New GRESB Infrastructure Report Shows Infrastructure Sector Is Taking On Responsibilities Following COP21 Agreement
11 Oct, 2016
Amsterdam, October 11,
2016 – GRESB, an investor-driven organization that is transforming the way we
assess the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) performance of real
assets globally, today released the data of the inaugural 2016 GRESB
Infrastructure Assessment. The data covers 185 infrastructure funds and assets
from 53 countries across six continents. The high response rate and the data
show that ESG is increasingly embedded in infrastructure investments, with more
than 90% of participating funds having ESG policies and including ESG
considerations in their investment processes. However, measuring and reporting
of the environmental performance of infrastructure assets, including carbon
emissions, energy and water consumption, and waste and air pollutant emissions,
are not yet common practice in the infrastructure investment industry.
“Ensuring that infrastructure assets are managed sustainably is critical to their successful operation and ability to generate stable long-term cash flows,” said Patrick Kanters, Managing Director Global Real Estate & Infrastructure at APG Asset Management. “GRESB Infrastructure is an important step towards more coordination and alignment among the infrastructure investment community, which is reflected in the high number of participants in the first assessment. Ultimately globally consistent standards for assessing sustainability performance should stimulate sustainability developments in the sector as a whole”.
A total of 185 infrastructure entities, including 51 funds and 134 assets, reported to the 2016 Assessment. The infrastructure funds and assets in the database carry out a wide variety of business activities, such as operations of ports, airports, toll roads, conventional and renewable energy, and social infrastructure.
The GRESB Infrastructure Assessment has two complementary components: a Fund Assessment and an Asset Assessment. The Fund Assessment focuses on management and investment processes, addressing foundational ESG plans and policies, leadership and accountability, engagement strategies, communications processes and other factors. Fund performance results in 2016 are overall strong with an average Fund Score of 54 (out of 100), however, there is room for improvement when it comes to the performance results of the underlying assets. The Asset Assessment addresses asset-level plans and policies, implementation actions and operational performance, providing the information needed to understand efforts to maximize beneficial outputs, while minimizing social and environmental impacts. The average GRESB Asset score for all participating assets is 28.
“With the high number of funds and assets participating in the inaugural GRESB Infrastructure Assessment, it is clear that the interest in sustainable infrastructure is high,” said Emke Bus, Managing Director, ESG & Infrastructure at GRESB. “The development and operation of infrastructure projects will play an important role in achieving the ambitious carbon reductions goals set out by the COP-21 agreement in Paris. The involvement and engagement of institutional investors, such as banks, insurance companies, pension funds, and sovereign wealth funds in infrastructure investments that are low carbon, climate resilient and socially inclusive, is particularly important.”
2016 GRESB Infrastructure highlights:
performance results are overall strong at the fund level with room for
improvement in the performance results of the underlying assets.
average GRESB Asset Score for infrastructure assets is low and scores show a
wide dispersion across infrastructure types.
data for infrastructure assets demonstrates a strong variation in average GRESB
Asset scores per region. Assets that are diversified by region and assets in
Australia and New Zealand both achieve relatively high scores as well.
environmental risks is key for most infrastructure business activities, as
demonstrated by a high level of adoption of environmental policies.
on environmental performance indicators is not yet common practice. This is
reflected in relatively low average scores for this aspect.
scores are on average highest for the Implementation aspect, and lowest for the
aspect Certification & Awards.