Ukraine: one year on
Now a year old, the war in Ukraine is devastating for those involved. Further afield, it has woken the world up to key issues around energy dependency, food security and what it means to be “green”. What lessons have been learned over the past 12 months?
- While physically the war in Ukraine puts conflict at the crossroads between Europe and Russia, its reverberations have been felt globally.
- The war has shown how the world depends on the region for crucial parts of the global supply chain – whether for energy, food or strategic metals and minerals.
- While the defence sector was previously classed as “socially harmful”, the war sparked questions about whether the social right to defend oneself could be reflected in sustainable funds.
- By raising questions about environmental, social and governance (ESG) approaches, the energy crisis that resulted from the conflict has helped focus minds on the transition to “green” and the regulation and investments needed to achieve it.
It is now a year since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, bringing war to Europe. The conflict continues to have an appalling human cost, and it has implications that reach far beyond the borders of Ukraine and Russia. International policy has shifted. More prosaically, global supply chains and just-in-time economies have been tested. Moreover, the war has challenged people’s commitments to sustainability and raised questions about what classifies as “sustainable”.
With these issues in mind, we have identified several lessons related to sustainability that have been learned from the war. In some cases, these are lessons that are still being learned.
Lesson one: accelerating affordable clean alternative energy sources
Lesson two: rewiring the global economy
To sustain these ambitions in clean energy, a fundamental rethink is required as to how we source key strategic metals and minerals. Russia is a major producer of base metals and the Economist Intelligence Unit estimates that countries representing over 77% of global gross domestic product (GDP) had imported significant quantities of at least one base metal from Russia or Ukraine in the past year.2
Clean energy is dependent on nickel, where Russia is the world’s largest producer, but geopolitical uncertainty has also highlighted China’s contribution to the supply of lithium and rare earth minerals.
The only way to sustainably meet the raw material demands of clean energy going forward is through the efficient recycling of electronic goods, or “e-waste”, whereby strategic metals and minerals can be extracted from these items and reused. According to The Earthbound Report, 7.6kg of e-waste is created every year per person on the planet.3
Lesson three: improving food security
Lesson four: defending what is defensible
The topic of capital allocation towards the defence sector came to the fore in March. The industry was previously viewed as “socially harmful” under the EU Social Taxonomy – a classification of economic activities that significantly contribute to social goals in the EU – but the war sparked questions about whether the social right to defend oneself could be reflected in sustainable-labelled funds.
While there is market consensus that controversial weapons should be excluded from investment portfolios, views are divided on providers of military equipment and services or nuclear weapons, whether the latter fall inside the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) or not.
In response, Allianz Global Investors published a research paper that explored how and why exclusions had evolved and why we believe our stance on military equipment and services providers – whereby we set a threshold of 10% of revenues generated from these activities for companies included in sustainable-labelled funds – represents a pragmatic approach.5 We know this is an evolving topic and after much analysis we will look to further define our approach on this matter soon.
Lesson five: rethinking ESG
The energy crisis sparked by the conflict swiftly turned perceived notions of ESG investing into a political hot topic. The sustained underinvestment in the global energy infrastructure, especially in Europe, was blamed on ESG and an out-of-touch climate agenda that prioritised low costs over resilient supply. Even if much of this debate was driven by political agendas instead of substance, ESG had genuine questions to answer about how it was applied to investment decisions.
ESG qualitative scoring systems had become mainstream over the last decade, but disparate methodologies and scores from the main providers prompted much more robust frameworks from those with significant market influence. We recognise the demand for a modernised, robust non-financial risk framework that can inform all investment strategies. We expect risk screening to migrate from non-specific, aggregated E, S and G scores to focus on specific elements of idiosyncratic risk within E, S and G – eg, physical risk assessments, social controversies, water intensity and board composition. We have developed our own dedicated sustainability data architecture to capture the full breadth of ESG risk and opportunity assessment tools to meet evolving client and regulatory demands.
Lesson six: prioritising transition over “being green”
As well as testing the resilience of ESG, the events of last year challenged the markets to consider the transition to green instead of focusing solely on being green. Many column inches have been written on the failings of the new “green” regulatory approach for being out of touch with real-world decarbonisation and transition, as well as for being confusing.
