FT商学院

Divestment: are there better ways to clean up ‘dirty’ companies?
除撤资外,是否有更好的方法来清理“脏”公司?

Even as more asset owners shun fossil fuels, some argue that a combination of engagement and the threat of denying funds would have the most effect
尽管越来越多的资产所有者回避化石燃料,但一些人认为,参与和拒绝提供资金的威胁相结合,将产生最大的效果。

In 2020 Cambridge university announced that it would strip its £3.5bn endowment fund of all fossil fuel investments by 2030. Shedding its near-£100mn of exposure to the energy sector was necessary to align its investment strategy with climate science which showed the need to cut carbon emissions to net zero to avoid catastrophe, it explained. By divesting, said vice-chancellor Stephen Toope, Cambridge was “responding comprehensively to a pressing environmental and moral need for action”. 

2020年,剑桥大学(Cambridge university)宣布,到2030年,将取消其35亿英镑的捐赠基金的所有化石燃料投资。该公司解释说,为了使其投资战略与气候科学相一致,有必要减少其在能源领域近1亿英镑的投资,气候科学表明有必要将碳排放减少到净零,以避免灾难。剑桥大学副校长斯蒂芬•图普(Stephen Toope)表示,通过撤资,剑桥“全面响应了采取行动的紧迫环境和道德需求”。

您已阅读2%(688字),剩余98%(28546字)包含更多重要信息,订阅以继续探索完整内容,并享受更多专属服务。
版权声明:本文版权归manbetx20客户端下载 所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×