Numerous studies have shown that companies with strong ESG practices tend to outperform over the long term. Improved sustainability practices can enhance reputation, reduce regulatory risks, and attract ESG-focused investors, all of which contribute to stronger stock price performance. "Good ESG practices are negatively correlated with corporate operational performance": This is incorrect. In fact, good ESG practices are often positively correlated with operational performance. Companies with strong ESG practices often experience benefits like improved efficiency, better risk management, and stronger stakeholder relationships, leading to better operational outcomes. Final Assessment: Stock price performance is positively correlated with good sustainability practices.

Answer 31

Answer B: Clarifying the client's ESG investment beliefs. Explanation: When drafting a client's investment mandate, the initial step is to understand the client's overall goals, values, and preferences—particularly their ESG investment beliefs, if ESG integration is part of the mandate. This step provides the foundation for creating an investment strategy that aligns with the client's values and financial objectives. Once the ESG beliefs are clarified, the next steps typically involve: Setting a strategic asset allocation: This aligns the portfolio with the client's risk tolerance, return expectations, and ESG preferences. Defining how ESG performance will be measured: This is a later step, as it requires established guidelines and objectives to determine appropriate metrics and benchmarks. Final Assessment: Clarifying the client's ESG investment beliefs is the most likely initial step when drafting a client's investment mandate.

Answer 32

Answer A: Community engagement. Explanation: Community engagement: This is classified as a social factor because it relates to how a real estate project interacts with and supports the local community. Examples include fostering local economic development, addressing community concerns, or creating shared social benefits. Use of renewable energy: This is classified as an environmental factor because it pertains to reducing the environmental impact of real estate operations through sustainable energy sources. Proximity to environmental hazards: This is also an environmental factor because it concerns the physical risks posed by environmental conditions, such as flooding or pollution, which could impact the value or safety of the property. Final Assessment: Community engagement is classified as a social factor when considering material ESG factors in real estate.

Answer 33

Answer A: Complying with minimum, EU-specified social and governance safeguards. Explanation: The EU Taxonomy is a classification system designed to determine whether an economic activity is environmentally sustainable. For an activity to qualify, it must meet specific criteria, which include: Complying with minimum social and governance safeguards: This is a key requirement under the EU Taxonomy. Activities must respect international social and governance standards, such as those outlined in the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Other options explained: "A principles-based Foundation Framework, which is applicable to all EU member states": This is not part of the EU Taxonomy. The Taxonomy is not principles-based but rather includes detailed technical screening criteria for specific activities. "The Plus Standard, with metrics and thresholds to further qualify and benchmark eligible green activities and investments": This does not exist as part of the EU Taxonomy framework. Final Assessment: Complying with minimum, EU-specified social and governance safeguards is part of the EU Taxonomy for an economic activity to be considered environmentally sustainable.

Answer 34

Answer B: Senior-level commitment and accountability mechanisms for responsible investment implementation must be in place. Explanation: The Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) require signatories to meet certain minimum standards to demonstrate their commitment to responsible investment. One of the minimum requirements is that: Senior-level commitment and accountability mechanisms must be in place for implementing responsible investment practices. This ensures that the firm's leadership is actively involved in driving ESG integration and that there is accountability for progress. Other options explained: "Implementation of a responsible investment policy must be monitored by external parties": While external monitoring may enhance transparency, it is not a minimum requirement for PRI signatories. "The investment policy that covers the firm’s responsible investment approach must apply to all assets under management": PRI encourages signatories to apply responsible investment practices broadly, but it is not a strict minimum requirement for all assets under management. Final Assessment: Senior-level commitment and accountability mechanisms for responsible investment implementation must be in place is a minimum requirement for PRI signatories.

Answer 35

Answer C: Can be either data-based or ratings-based. Explanation: ESG indices are constructed using ESG scores, which can be derived from either data-based or ratings-based methodologies: Data-based: Uses raw ESG data points (e.g., carbon emissions, water usage) to calculate scores for weighting the index components. Ratings-based: Uses ESG ratings assigned by providers (e.g., MSCI, Sustainalytics) based on a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis. These ratings represent an overall assessment of a company’s ESG performance. Other options explained: "Must be data-based only": Incorrect. ESG indices are not strictly limited to raw data. "Must be ratings-based only": Incorrect. While some indices use ratings, others rely on data-based methodologies or a combination of both. Final Assessment: ESG scores used for weightings tilts can be either data-based or ratings-based.

Answer 36

Answer C: Faith-based investing. Explanation: Negative screening is an investment approach that excludes certain companies, industries, or sectors from a portfolio based on specific ethical, moral, or religious criteria. It is most commonly associated with faith-based investing, which often involves avoiding investments in businesses that conflict with religious values (e.g., alcohol, gambling, tobacco, or weapons). Other options explained: Impact investing: Focuses on generating measurable social and environmental impact alongside financial returns. It does not typically rely on negative screening; instead, it proactively seeks investments that align with specific impact goals. Thematic investing: Centers on investing in companies or sectors related to a specific theme (e.g., renewable energy, clean water). It also does not rely on negative screening but rather seeks to include investments aligned with the chosen theme. Final Assessment: Faith-based investing often uses negative screening to align investments with religious or ethical principles.

