Module 6: Engagement and Stewardship Quiz Flashcards
(29 cards)
Quiz #1 No.1
A portfolio has equal holdings of the following investments:
Credit Rating ESG Score (1 is low, 10 is high)
Bond 1 BBB+ 2
Bond 2 AA− 8
Bond 3 AAA− 2
According to PRI’s guide “ESG Engagement for Fixed Income Investors” (2018b), which investment is most likely to be the highest priority for engagement?
A. Bond 1
B. Bond 2
C. Bond 3
A. Bond 1
Explanation:
According to the PRI’s guide “ESG Engagement for Fixed Income Investors” (2018b), fixed income investors prioritize engagement based on a combination of ESG risks and financial materiality. The investment that is most likely to be prioritized for engagement is the one with:
Lower ESG performance (low ESG score)
A low ESG score indicates weak performance in managing environmental, social, or governance risks, making the issuer more vulnerable to ESG-related financial or reputational risks.
Lower credit rating (higher credit risk)
Lower credit ratings suggest a higher likelihood of default, which increases the importance of addressing ESG risks to ensure the issuer’s financial stability.
Analysis of the three bonds:
Bond 1:
Credit rating: BBB+ (lowest among the three, indicating moderate credit risk)
ESG score: 2 (very poor ESG performance, indicating significant ESG risks)
Highest priority for engagement because of its combination of low ESG performance and lower credit quality.
Bond 2:
Credit rating: AA− (high credit quality, lower credit risk)
ESG score: 8 (strong ESG performance, indicating minimal ESG risks)
Lower priority for engagement because its strong ESG score and high credit rating indicate fewer concerns.
Bond 3:
Credit rating: AAA− (highest credit quality, minimal credit risk)
ESG score: 2 (poor ESG performance, indicating some ESG risks)
Lower priority than Bond 1, as its high credit rating reduces the urgency for engagement despite its low ESG score.
Conclusion:
Bond 1 is the most likely to be the highest priority for engagement because it has both low ESG performance (score of 2) and moderate credit risk (BBB+ rating), making it the most financially and ESG-vulnerable investment in the portfolio.
Quiz #1 No.2
The opportunity for fixed-income investors to engage on ESG issues is greatest with:
A. public debt.
B. private debt.
C. sovereign debt.
B. private debt.
Explanation:
The opportunity for fixed-income investors to engage on ESG issues is greatest with private debt, primarily because private debt markets involve closer, more direct relationships between investors and issuers. Unlike public or sovereign debt, private debt deals often include negotiated terms, allowing investors to exert more influence over the borrower’s ESG practices.
Why not the other options?
A. Public debt:
Public debt is issued in large, often highly liquid markets where investors generally have limited leverage or direct interaction with issuers. Engagement is more challenging because issuers are not obligated to engage with individual investors.
C. Sovereign debt:
While sovereign debt investors can engage on ESG issues, the process is complex and indirect. Sovereigns (governments) are less likely to respond directly to investor engagement, as their accountability is primarily to their citizens rather than to bondholders. Furthermore, the scope for influencing policy decisions is limited.
Why private debt offers the greatest opportunity:
Private debt arrangements often involve direct negotiations between investors and issuers, allowing investors to raise ESG concerns and potentially include ESG-linked covenants in debt agreements.
Borrowers in private debt markets are typically smaller or less established entities that may be more open to feedback and influence from investors.
Investors in private debt may also have access to non-public information, allowing for more targeted and meaningful ESG engagement.
Thus, private debt provides the most direct opportunities for fixed-income investors to engage on ESG issues.
Quiz #1 No.3
A fund management entity that advances clients’ engagement activities even if not investing the clients’ funds is best described as: 即使不投资客户的资金，但促进客户参与活动的基金管理实体最恰当的描述是：
A. a proxy firm. 代理公司。
B. an overlay service provider. 叠加服务提供商。
C. an ESG investment consultant. ESG 投资顾问。
B. an overlay service provider.
Explanation:
An overlay service provider is a fund management entity or specialist firm that assists clients in advancing their engagement activities, often independently of whether the clients’ funds are directly invested through the provider. These firms typically focus on stewardship activities, such as proxy voting, engagement with companies, and ESG advocacy, on behalf of their clients. 覆蓋服務提供商是指協助客戶推進其參與活動的基金管理實體或專業公司，通常與客戶的資金是否直接通過該提供商進行投資無關。這些公司通常代表客戶專注於代理投票、與公司進行互動以及 ESG 倡導等管理活動。
Why not the other options?
A. A proxy firm:
Proxy firms (e.g., ISS or Glass Lewis) usually provide voting recommendations and proxy voting execution services. While they may be involved in engagement indirectly, their primary role is not to advance engagement activities independently of their clients’ investments. 代理公司（例如 ISS 或 Glass Lewis）通常提供投票建议和代理投票执行服务。虽然它们可能间接参与参与活动，但其主要职责并非独立于客户的投资而推进参与活动。
C. An ESG investment consultant:
ESG investment consultants advise clients on how to integrate ESG considerations into their investment processes. They focus on strategy, portfolio design, and ESG policy development but do not typically engage directly with companies on behalf of clients. ESG 投資顧問為客戶提供如何將 ESG 考量納入投資流程的建議。他們專注於策略、投資組合設計和 ESG 政策制定，但通常不會代表客戶直接與公司接觸。
Key Characteristics of Overlay Service Providers:
They specialize in engagement and stewardship, often conducting these activities on behalf of multiple clients.