A more globally inclusive approach to real-world impact and future economic resilience is needed. One possible cornerstone of this approach is the concept of transition – which involves a pathway, preferably ambitious, towards a specific goal of achieving a more resilient and sustainable economy or society. Formalising the contribution that both transition and robust engagement can play could work alongside green regulation to upscale the investments required.
Even a country as politically divided as the United States on climate change issues is embracing the notion of transition as a bedrock to its future economy. Perhaps partly as a reaction to events in faraway Ukraine, the Biden administration has successfully passed various pieces of legislation adding up to over USD 1 trillion that will, in aggregate, create a green grid and provide subsidies for green tech. This multi-year transformation will put pressure on other existing transition plans in the EU and China.6
We have learned many things from the shocking invasion that started on 24 February 2022. In terms of sustainable investing, the world of ESG is set to become more refined in its economic and political logic going forward as countries and economic blocks ensure that their energy security is more closely aligned with its climate ambitions.
3 The scale of global e-waste – The Earthbound Report
Investing involves risk. The value of an investment and the income from it will fluctuate and investors may not get back the principal invested. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. This is a marketing communication. It is for informational purposes only. This document does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security and shall not be deemed an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security.
The views and opinions expressed herein, which are subject to change without notice, are those of the issuer or its affiliated companies at the time of publication. Certain data used are derived from various sources believed to be reliable, but the accuracy or completeness of the data is not guaranteed and no liability is assumed for any direct or consequential losses arising from their use. The duplication, publication, extraction or transmission of the contents, irrespective of the form, is not permitted.
This material has not been reviewed by any regulatory authorities. In mainland China, it is for Qualified Domestic Institutional Investors scheme pursuant to applicable rules and regulations and is for information purpose only. This document does not constitute a public offer by virtue of Act Number 26.831 of the Argentine Republic and General Resolution No. 622/2013 of the NSC. This communication’s sole purpose is to inform and does not under any circumstance constitute promotion or publicity of Allianz Global Investors products and/or services in Colombia or to Colombian residents pursuant to part 4 of Decree 2555 of 2010. This communication does not in any way aim to directly or indirectly initiate the purchase of a product or the provision of a service offered by Allianz Global Investors. Via reception of his document, each resident in Colombia acknowledges and accepts to have contacted Allianz Global Investors via their own initiative and that the communication under no circumstances does not arise from any promotional or marketing activities carried out by Allianz Global Investors. Colombian residents accept that accessing any type of social network page of Allianz Global Investors is done under their own responsibility and initiative and are aware that they may access specific information on the products and services of Allianz Global Investors. This communication is strictly private and confidential and may not be reproduced. This communication does not constitute a public offer of securities in Colombia pursuant to the public offer regulation set forth in Decree 2555 of 2010. This communication and the information provided herein should not be considered a solicitation or an offer by Allianz Global Investors or its affiliates to provide any financial products in Brazil, Panama, Peru, and Uruguay. In Australia, this material is presented by Allianz Global Investors Asia Pacific Limited (“AllianzGI AP”) and is intended for the use of investment consultants and other institutional/professional investors only, and is not directed to the public or individual retail investors. AllianzGI AP is not licensed to provide financial services to retail clients in Australia. AllianzGI AP is exempt from the requirement to hold an Australian Foreign Financial Service License under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) pursuant to ASIC Class Order (CO 03/1103) with respect to the provision of financial services to wholesale clients only. AllianzGI AP is licensed and regulated by Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission under Hong Kong laws, which differ from Australian laws.
This document is being distributed by the following Allianz Global Investors companies:
Allianz Global Investors GmbH, an investment company in Germany, authorized by the German Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin); Allianz Global Investors (Schweiz) AG; in HK, by Allianz Global Investors Asia Pacific Ltd., licensed by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission; in Singapore, by Allianz Global Investors Singapore Ltd., regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore [Company Registration No. 199907169Z]; in Japan, by Allianz Global Investors Japan Co., Ltd., registered in Japan as a Financial Instruments Business Operator [Registered No. The Director of Kanto Local Finance Bureau (Financial Instruments Business Operator), No. 424], Member of Japan Investment Advisers Association, the Investment Trust Association, Japan and Type II Financial Instruments Firms Association; in Taiwan, by Allianz Global Investors Taiwan Ltd., licensed by Financial Supervisory Commission in Taiwan; and in Indonesia, by PT. Allianz Global Investors Asset Management Indonesia licensed by Indonesia Financial Services Authority (OJK).