Answer 37

Answer B: Changing demographics and urbanization. Explanation: Social megatrends are large-scale, transformative societal changes that shape the future of economies, industries, and societies. Among the options provided: Changing demographics and urbanization: These are widely recognized as key social megatrends: Changing demographics: Includes aging populations, declining birth rates, and generational shifts in preferences and behaviors. Urbanization: Refers to the global trend of increasing population concentration in urban areas, leading to shifts in infrastructure, housing, and social dynamics. Urbanization and mass migration: While urbanization is a social megatrend, mass migration is typically considered a consequence of other factors (e.g., climate change, conflicts) rather than a standalone megatrend. Changing demographics and mass migration: Mass migration is not typically classified as a social megatrend on the same level as changing demographics or urbanization. Final Assessment: Changing demographics and urbanization are social megatrends.

Answer 38

Answer A: Loss aversion. Explanation: The risk mindset of a general insurer is heavily influenced by the nature of its business, primarily focused on managing liabilities and ensuring solvency. This leads to a loss-averse approach to investments, as insurers prioritize capital preservation and the ability to meet claims. ESG strategies must align with this cautious and risk-averse mindset. Other options explained: High tolerance for illiquidity: General insurers typically require liquidity to meet short-term claim obligations. They are less likely to tolerate illiquid investments compared to long-term investors like pension funds. High tolerance for short-term underperformance: General insurers are not typically tolerant of short-term underperformance, as their investment horizon is often aligned with short- to medium-term liability obligations. They focus on stable, predictable returns to preserve solvency. Final Assessment: The risk mindset of a general insurer is most likely characterized by loss aversion.

Answer 39

Answer C: Social bonds. Explanation: Bonds that fund projects providing access to essential services such as healthcare, education, affordable housing, or water and sanitation are classified as social bonds. These bonds are designed to generate positive social outcomes and are aligned with the International Capital Market Association (ICMA) Social Bond Principles. Other options explained: Blue bonds: These are bonds specifically issued to fund projects related to marine and ocean conservation, such as sustainable fisheries or protection of coral reefs. Green bonds: These are bonds used to finance environmentally friendly projects, such as renewable energy, energy efficiency, or pollution prevention. They focus on environmental, not social, objectives. Final Assessment: Bonds funding projects that provide access to essential services are best described as social bonds.

Answer 40

Answer C: ESG performance is not adequately reflected in stock prices. Explanation: The low correlation between ESG ratings from different providers arises primarily from differences in methodologies, frameworks, and subjective interpretations of ESG factors. The following points explain why the correct answer is "ESG performance is not adequately reflected in stock prices": The way ESG ratings are produced is evolving: ESG rating providers use different methodologies, frameworks, and weightings for various ESG factors. This evolving and diverse approach directly contributes to discrepancies in ratings between providers. ESG factor identification is up to the rating providers: Rating providers determine which ESG factors they consider material, and these choices vary significantly. This subjectivity is a key reason for low correlation between ESG ratings. ESG performance is not adequately reflected in stock prices: This statement is least likely to explain low correlation between ESG ratings because stock prices are not directly linked to the way ESG ratings are calculated. Instead, the issue lies in the differing methodologies and subjective interpretations of ESG factors by rating providers. Final Assessment: The least likely reason for low correlation between ESG ratings is: "ESG performance is not adequately reflected in stock prices."

Answer 41

Answer B: Building flood defenses. Explanation: A climate adaptation strategy focuses on adjusting to the impacts of climate change and reducing vulnerability to its effects. Building flood defenses is an adaptation strategy because it helps communities prepare for and cope with the consequences of rising sea levels or extreme weather events caused by climate change. Other options explained: Deploying solar energy: This is a climate mitigation strategy because it reduces greenhouse gas emissions by replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy, helping to limit the extent of climate change. Expanding the use of electric vehicles: This is also a climate mitigation strategy, as it reduces emissions by replacing traditional internal combustion engine vehicles with lower-emission alternatives. Final Assessment: Building flood defenses best characterizes a climate adaptation strategy.

Answer 42

Answer C: Short-term underperformance. Explanation: According to the Brunel Asset Management Accord, when evaluating an asset manager against an ESG investment mandate, short-term underperformance is considered of limited significance. This is because ESG investing typically follows a long-term perspective, and short-term fluctuations in performance are not necessarily indicative of the manager's ability to deliver on ESG objectives over time. Other options explained: Loss of key personnel: This is a significant concern because losing key members of the investment team could disrupt the execution of the ESG mandate, affect continuity, and compromise the investment strategy. Change in investment style: This is also a significant concern because a shift in investment style could indicate misalignment with the original ESG mandate and objectives, leading to potential issues in meeting client expectations. Final Assessment: Short-term underperformance is most likely of limited significance in evaluating an asset manager against an ESG investment mandate.