They are not directly tied to the management of the assets being invested but instead focus on advancing ESG goals and shareholder rights.
They help clients fulfill stewardship responsibilities, such as active ownership, while maintaining alignment with clients’ policies.
Thus, a fund management entity that advances engagement activities independently of managing the clients’ funds is best described as an overlay service provider.
Quiz #1 No.4
The most significant change in the 2020 version of the UK Stewardship Code is the: 2020 年版《英國企業責任準則》最重大的變化是：
A. increased emphasis on clear, robust policy statements. 更加重视清晰、强有力的政策声明。
B. addition of a principle requiring management of conflicts of interest. 增加要求管理利益冲突的原则。
C. requirement to report on the practical effects of engagement actions. 报告参与行动的实际效果的要求。
C. requirement to report on the practical effects of engagement actions.
Explanation:
The most significant change in the 2020 version of the UK Stewardship Code is the shift from focusing primarily on policy statements to requiring organizations to demonstrate outcomes and the practical effects of their stewardship activities. The updated code emphasizes accountability and effectiveness by asking investors to not only disclose their policies but also to provide evidence of how their engagement and stewardship efforts have resulted in tangible outcomes. 2020 年版英國《受託責任準則》最重大的變化是，重點從主要關注政策聲明轉向要求組織證明其受託責任活動的成果和實際效果。更新後的準則強調問責制和有效性，要求投資者不僅披露其政策，還提供證據證明其參與和受託責任努力如何帶來了具體成果。
Why not the other options?
A. Increased emphasis on clear, robust policy statements:
While the earlier (2012) Stewardship Code focused heavily on policy statements, the 2020 version shifts the emphasis away from simply having clear policies to demonstrating how those policies lead to real-world impacts. Therefore, this was not the most significant change.
B. Addition of a principle requiring management of conflicts of interest:
The management of conflicts of interest was already included in the earlier version of the UK Stewardship Code. While it remains important, it is not a new or significantly changed aspect of the 2020 update.
Key Changes in the 2020 Stewardship Code:
1. Focus on outcomes: Investors must provide evidence of the practical effects of their stewardship and engagement efforts, demonstrating how they have influenced the companies or assets they invest in.
2. Expanded scope: The Code applies not only to equity investors but also to fixed income, infrastructure, and other asset classes.
3. Enhanced reporting requirements: Signatories are required to produce an annual stewardship report that explains their activities and outcomes in detail.
Thus, the requirement to report on the practical effects of engagement actions represents the most significant change in the 2020 version of the UK Stewardship Code.
Quiz #1 No.5
Which form of collaborative engagement is most likely to require greater formality in approach?
A. Group meetings with the company
B. Collaborative letter-writing campaigns
C. Soliciting broader support for a shareholder resolution
C. Soliciting broader support for a shareholder resolution
Explanation:
Soliciting broader support for a shareholder resolution typically requires greater formality because it involves:
Drafting a legally compliant and well-structured resolution.
Coordinating with other shareholders to gather sufficient votes or endorsements.
Following formal rules and processes set by regulatory bodies and stock exchanges.
In contrast:
A. Group meetings with the company are usually less formal and involve direct dialogue.
B. Collaborative letter-writing campaigns are informal methods of engagement compared to filing or rallying support for a formal resolution.
Quiz #1 No.6
Successful investor engagement tends to have the most positive impact: 成功的投资者参与往往产生最积极的影响：
A. on restructuring and financial policies. 重組和財務政策。
B. on changes to remuneration policies. 薪酬政策的變更。
C. within six months of the initial engagement contact. 初次聯繫後六個月內。
A. on restructuring and financial policies.
Explanation:
Research on investor engagement has shown that it tends to have the most positive impact on areas such as corporate restructuring and financial policies. These issues are often directly tied to shareholder value, making companies more likely to respond positively to engagement efforts in these areas. For example, restructuring might include changes in capital allocation, debt levels, or asset sales, which can have immediate and measurable effects on financial performance. 研究表明，投资者参与对公司重组和财务政策等领域的影响最为积极。这些问题通常与股东价值直接相关，因此公司更可能对这些领域的参与努力做出积极回应。例如，重组可能包括资本分配、债务水平或资产出售的变化，这些变化会对财务业绩产生直接且可衡量的影响。
Why not the other options?
B. On changes to remuneration policies:
While engagement can influence executive remuneration policies, these changes are often less impactful in the short term compared to financial or strategic decisions. Furthermore, companies may resist changes to remuneration policies due to entrenched practices or board dynamics, making this area less likely to yield quick or significant results.
C. Within six months of the initial engagement contact:
Successful engagement often requires sustained effort over time, especially for complex issues. While some progress may be visible within six months, achieving significant, measurable results (e.g., policy changes or restructuring) typically takes longer.
