Activist investor group Ceres has issued two new documents focused on climate change and sustainability reporting, just as companies are in the midst of the busy financial reporting season. Using the spring reporting season as a backdrop that brings with it heightened scrutiny on corporate disclosure requirements and policies, one report assesses developments in climate change reporting and in Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") guidance from 2010 through 2013, while the other presents recommendations for stock exchange requirements related to sustainability reporting. A brief review of each report is presented below.
Cool Response: The SEC & Corporate Climate
Change Reporting – SEC Climate Guidance & S&P 500
Reporting – 2010 to 2013, by Ceres
(Coburn and Cook), February 2014. Ceres' February 2014
Cool Response report evaluates the scope of
climate risk disclosure of S&P 500 companies from 2009 through
2013, reviews the extent of SEC enforcement and other activity
related to corporate climate change risk disclosure, and concludes
with recommendations—directed to both the SEC and to publicly
traded companies—for improvements to risk disclosure for
investors.
The assessment starts with the fundamental premise that climate
change creates material risks for many companies and that without
climate change risk assessment in SEC filings, investor decisions
do not adequately account for these risks. According to the report,
early pressure from Ceres and other groups regarding this data gap
resulted in the SEC's issuance of its 2010 Guidance Regarding Disclosure Related to Climate
Change, following which the SEC has issued a number of comment
letters and, through its staff, has focused increased attention on
climate disclosure issues.
From this starting point, Cool Response presents an
assessment of 10-K filings by S&P 500 corporations from 2009
through 2013. Ceres' key findings include the following:
- While the adoption by the SEC of the Guidance triggered an increase in disclosure of climate change risk in 2010, climate change disclosure leveled off thereafter, resulting in little improvement since 2010.
- Many corporations do not discuss climate change risk in their annual SEC filings.
- There is wide variability, in both length and quality, in the climate change disclosures made in annual filings.
Cool Response at 11. The report then turns to the
SEC's own review of annual filings during this time, analyzing
the extent to which SEC staff members issued comment letters that
addressed climate change risks. Ceres concludes generally that the
SEC issued a minimal number of letters, that high-risk sectors were
not adequately targeted, that the comment letters were limited in
scope, and that the letters resulted in little change in actual
disclosures. Cool Response at 26–27.
Based on the assessment summarized above (and presented in
significant detail in the report), Ceres presents a series of
recommendations to both the SEC and companies for improvements to
climate change disclosure in annual filings. The report's
recommendations include a suggestion that the SEC place more
scrutiny on climate change disclosures in annual filings and
exercise its comment letter authority more aggressively. The report
also recommends that the SEC should target those industry segments
most at risk from climate change, including fossil fuel components
of the energy sector and the transportation sector. In addition,
Ceres recommends that SEC create a task force to focus on review of
climate change risks as well as better inter-agency coordination,
such as formal information-sharing with the United States
Environmental Protection Agency. Cool Response,
28–31. In terms of recommendations to companies, the report
recommends the development of corporate governance structures and
systems that address climate issues, including both risks and
opportunities, as well as enhanced recordkeeping of emissions and
emissions trends. The report also encourages companies to better
identify and understand risks associated with climate change and
disclosure of this information in its SEC filings. Cool
Response, at 31–35.
Ceres has established itself in the climate change disclosure
arena, and companies should follow the SEC's reaction to this
report closely. Given the heightened focus that may result from the
recommendations coming out of Ceres' review, companies should
continue to diligently review and disclose climate change risks in
accordance with the SEC's requirements. Companies may also find
value in reviewing the report's assessment as it relates to
additional "best practices" to improve the adequacy of
SEC disclosures, which could help protect companies in the event of
greater SEC scrutiny.
Investor Listing Standards Proposal: Recommendations
for Stock Exchange Requirements on Corporate Sustainability
Reporting, by Ceres and the Investor Network
on Climate Risk (a project of Ceres), March 2014. Ceres
also recently issued a report presenting proposed minimum global
standards for corporate sustainability reporting, which standards
would provide investors with improved sustainability information on a
variety of levels. The proposed standards, prepared by
investor members of Ceres, consist of a three-part recommendation
for a listing rule on sustainability disclosure. Section II of the
report presents a detailed description of the three parts, briefly
outlined as follows:
Item 1. ESG Materiality Assessment: The standards would require a sustainability, or ESG ("Environmental, Social and Governance"), materiality assessment to be disclosed in annual financial filings, in which management will discuss its approach to identifying the company's material ESG issues.
Item 2. ESG Issue Disclosure: This Item would require specific ESG disclosure, "on a 'comply or explain' basis," for a number of key ESG categories.
Item 3. ESG Disclosure Index: The new standards would create an avenue for cross-referencing annual financial filings and ESG information through an ESG Disclosure Index.
Proposal at 5.
For each Item, the report describes the basis for the
recommendation, includes a detailed explanation of the
recommendation, and provides recommendations for implementation.
The report also summarizes investor feedback on the proposal as
well as further recommendations for issuers, exchanges, and
regulators as these groups evaluate the proposal and implementation
challenges.
As with the findings and recommendations discussed with respect to
the Cool Response report, if the proposal presented by
Ceres gains traction with the SEC or other exchanges, companies
will want to understand the proposal and, more importantly, take
steps to ensure they have a voice in the drafting of any future
standards.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.