Answer 43

Answer C: Single-tier with a majority of executive directors. Explanation: The boards of Japanese companies are typically structured as single-tier boards (one board of directors), and they often have a majority of executive directors. This reflects Japan's traditional corporate governance model, which emphasizes internal management control and decision-making. Other options explained: Two-tier: This structure is common in countries like Germany, where there is a supervisory board (non-executive directors) and a management board (executive directors). Japanese companies do not follow this model. Single-tier with a combined CEO and chair: While Japanese companies often have a combined CEO and chair, the defining characteristic of their boards is the majority of executive directors, rather than this specific leadership combination. Final Assessment: The boards of Japanese companies

Answer 44

Answer B: Decrease projected cash flows Explanation: When a company is required to install and maintain pollution filters due to new environmental regulations, this will increase the company's operating costs (capital expenditures and/or maintenance expenses). These increased costs will reduce the company’s projected cash flows, which are a key component of a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. Why Decrease Projected Cash Flows Is Correct: Impact on Operating Expenses: The cost of installing and maintaining pollution filters will increase the company's expenses, directly reducing its projected free cash flows available to investors. DCF Model Sensitivity: A DCF model calculates the present value of future cash flows. Any reduction in projected cash flows due to higher costs will lower the overall valuation of the company. Why the Other Options Are Incorrect: Decrease the discount rate: The discount rate reflects the riskiness of the company’s cash flows or the cost of capital. New environmental regulations are unlikely to reduce risk; in fact, they may increase it. Therefore, decreasing the discount rate would not be appropriate. Increase the terminal growth rate: The terminal growth rate reflects the company’s long-term growth prospects. New regulations that increase costs are more likely to constrain growth, not enhance it. Increasing the terminal growth rate would overstate the company’s valuation. Conclusion: The best way for an analyst to reflect the impact of new environmental regulations in a DCF analysis is to decrease the projected cash flows, as these regulations will increase costs and reduce the company’s profitability.

Answer 45

Answer C: Statement 3 Explanation: Statement 1: There is one definition of materiality agreed upon by the various sustainability reporting standards setters. Incorrect. There is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of materiality among sustainability reporting standards setters. Different frameworks (such as SASB, GRI, and TCFD) define materiality differently, depending on whether the focus is on financial impact, stakeholder impact, or double materiality. Statement 2: Materiality is static, it remains constant in times of changes in the market, policies, and consumer attitudes. Incorrect. Materiality is not static; it evolves with changes in market conditions, regulatory policies, consumer attitudes, and societal expectations. What is considered material today may not be material tomorrow, and vice versa. Statement 3: The “Materiality Map” by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) is an interactive proprietary tool that compares disclosures across different industries and sectors. Correct. The SASB Materiality Map is a widely recognized interactive tool that identifies and compares the material ESG issues across industries and sectors. It helps companies and investors determine which sustainability factors are likely to be financially material for a given industry.

Answer 46

Answer C: Nominations committee. Explanation: Most corporate governance codes recommend or require the establishment of specific board committees to ensure good governance, transparency, and accountability. Among the listed options, the nominations committee is the one most commonly required, as it is critical for overseeing the appointment of directors and ensuring the board composition is suitable for the company’s needs. Other options explained: Risk committee: While a risk committee is important for companies in certain industries (e.g., financial services), it is not universally required by corporate governance codes. In many cases, risk oversight responsibilities are integrated into the audit committee. Investment committee: An investment committee is less common and typically relevant for asset management firms or companies heavily involved in investment decisions. It is not a standard requirement in corporate governance codes. Final Assessment: Corporate governance codes usually require a nominations committee.

Answer 47

Answer A: Exclusion of an industrial sector such as tobacco. Explanation: Exclusion strategies are the easiest to analyze in terms of their impact on portfolio performance because they involve a clear and measurable action: removing a specific sector or group of companies (e.g., tobacco) from the investment universe. Analysts can directly compare the performance of the portfolio with and without the excluded sector by analyzing historical data and sector-level risk-return characteristics. Other options explained: Voting for shareholder proposals relating to climate change: The impact of voting is indirect and long-term because it aims to influence corporate behavior rather than immediately affecting financial performance. Measuring the financial effect of voting is complex and requires tracking how the company responds to the proposal and its subsequent performance. Active engagement on issues of health and safety and workers' rights: Engagement involves ongoing dialogue with companies, and its impact on portfolio performance is both indirect and difficult to quantify. The results often materialize over an extended period, making it harder to analyze in a straightforward manner. Final Assessment: The exclusion of an industrial sector such as tobacco is the easiest ESG activity to analyze in terms of its impact on a portfolio's performance.

Answer 48

Answer A: Infrastructure. Explanation: Fund managers in infrastructure investments are most likely to be actively involved in governance because infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, airports, energy facilities) are often long-term, capital-intensive projects that require active oversight. These investments typically involve private ownership or partnerships where fund managers can engage directly with management and influence operational and governance decisions. Other options explained: Index tracking: Index-tracking funds (e.g., ETFs) are passive investments, and fund managers generally have limited involvement in governance. Their primary role is to replicate the performance of an index, although they may engage in proxy voting as a secondary activity. Active fixed income: While active fixed-income managers may engage with issuers on governance issues, their influence is typically limited compared to equity or infrastructure investors. Fixed-income investors are primarily focused on creditworthiness and risk, and they do not usually have direct ownership stakes that allow for active governance involvement. Final Assessment: The asset class most likely to have fund managers actively involved in governance is infrastructure.