Key Points:
Investor engagement is most effective when it focuses on value-relevant issues such as restructuring, capital allocation, or debt management.
These changes are more likely to align directly with shareholder interests and can produce measurable financial benefits. 投资者参与最有效的是关注与价值相关的问题，如重组、资本分配或债务管理。
这些变化更可能与股东利益直接一致，并产生可衡量的财务收益。
Other areas, such as governance or social issues, may also see progress, but the impact on shareholder value is generally more pronounced when addressing financial and structural issues. 其他領域，如治理或社會問題，也可能取得進展，但解決財務和結構問題對股東價值的影響通常更為明顯。
Thus, restructuring and financial policies are the areas where successful investor engagement tends to have the most positive impact.
Quiz #1 No.7
Collective engagement activities are most likely to be controversial when they: 集体参与活动最有可能引发争议的情况如下：
A. result in the creation of concert parties. 导致音乐会派对的创建。
B. are outsourced to specialist stewardship providers. 外包给专业管理服务提供商。
C. are carried out through platforms such as the UK’s Investor Forum. 通过英国投资者论坛等平台进行。
A. result in the creation of concert parties.
Explanation:
Concert parties occur when investors act together to exert control or significant influence over a company, which can trigger regulatory and legal concerns. For example, in many jurisdictions, forming a concert party may require mandatory disclosures, regulatory approvals, or even trigger takeover rules. Collective engagement becomes controversial when it crosses the line from collaborative stewardship into coordinated action that could be seen as attempting to control the company without following proper legal procedures. 協調行動是指投資者共同採取行動，以對公司施加控制或重大影響，這可能引發監管和法律問題。例如，在許多司法管轄區，形成協調行動可能需要強制披露、監管批准，甚至觸發收購規則。集體參與在跨越從合作管理到協調行動的界限時會變得有爭議，因為協調行動可能被視為在未遵循適當法律程序的情況下試圖控制公司。
Why not the other options?
B. Are outsourced to specialist stewardship providers:
Outsourcing engagement activities to specialist stewardship providers is a common practice and is not inherently controversial. These providers act within regulatory frameworks and help investors fulfill their stewardship responsibilities more efficiently.
C. Are carried out through platforms such as the UK’s Investor Forum:
Platforms like the UK’s Investor Forum facilitate collective engagement while adhering to legal and regulatory guidelines. They are designed to avoid issues like concert party creation by providing structured and legally compliant frameworks for collaboration.
Key Issues with Concert Parties:
Legal and regulatory implications: Acting in concert can trigger legal obligations under takeover or securities laws, which can be costly and complex to manage.
Perceived collusion: It can raise concerns about anti-competitive behavior or unfair pressure on the company.
Risk to reputation: Investors involved in controversial concert party allegations may face reputational damage.
Thus, collective engagement activities are most likely to be controversial when they result in the creation of concert parties, as this can lead to significant legal, regulatory, and reputational risks.
Quiz #1 No.8
Which of the following activities is most likely associated with the early stages of a successful engagement action?
A. Ensuring that there is media interest
B. Registering to speak at an annual general meeting
C. Engaging in site visits to understand the company culture
C. Engaging in site visits to understand the company culture.
Explanation:
Engaging in site visits to understand a company’s culture is an activity most associated with the early stages of a successful engagement action. At this stage, investors are gathering information, building relationships, and gaining deeper insights into the company’s operations, governance, and culture. This understanding forms the foundation for developing a meaningful and informed engagement strategy.
Why not the other options?
A. Ensuring that there is media interest:
Media involvement is typically associated with more advanced or escalated stages of engagement, such as when private negotiations fail, and investors seek public attention to pressure the company. This is not a common activity in the early stages of engagement.
B. Registering to speak at an annual general meeting (AGM):
Registering to speak at an AGM is a more formal action that usually occurs in the later stages of engagement. By this point, investors have typically already attempted private discussions and are raising concerns in a public forum as part of escalating their efforts.
Why site visits are key in early stages:
1. Site visits allow investors to observe operations firsthand and engage directly with management and employees.
2. They provide insights into the company’s culture, values, and challenges, which are critical for shaping constructive engagement.
3. This activity helps establish trust and rapport with company representatives, increasing the likelihood of successful dialogue later in the engagement process.
Thus, engaging in site visits to understand the company culture is most likely associated with the early stages of a successful engagement action.
Quiz #1 No.9
In private equity investments, the limited partners are most likely to:
A. fall outside the scope of principles of stewardship codes.
B. initiate direct ESG engagement with the investee company.
C. engage with the general partner, who monitors and acts on ESG issues across the portfolios.
C. engage with the general partner, who monitors and acts on ESG issues across the portfolios.
Explanation:
In private equity investments, limited partners (LPs), such as institutional investors, typically engage with the general partner (GP), who is responsible for managing the private equity fund and overseeing the portfolio companies. The GP acts as an intermediary, monitoring and addressing ESG issues across the investment portfolio. LPs rely on the GP to implement and report on ESG policies, as they do not usually engage directly with the investee companies.
Why not the other options?
