- The Biden administration is addressing climate issues on a number of fronts.
- The proposals consistently address themes of environmental justice and climate justice.
- Our research teams track both concepts, even as understanding of their materiality evolves.
Breckinridge investment team members explored prospects for legislation and regulation related to key Biden administration environmental- and climate-related initiatives in Breckinridge’s spring ESG Newsletter. In this issue, members of our credit research teams discuss concepts of environmental justice (EJ) and climate justice (CJ) that are integrated in the administration’s efforts. Participants included Co-Heads, Research, Nicholas Elfner and Adam Stern, Director, ESG Research, Robert Fernandez, and Director, Municipal Research, Andrew Teras.
Rob: The Biden Administration’s climate initiatives remain front and center on the policymaking front. The announcements consistently address EJ and CJ. I sometimes wonder if market participants are familiar with those concepts.
Andrew: The trend continued on May 24, 2021. Ahead of the summer hurricane and wildfire season, the administration is doubling spending to help communities mitigate summer hurricane and wildfire risks. The announcement noted that the money would help communities, “including those too often overlooked.”
Nick: Comments from the President and cabinet members acknowledge research that shows not all people bear an equal amount of the burden posed by environmental concerns and climate change. The majority of the impacts are felt in vulnerable communities. It may be worth reviewing the terms.
Adam: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines EJ as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income when it comes to developing, implementing, and enforcing environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
The EPA has had an office of Environmental Justice since the early 1990s.
Climate Justice is a kind of subset of EJ. It’s concerned with local climate impacts, particularly as they relate to traditionally vulnerable or marginalized groups living in specific areas, and the importance of community voice.
Rob: EJ and CJ both begin from the ideas that not all people are equally impacted by environmental and climate concerns, including climate change, urban heat islands, extreme weather events, poor air or lack of water or poor water quality due pollution or deteriorating infrastructure.
Andrew: I am often asked by investors for examples that illustrate inequity in the impact of environmental and climate issues within the context of infrastructure. I point to incidents like the contaminated water crisis in Flint, Michigan, where the population was predominantly minority and 40 percent poor.
Nick: Examples of inequity also are ingrained in the growth of industry in the country. USA Today recently published a report discussing a region along the Mississippi River in Louisiana where petrochemical plants are located. The population is largely Black, and the area is colloquially known as Cancer Alley.
Rob: These examples and others like them are the consequence of longstanding issues that frequently were shaped by historical conditions like redlining or economic development projects that had negative outcomes for the people who live in the area.
Adam: We’re starting to see more municipalities and corporations trying to address these types of issues under the umbrella of more equitable and inclusive growth. For example, anecdotally, more water utilities are inching toward income-support programs for rising utility bills. More cities are considering greening efforts. That can mean more trees or park space in more neighborhoods, which tend to be associated with less asthma, lower stress levels, and lower temperatures. Sometimes, communities are issuing debt to fund these strategies, whether directly or indirectly.
Whether these efforts materiality impact credit quality remains an open question and is one that is unlikely to be answered anytime soon.
For example, one issue is whether remediating EJ issues will make these communities sufficiently more competitive, regardless of the moral issues involved. For every community that opts to address EJ issues, there’s another that attracts capital and business growth by largely ignoring them. Washoe County, NV, is nice example. That area is growing rapidly thanks to an extremely light-touch regulatory and tax environment. Washoe County can easily avoid the deliberation and equal-access requirements that characterize good EJ-focused economic development planning. So, it may turn out that addressing EJ issues are necessary, but not sufficient, to promote long-term credit health.
Andrew: The Biden administration is proposing a wide range of infrastructure projects that can help mitigate or reverse negative effects of environmental concerns on cities, regions, and people. Its announcements suggest that it would approach these projects, if approved, with an eye to address the historic inequities that are contemplated in the EJ and CJ concepts.
(See list of announcements and initiatives accompanying this article for examples.)
Nick: Governmental agencies are reporting on their approach to justice concepts. The Department of Transportation has established an equity council. The Department of Energy website describes tactics for implementing EJ, including community engagement initiatives and efforts to deliver resources to overburdened, underserved, and economically distressed communities. The EPA established an Office of Environmental Justice.
Rob: For Breckinridge, as we consider investments in municipalities and businesses, but, to your point Adam, clients want to understand if and how these types of issues are material to our investment process.
Adam: Right. One way to think about it, purely from a credit standpoint, is that it makes sense to be exploring the questions around EJ. First, communities think these issues are important, and some are spending scarce resources on them. So, investors need to be aware of them, as well. Second, I think it is intuitive that addressing the health of a population could lead to more sustainable and resilient communities, over time. We integrate these kinds of considerations in our city/county frameworks.