Answer 49

Answer C: Impact assumptions regarding expected return, volatility, and correlations. Explanation: When applying ESG analysis to the mean-variance optimization model, ESG issues can directly influence the inputs to the model, which include: Expected return: Companies with strong ESG practices may be perceived as having lower risk and/or better long-term performance potential, affecting return expectations. Volatility: ESG risks (e.g., environmental fines or reputational damage) may increase or decrease a company’s risk profile, impacting its volatility. Correlations: Incorporating ESG factors could change how different assets or asset classes correlate with one another, altering portfolio diversification benefits. Other options explained: Require a change to baseline factor risk assumptions: ESG analysis doesn't typically require changes to the baseline risk factors used in traditional factor models, though it might add new ESG-specific factors. This is more relevant to multi-factor modeling rather than mean-variance optimization. Potentially impact inflation and alter liability assumptions: While ESG issues like climate change might influence macroeconomic factors such as inflation, this is not directly tied to mean-variance optimization, which focuses on asset-level inputs like return, volatility, and correlations. Final Assessment: When applying ESG analysis to the mean-variance optimization model, ESG issues could impact assumptions regarding expected return, volatility, and correlations.

Answer 50

Answer C: Many third-party data providers describe ESG attributes as an uncorrelated, statistically independent factor. Explanation: ESG performance attribution at the portfolio level is challenging because ESG data is often treated as an independent factor that is not directly correlated with traditional financial metrics (e.g., risk, return, or other factors like value or growth). This makes it difficult to integrate ESG into standard performance attribution models, which typically rely on quantifiable and correlated factors to explain a portfolio's returns. Other options explained: There is a lack of third-party data providers: Incorrect. While there are challenges with ESG data consistency and quality, there is no shortage of third-party ESG data providers (e.g., MSCI, Sustainalytics, Refinitiv). The issue lies more in the variability of methodologies used by these providers than in their availability. There is a size bias in ESG ratings in favor of large companies: Incorrect. While size bias in ESG ratings is a known issue (larger companies often have better ESG ratings due to more resources for disclosure), this issue alone does not directly explain why ESG performance attribution is difficult at the portfolio level. Final Assessment: Describing ESG performance attribution at a portfolio level is difficult because many third-party data providers describe ESG attributes as an uncorrelated, statistically independent factor.

Answer 51

Answer A: France. Explanation: In France, it is common for companies to have a combined CEO and chair position, particularly under the traditional monistic (single-tier) board structure. French corporate governance allows for a Président-Directeur Général (PDG), where one individual serves as both the CEO and the chair of the board. This structure is prevalent, although some French companies now separate these roles, especially under international pressure for better governance practices. Other options explained: Germany: Germany typically uses a two-tier board structure with clear separation of roles: The management board (Vorstand) is responsible for running the company. The supervisory board (Aufsichtsrat) oversees the management board. Consequently, the CEO and chair positions cannot be combined in Germany. The United Kingdom: In the UK, corporate governance codes strongly recommend the separation of the CEO and chair roles to ensure independent oversight and avoid conflicts of interest. While there are exceptions, combining these roles is uncommon and often criticized. Final Assessment: A combined CEO and chair position is most likely to be found on a board in France.

Answer 52

Answer B: Expressing views through voting on resolutions. Explanation: Shareholder engagement refers to the actions taken by investors to influence the governance, policies, or practices of the companies they invest in. Voting on resolutions is a direct form of engagement, as it allows institutional investors to express their views on issues like executive compensation, board composition, or environmental and social policies. This is a key mechanism for influencing corporate behavior. Other options explained: Making recommendations to policymakers: This is not an example of shareholder engagement with companies. It is an advocacy activity aimed at influencing public policy rather than corporate governance. Using ESG criteria to identify investment opportunities: This is part of ESG integration or screening, not shareholder engagement. It involves selecting investments based on ESG performance but does not involve direct interaction with companies. Final Assessment: The action most likely to be an example of shareholder engagement is expressing views through voting on resolutions.

Answer 53

Answer C: It enables humans to derive ecosystem services. Explanation: Natural capital refers to the world's stock of natural resources—such as soil, water, air, plants, and animals—that provide ecosystem services essential for human well-being. Ecosystem services include things like clean water, fertile soil for agriculture, carbon sequestration by forests, and pollination by bees, which humans depend on for survival and economic activity. Other options explained: It is the world’s stocks of real assets: Incorrect. Real assets typically refer to tangible financial investments like property, machinery, or infrastructure, not natural resources. Natural capital specifically relates to environmental resources. It includes water but excludes soil and air: Incorrect. Natural capital includes water, soil, air, and all other natural resources. Excluding soil or air would be an incomplete definition. Final Assessment: Natural capital is best described as “It enables humans to derive ecosystem services.”

Answer 54

Answer C: Both Factor 1 and Factor 2. Explanation: Active private engagement is most effective when it is well-structured and tailored to the specific situation of the target company. Both Factor 1 and Factor 2 are critical success factors for achieving meaningful outcomes through engagement: Factor 1: The objectives of the engagement are specific and targeted to enable clarity around delivery. Specific, clear, and measurable objectives are essential for effective engagement. They help define what the engagement aims to achieve and provide a framework for assessing progress and success. This ensures that the company understands the expectations and can act accordingly. Factor 2: The engagement approach is bespoke to the target company. A one-size-fits-all approach is less likely to succeed because companies have unique circumstances, governance structures, and challenges. Tailoring the engagement approach to the specific context of the company increases the likelihood of achieving the desired impact. Final Assessment: Both Factor 1 and Factor 2 are essential for successful active private engagement, as they ensure clarity of objectives and a customized approach.