A. Fall outside the scope of principles of stewardship codes:
LPs do fall under stewardship principles in many cases. For example, the UK Stewardship Code and other similar guidelines encourage LPs to ensure that GPs integrate ESG considerations into their investment processes and stewardship activities. Therefore, this statement is incorrect.
B. Initiate direct ESG engagement with the investee company:
LPs typically do not engage directly with the investee companies in private equity settings. Instead, it is the GP’s role to manage the companies and address ESG concerns on behalf of the LPs. Direct engagement by LPs would be unusual and outside the standard private equity structure.
Key Points About LP-GP Relationships and ESG:
LPs often require GPs to have robust ESG frameworks and regularly report on ESG performance.
GPs are expected to monitor ESG risks and opportunities across the portfolio and take action where necessary.
LPs may engage with GPs through advisory committees or during fund due diligence to ensure alignment of ESG priorities.
Thus, in private equity investments, LPs engage with the GP, who monitors and acts on ESG issues across the portfolios.
Quiz #1 No.10
An investee company implemented an innovative methodology for tracking GHG emissions. An investor wants to understand how the methodology can lower GHG emissions for the investee. To accomplish this, the investor is most likely to engage in value-creating:
A. political dynamics.
B. learning dynamics.
C. communicative dynamics.
B. learning dynamics.
Explanation:
Learning dynamics refer to the process by which investors seek to gain a deeper understanding of an investee company’s operations, strategies, or innovations. In this case, the investor’s goal is to understand the potential impact of the company’s innovative methodology for tracking greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and how it can contribute to reducing emissions. This involves acquiring knowledge and insights, which is a hallmark of learning dynamics.
Why not the other options?
A. Political dynamics:
Political dynamics involve efforts to influence decision-making processes, policies, or governance structures within the investee company. While political dynamics may play a role in broader ESG engagements, this scenario is focused on understanding the methodology, not influencing policies, making this option incorrect.
C. Communicative dynamics:
Communicative dynamics focus on the exchange of information and dialogue between investors and the company, often to build trust or alignment. While dialogue may occur as part of the learning process, the primary activity here is to gain knowledge, which aligns more closely with learning dynamics.
Key Characteristics of Learning Dynamics:
Involve knowledge acquisition to better understand the company’s strategies, methodologies, or innovations.
Help investors evaluate the effectiveness and potential impact of the company’s initiatives.
Provide a foundation for informed engagement and decision-making.
Thus, the investor’s effort to understand how the innovative methodology can lower GHG emissions is best described as engaging in learning dynamics.
Quiz #2 No.1
An investor with a history of governance-led engagement is most likely to start engagement with a company by entering into a dialogue with the:
A. board of directors.
B. investor relations team.
C. senior management.
A is correct.
The styles of engagement might differ depending on the heritage of the stewardship team of an investor. If an investor has a history of governance-led engagement, it will tend to engage with the board chair and the board of directors and then down to the management of the firm and the investor relations team. This approach is consistent with a top-down style of engagement. Initiating engagement with investor relations specialists or the company’s management is more specific to investors with a heritage of environmental and social expertise.
Quiz #2 No.2
The best way to assess an investor’s engagement success is to consider: 评估投资者参与度成功的最佳方法是考虑以下因素：
A. the impact the engagement had on the investee’s stock price. 参与对被投资公司股票价格的影响。
B. the improvements in the investee’s corporate governance policies and practices. 被投资公司公司治理政策和实践的改进。
C. the outcome of the investor’s engagement actions against engagement objectives related to the investee. 投资者针对被投资公司参与目标采取的参与行动的结果。
C. the outcome of the investor’s engagement actions against engagement objectives related to the investee.
Explanation:
The best way to assess the success of an investor’s engagement is to measure the outcomes of the engagement against the specific objectives set at the start of the engagement process. Engagement success is typically determined by whether the investor achieved the desired changes or improvements related to the investee company, such as better ESG practices, enhanced corporate governance, or improved disclosure. 評估投資者參與的成功與否的最佳方法是，將參與的結果與參與過程開始時設定的具體目標進行對比。參與的成功通常取決於投資者是否實現了與被投資公司相關的預期變化或改進，例如更好的 ESG 實踐、更強的企業治理或更完善的披露。
Why not the other options?
A. The impact the engagement had on the investee’s stock price: While changes in stock price can be a byproduct of successful engagement, it is not a direct or reliable measure of engagement success. Other factors unrelated to engagement may influence the stock price.
B. The improvements in the investee’s corporate governance policies and practices: While improvements in governance can be an indicator of success, they are only relevant if they align with the investor’s specific engagement objectives. Engagements might also target other areas, such as environmental or social issues.
Thus, the most comprehensive and accurate way to assess success is to evaluate the outcome of the engagement relative to the objectives set by the investor.
