This report assesses the performance of 20 of the largest asset managers in South Africa against key standards for responsible investment. The report concentrates on asset managers’ policies and practices regarding their investments, and not on their internal operations.
The overall performance of the South African asset managers is summarised in Table 1. For comparison, global manager performance as assessed in the ShareAction Report, is summarised in Appendix 1. Each firm has been awarded a grade depending on how many of the 20 key standards it met. These standards cover the most important pillars of responsible investment across the themes of governance and stewardship, climate, biodiversity, and social impacts. Firms are ranked by grade and then by overall score, which provides an additional level of detail.
The standards provide a concrete overview of how individual firms are performing, and a priority set of recommendations for asset managers to improve their performance. Standards relating to investment policies require that these policies apply to most or all of an asset manager’s funds, not only ESG-labelled funds (or similar).
The report methodology, including the process for selecting asset managers, is provided in Appendix 2. Examples are provided in this report of current leading practice which goes beyond the key standards and demonstrates what is possible.
In summary:
● Asset managers are encouraged to use this report, and its recommendations, to benchmark their own performance and inform areas for improvement. The key standards should be considered as a minimum set of expectations; leaders should go beyond these.
● Asset owners and asset consultants can use the information to assess the performance of asset managers on responsible investment issues and challenge them to improve their approach, using the examples of leading practice as a guide. The findings and key standards can be used to set clear expectations and inform the selection of asset managers.
● Policy makers can use the report to identify areas of sector-wide strength and weakness and to determine appropriate policy action to set higher standards for investors and protect the wider public interest. They can also use the examples of leading practice as evidence of what
is possible, and to refute arguments that no one in the market is doing this, or that certain measures would be too burdensome.