Answer 55

Answer A: Risk discount on the cost of capital. Explanation: Negative corporate governance characteristics, such as poor board oversight, lack of transparency, or conflicts of interest, are typically reflected in investment models by adjusting the cost of capital. Poor governance increases the perceived risk of investing in a company, which translates into a higher cost of equity or debt. This adjustment reflects the additional risk premium required by investors to compensate for governance-related risks. Other options explained: Proxy vote for low quality of management: Incorrect. Proxy voting is a mechanism for shareholders to express their views on governance issues, but it is not part of how negative governance characteristics are reflected in investment models. Instead, voting is a tool for shareholder engagement. Threshold assessment prior to investment: Incorrect. While some investors may use threshold assessments (e.g., avoiding companies with poor governance), this is more related to screening and does not directly reflect how governance issues are incorporated into the financial model or valuation. Final Assessment: Negative corporate governance characteristics are reflected in investment models through a risk discount on the cost of capital.

Answer 56

Answer C: Revenue projections. Explanation: Climate change policy risk, especially for a company with carbon-intensive operations, is most likely to affect future revenue projections. For example, stricter regulations, carbon taxes, or shifts in consumer preferences could reduce demand for the company’s products, increase operating costs, or make its operations less competitive. These factors would directly lower the company's future revenue and profitability, which should be reflected in its discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. Other options explained: Discount rate: Incorrect. The discount rate reflects the overall risk and cost of capital for the company. While climate risk may increase the discount rate indirectly (through an increased cost of capital), the direct impact of climate policy risk is more appropriately reflected in revenue or cash flow forecasts. Cost of capital: Incorrect. The cost of capital could rise due to perceived higher risks associated with climate policy, but this is not the primary way to incorporate specific climate policy risks. The direct effect is on the company’s operations, revenue, and cash flows. Final Assessment: Climate change policy risk for a carbon-intensive company should be incorporated into the DCF analysis by lowering its revenue projections.

Answer 57

Answer C: Both relative and absolute basis screening. Explanation: Both relative basis screening and absolute basis screening are criticized for not considering stewardship and engagement activities because these methodologies focus primarily on excluding or including investments based on criteria, rather than actively working to improve company practices through engagement or stewardship. Here's how each is limited: Relative basis screening: This involves comparing companies to their peers (e.g., selecting companies that rank higher on ESG metrics within a sector). While it considers relative ESG performance, it does not account for efforts to engage with companies to improve their practices. Absolute basis screening: This involves applying fixed criteria (e.g., excluding companies involved in certain industries like tobacco or fossil fuels). This approach excludes companies outright, without considering the potential for improving their ESG performance through engagement or stewardship. Why both are criticized: Neither screening methodology incorporates active shareholder engagement, which aims to influence and improve company behavior over time. By excluding companies or focusing only on comparisons, these methods miss the opportunity to contribute to positive change through dialogue, voting, or other stewardship activities. Final Assessment: Both relative and absolute basis screening are criticized for not considering stewardship and engagement activities.

Answer 58

Answer B: Globalization. Explanation: Reshoring refers to the process of bringing manufacturing and supply chain operations back to a company's home country after previously offshoring them to other countries. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains, prompting many companies and governments to consider reshoring as a way to improve resilience and reduce dependency on foreign suppliers. Reshoring directly counteracts globalization, which emphasizes interconnected global supply chains and cross-border trade. By bringing operations back to domestic markets, reshoring reduces reliance on international trade and global networks, thereby opposing one of the key tenets of globalization. Other options explained: Urbanization: Incorrect. Reshoring does not directly counteract urbanization, which refers to the increasing concentration of populations in cities. In fact, reshoring can sometimes support urbanization by creating jobs in industrial or manufacturing hubs, which are often located in or near urban areas. Digital disruption: Incorrect. Reshoring is not directly related to digital disruption, which involves technological advancements that reshape industries. In fact, digital tools (e.g., automation and AI) often support reshoring by reducing labor costs and making domestic production more competitive. Final Assessment: Reshoring as a result of the COVID-19 experience is most likely to counteract globalization.

Answer 59

Answer C: Not supported by global consensus. Explanation: Idiosyncratic exclusions refer to exclusions that are specific to the preferences or values of individual investors or groups, rather than being broadly agreed upon or supported by global standards. These exclusions often reflect personal, cultural, or organizational values and may not align with widely accepted norms or conventions. 特异性排除指的是那些基于个人投资者或特定群体偏好或价值观的排除条款，而非普遍认可或符合全球标准的排除条款。此类排除往往反映了个人、文化或组织层面的价值观，可能与广泛接受的规范或惯例不一致。 Other options explained: Specific to religious investors: Incorrect. While religious investors may apply idiosyncratic exclusions (e.g., excluding companies involved in alcohol or gambling), idiosyncratic exclusions are not limited to religious investors. They can reflect any investor's unique values or preferences. Based upon universal conventions: Incorrect. Universal conventions, such as those established by the United Nations or other global bodies, underpin widely accepted exclusions (e.g., excluding companies involved in human rights violations). Idiosyncratic exclusions, however, are subjective and do not rely on universal conventions. Final Assessment: Idiosyncratic exclusions are not supported by global consensus.