Quiz #2 No.3
Unlike stewardship delivered through engagement, stewardship delivered through monitoring is most likely to: 与通过参与实现的治理不同，通过监控实现的治理最有可能：
A. inform incremental investment decisions. 提供增量投资决策的信息。
B. seek two-way communication between investors and investees. 寻求投资者与被投资方之间的双向沟通。
C. avoid a dialogue with the investee companies to maintain the objectivity of the investor. 避免与被投资公司进行对话，以保持投资者的客观性。
A. inform incremental investment decisions.
Explanation:
Stewardship delivered through monitoring involves the investor observing and assessing the investee company’s performance, governance, and ESG practices without necessarily engaging in direct dialogue. This type of stewardship focuses on gathering information to evaluate whether the company aligns with the investor’s expectations, which, in turn, helps inform incremental investment decisions such as holding, increasing, reducing, or selling the investment. 通过监控实现的受托责任包括投资者观察和评估被投资公司的业绩、治理和ESG实践，而不一定进行直接对话。这种受托责任侧重于收集信息，以评估公司是否符合投资者的期望，进而帮助投资者做出增持、减持或出售投资等增量投资决策。
Why not the other options?
B. Seek two-way communication between investors and investees: This is characteristic of engagement, where the goal is to establish a dialogue with the investee to influence its behaviors or practices. Monitoring does not typically involve direct communication.
C. Avoid a dialogue with the investee companies to maintain the objectivity of the investor: While monitoring may not involve dialogue, the purpose is not necessarily to “maintain objectivity.” Instead, it is about gathering information to support investment decisions. Objectivity can still be maintained during engagement.
Thus, stewardship delivered through monitoring is most likely to inform incremental investment decisions based on the insights gathered.
Quiz #2 No.4
Which of the following forms of engagement is most likely seen by engagement professionals as normal engagement dialogue with companies? 以下哪一種參與形式最有可能被參與專業人士視為與公司進行正常參與對話？
A. Requesting a general meeting 要求召开股东大会
B. Expressing concerns through the investee’s advisers 通过被投资公司的顾问表达关切
C. Making public statements in advance of general meetings 在股东大会召开前发表公开声明
B. Expressing concerns through the investee’s advisers.
Explanation:
Engagement professionals generally view expressing concerns through the investee’s advisers as part of the normal engagement dialogue. This approach allows investors to communicate their concerns indirectly but effectively, often through intermediaries such as legal, financial, or investor relations advisers. It is considered less confrontational and more aligned with standard engagement practices. 參與專業人士通常將通過被投資方的顧問表達關切視為正常參與對話的一部分。這種方法使投資者能夠間接但有效地表達關切，通常通過法律、財務或投資者關係顧問等中介機構。這種方法被認為較少對抗性，更符合標準的參與實踐。
Why not the other options?
A. Requesting a general meeting: Requesting a general meeting is considered an escalation tactic rather than normal engagement dialogue. It is typically used when previous engagement efforts have failed to address the investor’s concerns.
C. Making public statements in advance of general meetings: Public statements are also an escalation tactic. This approach is often used to apply pressure on the company when private dialogue has not yielded satisfactory results.
Thus, expressing concerns through the investee’s advisers is most likely to be seen as normal engagement dialogue, as it is a common and non-escalatory way of raising issues.
Quiz #2 No.5
Which of the following is most accurate about stewardship in investments? Stewardship is exercised: 以下哪项最准确地描述了投资中的受托责任？受托责任体现在：
A. via voting and engagement. 通过投票和参与。
B. by a company’s stakeholders. 由公司的利益相关者。
C. via short-term investor activism. 通过短期投资者活动。
A. via voting and engagement.
Explanation:
Stewardship in investments refers to the responsible oversight and management of assets by investors to promote long-term value creation. This is primarily exercised through voting on shareholder resolutions and board elections, as well as engagement with investee companies to address issues related to governance, environmental, and social practices. 投資管理是指投資者對資產進行負責任的監督和管理，以促進長期價值創造。這主要通過對股東決議和董事會選舉進行投票，以及與被投資公司進行交流，以解決與治理、環境和社會實踐相關的問題來實現。
Why not the other options?
B. By a company’s stakeholders: While stakeholders such as employees, customers, and communities can influence corporate behavior, stewardship in investments specifically refers to actions taken by investors who have ownership stakes in the company.
C. Via short-term investor activism: Stewardship focuses on long-term value creation, not short-term activism, which often prioritizes immediate financial returns over sustainable, long-term outcomes.
Thus, stewardship in investments is most accurately exercised via voting and engagement, which are key tools for investors to influence corporate behavior and performance.
Quiz #2 No.6
According to records in the “Active Ownership” study, successful ESG engagement generated, on average, abnormal financial returns of approximately: 根据「积极所有权」研究中的记录，成功的ESG参与平均产生了大约以下异常财务回报：
A. 7% in the year after the initial engagement.
B. 9% in the year after the initial engagement.
C. 10% in the year after the initial engagement.
A is correct.