In this context, the administration’s infrastructure proposals could help some communities, over the long term. But again, we don’t really know yet. As an initial matter, any new federal support will need to be spent on the right priorities and projects.
Nick: Industry is a key player. We assess the environmental and climate-related initiatives of companies in our environmental, social and governance analysis and in our engagement meetings with corporate managements. Those companies that publish corporate sustainability reports often document these efforts and their progress. Companies that work within their communities to ensure that all voices are heard, and inequities are addressed or avoided often are building more sustainable business models.
Andrew: For businesses and municipalities, EJ and CJ principles can be achieved when stakeholders make them a priority in ways that are economically and operationally feasible.
This material provides general and/or educational information and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer of Breckinridge services or products or as legal, tax or investment advice. The content is current as of the time of writing or as designated within the material. All information, including the opinions and views of Breckinridge, is subject to change without notice.
Any estimates, targets, and projections are based on Breckinridge research, analysis, and assumptions. No assurances can be made that any such estimate, target or projection will be accurate; actual results may differ substantially.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Breckinridge makes no assurances, warranties or representations that any strategies described herein will meet their investment objectives or incur any profits. Any index results shown are for illustrative purposes and do not represent the performance of any specific investment. Indices are unmanaged and investors cannot directly invest in them. They do not reflect any management, custody, transaction or other expenses, and generally assume reinvestment of dividends, income and capital gains. Performance of indices may be more or less volatile than any investment strategy.
Performance results for Breckinridge’s investment strategies include the reinvestment of interest and any other earnings, but do not reflect any brokerage or trading costs a client would have paid. Results may not reflect the impact that any material market or economic factors would have had on the accounts during the time period. Due to differences in client restrictions, objectives, cash flows, and other such factors, individual client account performance may differ substantially from the performance presented.
All investments involve risk, including loss of principal. Diversification cannot assure a profit or protect against loss. Fixed income investments have varying degrees of credit risk, interest rate risk, default risk, and prepayment and extension risk. In general, bond prices rise when interest rates fall and vice versa. This effect is usually more pronounced for longer-term securities. Income from municipal bonds can be declared taxable because of unfavorable changes in tax laws, adverse interpretations by the IRS or state tax authorities, or noncompliant conduct of a bond issuer.
Breckinridge believes that the assessment of ESG risks, including those associated with climate change, can improve overall risk analysis. When integrating ESG analysis with traditional financial analysis, Breckinridge’s investment team will consider ESG factors but may conclude that other attributes outweigh the ESG considerations when making investment decisions.
There is no guarantee that integrating ESG analysis will improve risk-adjusted returns, lower portfolio volatility over any specific time period, or outperform the broader market or other strategies that do not utilize ESG analysis when selecting investments. The consideration of ESG factors may limit investment opportunities available to a portfolio. In addition, ESG data often lacks standardization, consistency and transparency and for certain companies such data may not be available, complete or accurate.
Breckinridge’s ESG analysis is based on third party data and Breckinridge analysts’ internal analysis. Analysts will review a variety of sources such as corporate sustainability reports, data subscriptions, and research reports to obtain available metrics for internally developed ESG frameworks. Qualitative ESG information is obtained from corporate sustainability reports, engagement discussion with corporate management teams, among others. A high sustainability rating does not mean it will be included in a portfolio, nor does it mean that a bond will provide profits or avoid losses.
Net Zero alignment and classifications are defined by Breckinridge and are subjective in nature. Although our classification methodology is informed by the Net Zero Investment Framework Implementation Guide as outlined by the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, it may not align with the methodology or definition used by other companies or advisors. Breckinridge is a member of the Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials and uses the financed emissions methodology to track, monitor and allocate emissions. These differences should be considered when comparing Net Zero application and strategies.
Targets and goals for Net Zero can change over time and could differ from individual client portfolios. Breckinridge will continue to invest in companies with exposure to fossil fuels; however, we may adjust our exposure to these types of investments based on net zero alignment and classifications over time.
Any specific securities mentioned are for illustrative and example only. They do not necessarily represent actual investments in any client portfolio.
The effectiveness of any tax management strategy is largely dependent on each client’s entire tax and investment profile, including investments made outside of Breckinridge’s advisory services. As such, there is a risk that the strategy used to reduce the tax liability of the client is not the most effective for every client. Breckinridge is not a tax advisor and does not provide personal tax advice. Investors should consult with their tax professionals regarding tax strategies and associated consequences.
Federal and local tax laws can change at any time. These changes can impact tax consequences for investors, who should consult with a tax professional before making any decisions.
The content may contain information taken from unaffiliated third-party sources. Breckinridge believes such information is reliable but does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. Any third-party websites included in the content has been provided for reference only. Please see the Terms & Conditions page for third party licensing disclaimers.