Answer 60

Answer C: Industry and sector bias. Explanation: The statement that ESG rating providers oversimplify industry weighting and company alignment best describes industry and sector bias. This bias occurs when ESG ratings fail to adequately account for the unique challenges and opportunities faced by companies within specific industries or sectors. For example, companies in carbon-intensive industries like energy may automatically receive lower ESG ratings compared to companies in less carbon-intensive sectors, even if the former are leaders in their sector in terms of sustainability initiatives. Other options explained: Geographical bias: Incorrect. Geographical bias in ESG ratings occurs when companies in certain regions or countries are rated higher or lower due to varying disclosure standards or regional expectations. This is not related to industry weighting or company alignment. Company size bias: Incorrect. Company size bias refers to the tendency for larger companies to receive higher ESG ratings because they have more resources to dedicate to ESG reporting and initiatives. This does not specifically involve oversimplifying industry weighting. Final Assessment: ESG rating providers oversimplifying industry weighting and company alignment best describes industry and sector bias.

Answer 61

Answer B: The Paris Agreement. Explanation: The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, sets a target for limiting global temperature increases. Specifically, it aims to: Limit global warming to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5°C, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change. This makes the Paris Agreement the key international framework for global temperature targets. Other options explained: The Kyoto Protocol: Incorrect. The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997, set binding emission reduction targets for developed countries but did not establish a specific global temperature target. The EU taxonomy for sustainable activities: Incorrect. The EU taxonomy is a classification system that defines environmentally sustainable economic activities. While it supports climate goals, it does not set a specific global temperature target. Final Assessment: The Paris Agreement is the framework that sets a target for global temperature increase.

Answer 62

Answer C: Pre-emption rights. Explanation: Pre-emption rights are mechanisms that protect minority shareholders by giving them the right to maintain their proportional ownership when new shares are issued. This ensures that existing shareholders can purchase additional shares before they are offered to new investors, preventing dilution of their ownership and voting power. Other options explained: Two-tier boards: Incorrect. Two-tier board structures, common in some European countries (e.g., Germany), separate the management board from the supervisory board. While this can improve governance and oversight, it does not specifically focus on protecting minority shareholders. Dual-class shares: Incorrect. Dual-class share structures often disadvantage minority shareholders because they grant different voting rights to different classes of shares. For instance, founders or insiders may hold shares with superior voting rights, reducing the influence of ordinary shareholders. Final Assessment: Pre-emption rights are the mechanism most likely to protect minority shareholders.

Answer 63

Answer B: Applied differently between countries. Explanation: Standards regarding the relationship between board tenure and independence are applied differently between countries because governance frameworks and regulations vary across jurisdictions. While some countries set specific limits on board tenure to maintain independence, others rely on principles-based approaches or have no clear guidelines. Other options explained: Clearly defined in the US: Incorrect. In the United States, there is no universal standard for how board tenure affects independence. Independence is determined based on factors like lack of material relationships with the company, rather than tenure alone. Consistent among European Union members: Incorrect. Although EU member states follow general governance principles set by the EU (e.g., through the Shareholder Rights Directive), the specific rules regarding board tenure and independence vary significantly between countries, such as France, Germany, and the UK. Final Assessment: Standards determining the relationship between board tenure and independence are applied differently between countries.

Answer 64

Answer C: A higher estimate of intrinsic value. Explanation: In a Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) analysis, the intrinsic value of a company is calculated by discounting its future cash flows to present value using a discount rate. The discount rate reflects the company's cost of capital or the required rate of return. A lower discount rate reduces the discounting effect on future cash flows, making them worth more in present value terms. This results in a higher estimate of intrinsic value for the company. Example: If the discount rate decreases, future cash flows are discounted less steeply, increasing their contribution to the total present value. Conversely, a higher discount rate would reduce the present value of future cash flows, leading to a lower intrinsic value. Final Assessment: A lower discount rate applied to a company's DCF analysis will lead to a higher estimate of intrinsic value.

Answer 65

Answer B: Consider ESG factors that are not necessarily financially material. Explanation: Exclusionary ESG investing strategies involve removing investments in companies or sectors that do not align with the investor's values or ethical considerations. This approach often prioritizes values-based criteria, such as avoiding industries like tobacco, firearms, or fossil fuels, regardless of whether the exclusion is financially material to investment performance. Other options explained: Exclude ideological criteria when selecting ESG factors: Incorrect. Exclusionary ESG strategies are often driven by ideological or ethical criteria, such as religious beliefs or personal values. These criteria typically play a central role in exclusionary strategies. Focus exclusively on ESG factors that are material in terms of likelihood and impact: Incorrect. Focusing exclusively on financially material ESG factors is more aligned with integration strategies, which aim to enhance risk-adjusted returns by considering material ESG risks and opportunities. Exclusionary strategies, however, do not necessarily prioritize financial materiality. Final Assessment: When applying an exclusionary ESG investing strategy, investors are most likely to consider ESG factors that are not necessarily financially material.