Successful ESG engagements generated 7.1% abnormal returns in the year after the initial engagement, compared to 2.3% abnormal returns, on average, generated by ESG engagements. 成功的ESG参与在初始参与后的第一年产生了7.1%的异常回报，而ESG参与平均产生了2.3%的异常回报。
When ESG engagements were more targeted, the abnormal returns were even higher, with more than 10% for successful climate change engagements and more than 9% for successful corporate governance engagements. See Dimson et al. 2015. 当ESG参与更具针对性时，异常回报更高，成功的气候变化参与超过10%，成功的公司治理参与超过9%。参见Dimson等人,2015年。
Quiz #2 No.7
Which of the following stewardship codes includes a principle stating that asset owners are encouraged to align the operation of the market-wide financial system with the long-term interests of investors? 以下哪項受託管理準則包含一項原則，鼓勵資產所有者將市場整體金融體系的運作與投資者的長期利益保持一致？
A. Singapore Stewardship Principles for Responsible Investors 新加坡负责任投资者受托原则
B. Australian Asset Owner Stewardship Code 澳大利亚资产所有者受托准则
C. European Fund and Asset Management Association Stewardship Code 欧洲基金与资产管理协会受托准则
B. Australian Asset Owner Stewardship Code
Explanation:
The Australian Asset Owner Stewardship Code includes principles that emphasize the responsibility of asset owners to contribute to the alignment of the broader financial system with the long-term interests of investors. This reflects a focus on promoting sustainable and responsible investment practices that ensure the financial system supports long-term value creation and stability. 《澳洲資產所有者受託責任守則》包含強調資產所有者應促進更廣泛金融體系與投資者長期利益保持一致的責任原則。這反映了促進可持續和負責任的投資實踐，確保金融體系支持長期價值創造和穩定性的重點。
Why not the other options?
A. Singapore Stewardship Principles for Responsible Investors: These principles focus on encouraging responsible investment practices and engagement but do not explicitly mention aligning the market-wide financial system with long-term investor interests. 新加坡负责任投资者管理原则：这些原则侧重于鼓励负责任的投资实践和参与，但未明确提及将整个金融体系与长期投资者利益保持一致。
C. European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) Stewardship Code: This code emphasizes transparency, engagement, and ESG integration but does not specifically include a principle about aligning the operation of the financial system with long-term investor interests.
協會（EFAMA）管理準則：該準則強調透明度、參與度和 ESG 整合，但未明確納入將金融體系運作與長期投資者利益保持一致的原則。
Thus, the Australian Asset Owner Stewardship Code is the correct answer, as it explicitly addresses the alignment of the financial system with long-term investor interests.
Quiz #2 No.8
One of the largest global investment firms holds US$1.5 trillion in AUM in over 400 actively managed mutual funds. One of the most challenging aspects of successful engagement with the investees is: 全球最大的投资公司之一在 400 多只积极管理的共同基金中拥有 1.5 万亿美元的资产管理规模。与被投资方成功开展合作最困难的方面之一是：
A. hiring external stewardship services. 聘請外部受託管理服務。
B. resource constraints within the investment firm. 投資公司內部資源限制。
C. finding other asset managers to share the concerns regarding the individual investees. 尋找其他資產管理公司共同分擔對個別投資對象的擔憂。
B. resource constraints within the investment firm.
Explanation:
For large investment firms managing significant assets, such as US$1.5 trillion across hundreds of funds, one of the most challenging aspects of successful engagement is the resource constraints within the firm. Despite their size, these firms often need to allocate limited stewardship resources (e.g., analysts or engagement professionals) across a large number of investee companies. Managing effective engagement with all investees, especially on ESG issues, requires significant time, expertise, and personnel. 對於管理巨額資產的大型投資機構（例如管理數千億美元的數百支基金），成功開展投資者責任管理的一大挑戰在於機構內部資源的限制。儘管規模龐大，這些機構往往需要將有限的責任管理資源（例如分析師或責任管理專業人員）分配到大量被投資公司。有效管理所有被投資公司的責任，尤其是環境、社會和治理（ESG）方面的責任，需要大量時間、專業知識和人力。
Why not the other options?
A. Hiring external stewardship services: While external services can provide support, they are typically seen as supplementary to the firm’s own stewardship efforts. The challenge lies more in effectively allocating internal resources than in outsourcing.
C. Finding other asset managers to share concerns regarding individual investees: Collaboration with other asset managers is not typically a significant challenge. In fact, collective engagement is often encouraged and facilitated through industry initiatives and alliances, such as investor coalitions.
Thus, the most challenging aspect is resource constraints, as even large firms face limits on the personnel and time they can dedicate to engaging with investee companies.
Quiz #2 No.9
Which of the following forms of engagement is most likely to have clear engagement objectives regarding an investee company? 以下哪種參與形式最有可能對被投資公司制定明確的參與目標？
A. The annual letter issued by a fund manager 基金经理发布的年度信函
B. Informal discussions with an investee’s senior management 与被投资公司高级管理层进行非正式讨论
C. A coalition of investors established for environmental research purposes 为环境研究目的而成立的投资者联盟
C. A coalition of investors established for environmental research purposes
Explanation:
A coalition of investors formed for a specific purpose, such as environmental research, is most likely to have clear engagement objectives. Such coalitions are typically organized with a focused agenda (e.g., addressing climate change, improving sustainability practices, etc.), and their engagement efforts are guided by specific, measurable goals to influence investee companies on these issues. 為特定目的（如環境研究）而組成的投資者聯盟最有可能制定明確的參與目標。此類聯盟通常圍繞一個明確的議程（如應對氣候變化、改善可持續發展實踐等）組織起來，其參與工作以具體、可衡量的目標為指導，以影響被投資公司在這些問題上的行為。
Why not the other options?
A. The annual letter issued by a fund manager: While an annual letter may outline broad priorities or expectations, it is unlikely to include specific engagement objectives tailored to individual investee companies.
B. Informal discussions with an investee’s senior management: Informal discussions are less likely to involve structured or clearly defined engagement objectives. These discussions may be exploratory or address general concerns without a focused agenda.
Thus, a coalition of investors established for environmental research purposes is the option most likely to have clear and specific engagement objectives related to the investee company.
Quiz #2 No.10
An asset manager engages with an investee company with the objective of increasing its board’s gender diversity. During the engagement, two of the non-independent male board members expressed concerns regarding a forced restructuring of the board and resigned. They were replaced with two independent male members with superior skill sets. Does this outcome represent a successful form of engagement for the asset manager? 資產管理公司與被投資公司進行互動，目的是提高其董事會的性別多樣性。在互動過程中，兩名非獨立男性董事對董事會強制重組表示擔憂並辭職。他們被兩名技能更強的獨立男性董事取代。這種結果是否代表資產管理公司的互動取得了成功？
A. No
B. Yes, because the new board members are independent 是，因为新董事会成员是独立的
C. Yes, because the new board members have superior skill sets 是，因为新董事会成员具备卓越的技能
A. No
Explanation:
The asset manager’s stated engagement objective was to increase the board’s gender diversity, which means the goal was to improve the representation of women on the board. While the outcome led to the appointment of independent board members with superior skill sets, it did not address the objective of increasing gender diversity. As a result, the engagement cannot be deemed successful in achieving its intended purpose. 資產管理公司的明確參與目標是提高董事會的性別多樣性，這意味著目標是提高女性在董事會中的代表性。雖然結果是任命了具備卓越技能的獨立董事，但並未實現提高性別多樣性的目標。因此，該參與行動無法被視為成功實現其預期目的。
Why not the other options?
B. Yes, because the new board members are independent: Independence is important for good governance, but it was not the primary focus of the asset manager’s engagement. The objective was gender diversity, which was not achieved.
C. Yes, because the new board members have superior skill sets: While superior skill sets may improve board performance, this outcome does not align with the specific engagement objective of increasing gender diversity.
Thus, the outcome does not represent a successful engagement, as it failed to achieve the stated goal of improving gender diversity on the board.
Quiz #3 No.1
Which of the following stewardship approaches is least likely to be applied by small investors in sovereign debt? 以下哪一種管理方式最不可能被主權債務的小型投資者採用？
A. Exerting influence on the issuer to act on meeting the sustainable development goals 影響發行人採取行動實現可持續發展目標
B. Tilting the portfolios toward fixed-income holdings issued by states with achievements in meeting the sustainable development goals 將投資組合向在實現可持續發展目標方面取得成就的國家發行的固定收益證券傾斜
C. Screening the universe of sovereign fixed-income securities for issuers showing progress in meeting the sustainable development goals 篩選主權固定收益證券，挑選出在實現可持續發展目標方面取得進展的發行人
A. Exerting influence on the issuer to act on meeting the sustainable development goals
Explanation:
Small investors in sovereign debt are least likely to exert direct influence on a sovereign issuer (e.g., a government) to take action toward meeting sustainable development goals (SDGs). Unlike equity investors, who may engage directly with companies and vote at shareholder meetings, sovereign debt investors typically lack the mechanisms for direct engagement with sovereign issuers. Furthermore, small investors lack the scale or leverage to influence the actions of a sovereign government.
主權債務的小型投資者最不可能對主權發行人（例如政府）施加直接影響，促使他們採取行動實現可持續發展目標（SDGs）。與股權投資者不同，股權投資者可以直接與公司接觸並在股東大會上投票，而主權債務投資者通常缺乏與主權發行人直接接觸的機制。此外，小型投資者缺乏影響主權政府行動的規模或影響力。
Why not the other options?
B. Tilting the portfolios toward fixed-income holdings issued by states with achievements in meeting the sustainable development goals: Small investors can easily adopt a “tilting” strategy by allocating a greater portion of their portfolio to sovereign issuers that demonstrate strong SDG achievements, as this approach does not require direct engagement. 將投資組合向已實現可持續發展目標的國家發行的固定收益證券傾斜：小型投資者可以輕鬆採用「傾斜」策略，將投資組合中更大比例的資金分配給在實現可持續發展目標方面表現強勁的主權發行機構，因為這種方法無需直接參與。
C. Screening the universe of sovereign fixed-income securities for issuers showing progress in meeting the sustainable development goals: Screening is a commonly used strategy for small investors, as it involves selecting securities based on predefined ESG or SDG criteria without needing to influence the issuers directly.
篩選主權固定收益證券發行人中在實現可持續發展目標方面取得進展的發行人：篩選是小型投資者常用的策略，因為它涉及根據預先定義的ESG或SDG標準選擇證券，而無需直接影響發行人。
Thus, exerting influence on the issuer is the least likely stewardship approach for small investors in sovereign debt, given their limited ability to directly affect sovereign policies or actions.