Answer 66

Answer C: Number of policy adoptions and changes. Explanation: Diversity at the board level (e.g., diversity in gender, ethnicity, professional background, or perspectives) brings a wider range of ideas, experiences, and viewpoints to decision-making. This often leads to more robust discussions and a greater likelihood of adopting or modifying policies to address various stakeholder concerns, improve governance, and adapt to changing business environments. Other options explained: Level of financial risk taken: Incorrect. Diverse boards are generally associated with better risk management rather than taking on more financial risk. They tend to carefully evaluate decisions, leading to a balance between risks and opportunities. Budget for research and development: Incorrect. While diversity can contribute to innovation and strategic thinking, there is no direct correlation between board diversity and increased R&D budgets. Budget decisions depend more on company strategy and financial priorities.

Answer 67

Answer C: The way investors implement their stewardship responsibilities in line with the Principles for Responsible Investment. Explanation: Engagement is a key component of responsible investment and refers to the process by which investors actively interact with companies to influence their behavior and encourage better ESG practices. It is closely aligned with stewardship responsibilities, as outlined in the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), which emphasize the importance of active ownership and dialogue to improve long-term outcomes for both investors and society. Other options explained: Not meant to address issues relating to a company’s strategy and capital structure: Incorrect. Engagement often addresses issues related to a company's strategy, capital structure, governance, and ESG practices. For example, investors may engage with companies to advocate for improvements in capital allocation or sustainability strategies. A form of activism where an institution initiates an investment to change a company’s governance policies: Incorrect. While engagement shares some similarities with activism, it is typically more collaborative and long-term focused. Activism, in contrast, often involves taking a more aggressive approach to force changes in governance or strategy. Engagement is a broader and less confrontational approach. Final Assessment: Engagement is the way investors implement their stewardship responsibilities in line with the Principles for Responsible Investment.

Answer 68

Answer C: Positively correlated. Explanation: The ESG ratings provided by different data providers are positively correlated, but the correlation is typically moderate at best. This means there is some alignment in how providers rate companies on ESG factors, but significant differences often arise due to variations in: Methodologies: Providers use different frameworks, weightings, and interpretations of ESG factors. Data sources: Providers may rely on different data sets, self-reported metrics, or proprietary research. Focus areas: Some providers emphasize certain ESG factors (e.g., governance vs. environmental) more heavily than others. While ESG ratings are not perfectly aligned, they generally exhibit a positive correlation because they assess the same broad underlying factors. Other options explained: Negatively correlated: Incorrect. If ESG ratings were negatively correlated, it would mean that a high ESG score from one provider would correspond to a low score from another, which is not the case. Most providers agree somewhat on the general direction of a company's ESG performance. Uncorrelated: Incorrect. While there are methodological differences among providers, their ratings are not entirely uncorrelated. Companies with strong ESG performance tend to receive relatively high scores across providers, though the exact scores may differ. Final Assessment: The ESG rating correlation among different data providers is most likely positively correlated.

Answer 69

Answer C: Active public engagement. Explanation: Collaborative engagement refers to a situation where multiple investors or stakeholders work together to influence a company's behavior, typically by addressing ESG issues. Active public engagement is a form of collaborative engagement because it often involves public advocacy or campaigns where investors join forces to push for changes in a company’s practices, policies, or governance. Other options explained: Tailored letter: Incorrect. A tailored letter is a form of individual engagement, where an investor directly communicates with a company to raise specific concerns or request changes. This is not collaborative as it involves only one investor. Follow-on dialogue: Incorrect. Follow-on dialogue refers to ongoing communication between an investor and a company, typically building on previous interactions. Like the tailored letter, this is an individual engagement strategy rather than a collaborative one. Final Assessment: Active public engagement is a form of collaborative engagement, as it usually involves multiple stakeholders working together to publicly advocate for change.

Answer 70

Answer C: Both rule-based approaches and fundamental portfolio approaches. Explanation: Integrating ESG factors into the portfolio management process can involve a combination of rule-based approaches and fundamental portfolio approaches: Rule-based approaches: These involve the application of systematic rules or screens to include or exclude investments based on predefined ESG criteria. For example: Exclusionary screening (e.g., avoiding tobacco or fossil fuel companies). Positive screening (e.g., selecting companies with high ESG scores). ESG index-based investing. Fundamental portfolio approaches: These focus on in-depth qualitative and quantitative analysis of ESG factors as part of the investment decision-making process. For example: Assessing how ESG risks and opportunities impact a company's financial performance. Incorporating ESG considerations into valuations, earnings forecasts, and risk assessments. Final Assessment: Both rule-based approaches and fundamental portfolio approaches are used to integrate ESG factors into the portfolio management process.

Answer 71

Answer C: The governance structure overseen by a company's overall team. Explanation: In the context of integrating corporate governance into investment decision-making, quality of management refers to evaluating the governance structure and practices established and overseen by the company's leadership team. This includes assessing: Decision-making processes. Alignment of management's actions with shareholder interests. Corporate governance policies (e.g., transparency, accountability, executive compensation, etc.). The ability of the management team to effectively lead and execute the company's strategy while managing risks and opportunities. Other options explained: A company's culture of taking excessive risk: Incorrect. While risk management is a part of governance, "quality of management" is a broader term that encompasses the governance structure and decision-making processes, rather than focusing solely on risk-taking culture. The quality and thoughtfulness of a company's board members: Incorrect. This describes the board's governance rather than the management team's governance. The board is responsible for oversight, whereas management executes the company's strategy and oversees day-to-day operations. Final Assessment: Quality of management is best described as an assessment of the governance structure overseen by a company's overall team.