Quiz #3 No.2
Investors engage in monitoring their investees to: 投资者对被投资方进行监控的目的包括：
A. direct investees toward adopting improved ESG practices.
B. understand performance and business opportunities for the investees.
C. express their position on key issues and concerns related to the investees.
B. understand performance and business opportunities for the investees.
Explanation:
The primary purpose of monitoring investees is to gather information and gain insights into the investees’ performance, business operations, and opportunities. This helps investors assess whether the investees are aligned with their investment objectives and whether they are on track to deliver long-term value. 監控被投資者的主要目的是收集信息，了解被投資者的業績、業務運營和機遇。這有助於投資者評估被投資者是否符合其投資目標，以及是否正在實現長期價值。
Why not the other options?
A. Direct investees toward adopting improved ESG practices: This is better suited to engagement, not monitoring. Engagement involves actively influencing the investee’s behavior or policies, while monitoring is a more passive process focused on observation and analysis. 引导被投资方采用改进的ESG实践：这更适合参与，而不是监控。参与是指积极影响被投资方的行为或政策，而监控则是一个更被动的流程，侧重于观察和分析。
C. Express their position on key issues and concerns related to the investees: Expressing positions on issues is a component of engagement, where investors communicate their concerns and expectations to the investees. 就與被投資方有關的關鍵問題和關切表達立場：就問題表達立場是參與的一部分，投資者通過此方式向被投資方表達其關切和期望。
Thus, monitoring is primarily about understanding performance and business opportunities, making B the most accurate answer.
Quiz #3 No.3
Which of the following is a new area of focus in the 2020 version of the UK Stewardship Code? 以下哪一项是 2020 版《英国企业责任准则》的新重点领域？
A. Conflicts
B. Outcomes
C. Collaboration
B. Outcomes
Explanation:
The 2020 version of the UK Stewardship Code introduced an increased focus on outcomes, emphasizing that signatories must demonstrate the results of their stewardship activities. This shift represents a move away from simply reporting policies and processes toward showing how stewardship activities lead to tangible impacts and benefits, such as improvements in investee companies’ ESG practices or contributions to sustainable long-term value creation. 2020 版《英國企業責任準則》更加重視成果，強調簽署方必須證明其企業責任活動所取得的成果。這一轉變意味著從簡單地報告政策和流程，轉向展示企業責任活動如何帶來實質性的影響和效益，例如被投資公司的 ESG 實踐得到改善，或為創造可持續的長期價值做出貢獻。
Why not the other options?
A. Conflicts: Addressing conflicts of interest has always been a focus of the UK Stewardship Code and was present in earlier versions. It is not a new area introduced in the 2020 revision. 衝突：處理利益衝突一直是英國《責任投資準則》的重點，在早期版本中就已存在。這不是 2020 年修訂版中新引入的領域。
C. Collaboration: Collaboration has also been a part of the Stewardship Code for some time, as it encourages investors to work together to influence change. While it remains an important aspect of stewardship, it is not a new focus in the 2020 version. 合作：合作一直是《受託責任守則》的一部分，因為它鼓勵投資者共同合作，影響變革。雖然合作仍然是受託責任的重要方面，但並非 2020 版的新重點。
The focus on outcomes is a significant new feature of the 2020 UK Stewardship Code, setting higher standards for accountability and transparency.
Quiz #3 No.4
Which of the following is not among the challenges to effective engagement as part of an investor coalition? 以下哪一项不属于投资者联盟有效参与所面临的挑战？
A. Conflicts of interest 利益冲突
B. Difficulty in reaching a consensus 达成共识的困难
C. Difficulty in finding an organization to support their stewardship work 难以找到支持其管理工作的组织
C. Difficulty in finding an organization to support their stewardship work
Explanation:
Investor coalitions typically consist of multiple institutional investors working together to achieve shared stewardship goals. They often benefit from the support of established organizations, such as industry groups (e.g., the PRI, Climate Action 100+), which provide frameworks, coordination, and resources for their stewardship work. Thus, finding an organization to support their work is not generally a significant challenge. 投資者聯盟通常由多個機構投資者組成，共同實現共同的治理目標。它們通常受益於行業組織（例如 PRI、Climate Action 100+）等成熟組織的支持，這些組織為其治理工作提供框架、協調和資源。因此，找到一個支持其工作的組織通常不是一個重大挑戰。
Challenges in investor coalitions include:
A. Conflicts of interest: Conflicts of interest can arise when coalition members have differing priorities, investment strategies, or relationships with the investee companies, making it harder to align their goals. 利益衝突：當聯盟成員擁有不同的優先事項、投資策略或與被投資公司之間的關係時，可能會產生利益衝突，從而難以協調其目標。
B. Difficulty in reaching a consensus: Reaching consensus is a common challenge in coalitions, as members may have diverse views, engagement priorities, or strategies, which can delay or hinder decision-making. 達成共識的困難：達成共識是聯盟中常見的挑戰，因為成員可能有不同的觀點、參與優先事項或策略，這可能會延遲或阻礙決策。
Both A and B are well-documented challenges to effective collaboration in investor coalitions, but C is not typically a problem. A 和 B 都是投資者聯盟有效合作方面有據可查的挑戰，但 C 通常不是問題。