Answer 72

Answer B: Yes, the discount rate increases. Explanation: If a company is accused of having poor labor practices, this introduces additional risks to the company, such as: Reputational risk: Negative publicity can damage the company's brand and customer loyalty. Regulatory risk: Potential fines, lawsuits, or penalties can arise due to violations of labor laws. Operational risk: Labor unrest or low employee morale can disrupt operations and reduce efficiency. These risks would likely increase the company's cost of equity or cost of debt, which are components of the discount rate in a DCF model. A higher discount rate reflects the increased risk investors associate with future cash flows, leading to a lower valuation. Other options explained: No: Incorrect. Poor labor practices introduce risks that affect the discount rate and valuation, so the DCF model would change. Yes, the discount rate decreases: Incorrect. Poor labor practices increase risk, which raises the discount rate. A lower discount rate would imply reduced risk, which is not the case here. Final Assessment: Accusations of poor labor practices increase the company's perceived risk, so the discount rate increases, reducing the company's intrinsic value in the DCF model.

Answer 73

Answer: A breakdown of the return on investment from ESG-related activities for each stakeholder group. Explanation: The International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) Model Mandate provides guidelines for asset owners and managers to integrate ESG factors into their investment and stewardship activities. While the ICGN encourages transparency in ESG practices, it does not require a breakdown of the return on investment (ROI) from ESG-related activities for each stakeholder group. Other options explained: Details about stewardship engagement and voting activity: Correctly requested. The ICGN Model Mandate emphasizes the need for disclosure of stewardship practices, including engagement efforts and voting activities, to ensure alignment with ESG objectives. The manager’s assessment of ESG risks that are embedded in the portfolio: Correctly requested. The ICGN Model Mandate encourages managers to assess and disclose material ESG risks within their portfolios to demonstrate how these factors are integrated into investment decision-making. Final Assessment: The ICGN Model Mandate does not request a breakdown of the return on investment from ESG-related activities for each stakeholder group, as this level of granularity is beyond its scope.

Answer 74

Answer C: Local community protests Explanation: An externality refers to a cost or benefit that affects third parties (those not directly involved in the transaction or decision) and is not reflected in the price of the asset. For infrastructure assets, local community protests represent a negative externality because they are a consequence of the asset's operation (e.g., environmental concerns, noise, or disruption) and can lead to: Operational delays. Increased regulatory scrutiny. Reputational damage. Potential financial losses. These impacts are external to the initial investment decision but directly affect profitability. Other options explained: Rising temperatures: Incorrect. Rising temperatures are an environmental risk or factor that might affect the infrastructure asset, but they are not an externality in this context. They are more likely to be part of the broader climate risk considerations. Higher fossil fuel prices: Incorrect. Higher fossil fuel prices are a market factor that directly impacts costs for the asset (e.g., energy-intensive operations) but are not an externality. These are internalized in the asset's financial model. Final Assessment: The impact of an externality on an infrastructure asset is best described as a reduction in profitability resulting from local community protests.

Answer 75

Answer B: Using the company's vehicles. Explanation: Scope 1 emissions are direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that result from sources owned or controlled by the company. For an energy company, this includes emissions from activities like operating company-owned vehicles, equipment, or facilities that burn fossil fuels. Other options explained: Purchasing freight services: Incorrect. Emissions from purchasing freight services fall under Scope 3 emissions, which cover indirect emissions from the company's value chain, such as transportation and logistics provided by third parties. Disposing of waste at the company's gas stations: Incorrect. Waste disposal emissions are typically categorized as Scope 3 emissions, as they result from activities indirectly related to the company's operations. Final Assessment: For an energy company, Scope 1 emissions most likely result from using the company's vehicles, as these are direct emissions from company-controlled sources.

Answer 76

Answer B: United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights Explanation: "Access to remedy for victims of business-related abuses" is one of the three main pillars of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). These principles provide a global framework for addressing human rights risks associated with business activities. The three pillars of the UNGPs are: The state duty to protect human rights: Governments must protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including businesses. The corporate responsibility to respect human rights: Companies must avoid infringing on human rights and address adverse impacts they are involved in. Access to remedy: Victims of business-related human rights abuses must have access to effective remedies (judicial, administrative, or other means). Other options explained: Human Rights 100+: Incorrect. Human Rights 100+ is not a recognized global framework. It may be a reference to initiatives or campaigns advocating for human rights, but it does not include specific pillars like the UNGPs. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: Incorrect. While the OECD Guidelines incorporate human rights and responsible business practices, they do not explicitly structure their recommendations around the three pillars of the UNGPs. However, they align with the UNGPs in many respects. Final Assessment: The concept of "access to remedy for victims of business-related abuses" is a pillar of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).

Mock Exam 2 Flashcards

(100 cards)