Harvard Overseer Resigns over Fossil Fuel Investments

Kat Taylor accuses $37.1 billion endowment of funding ‘pernicious activities.’

Kathryn “Kat” Taylor has resigned as a member of Harvard’s Board of Overseers to protest the university’s failure to address what she said are unethical investments, particularly in fossil fuel companies, by its $37.1 billion endowment.

“After six years of Harvard’s inaction during my tenure, and many more that preceded my participation as an Overseer, I am today speaking publicly about our failure to act,” Taylor wrote in her resignation letter, which she submitted one day before the end of her six-year term.

“We have neither a moral nor a financial narrative to stand behind,” she said, adding that “Harvard’s endowment has severely underperformed financially compared to its peers, even as we have continued to invest in activities and products that undermine the well-being of our communities, nation, and planet.”

Taylor is the cofounder and CEO of California-based Beneficial State Bank, a community development bank, and in 2012 was elected to the Board of Overseers, Harvard’s second-highest governing body. Prior to her resignation, Taylor publicly announced her concerns over the endowment’s investments in a March 28 op-ed piece in The Harvard Crimson, as she called on Harvard Management Company (HMC) to divest from fossils fuels.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

“We should and would be horrified to find out that Harvard investments are actually funding some of the pernicious activities against which our standout academic leadership rails,” she wrote. “Ethical investment standards run to the core of our responsibility.”

She said that her concerns pertain to the potential presence in the endowment of “fossil fuel reserves we can never afford to burn, land purchases that may not respect indigenous rights, water holdings that threaten the human right to water, and investments at odds with the safety of children and first responders.”

In response to her resignation, Harvard University said it agreed that climate change is an urgent issue, but “we respectfully disagree on the means by which a university should confront it.”

HMC, the investment arm of the university, declined to comment on Taylor’s accusations, but said it has a sustainable investment policy that integrates environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) factors into investments. However, divestment, as Taylor has sought, is something HMC tends to avoid.

“The University maintains a strong presumption against divesting investment assets for reasons unrelated to the endowment’s financial strength and its capacity to further Harvard’s academic goals,” HMC states in its sustainable investment policy. “Harvard conceives of the endowment fundamentally as an economic resource, not as a lever to advance political positions or to exert economic pressure for social purposes.”

However, HMC said there are “very rare occasions” when companies’ activities are so “repugnant and ethically unjustifiable” that it calls for the university’s dissociation from those activities. HMC said such ethical considerations have led it to not own shares in “certain companies involved in the perpetuation of apartheid in South Africa, in the manufacture of tobacco products, and in enabling genocide in Darfur.” 

Taylor also criticized the lack of transparency with HMC’s investments, saying “we don’t know what we don’t know, especially now that so much of the endowment is held in opaque funds.”

She said she has tried to “work behind the scenes,” including meeting with student and faculty groups, and consulting with university officials. But her “soft power approach” was to no avail, she said. 

“Harvard may have already lost its great opportunity to lead, but it has not lost its responsibility to act and cannot indefinitely avoid taking up this issue,” she wrote, adding that because of Harvard’s dominant influence among world universities, a commitment to ethical standards “would likely open a floodgate of similarly principled decisions that truly move markets, policy, hearts, and minds.”

Tags: , , , ,

Over 100 US Multiemployer Pension Plans Face Insolvency

Despite rising funded status trend, many plans will run out of assets within 10 years.

While many US corporate pension plans have enjoyed steadily rising funded levels over the past couple of years, others are still struggling to stay afloat, as 107 multiemployer pension plans are projected to become insolvent over the next 20 years, according to a report from the Society of Actuaries.  

By most accounts, corporate pension plans have been moving toward full funding levels in recent years, and have seen significant improvements in their status since being devastated by the financial crisis 10 years ago.

Consulting firm Milliman reported earlier this month that the aggregate funded ratio of all multiemployer pension plans in the US reached 83%, the highest since 2008.

And Goldman Sachs Asset Management estimates that the funded level of the 50 largest US defined benefit plans in the S&P 500 surged to 85.4% at the end of 2017, from 81.1% at the end of 2016.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

The Society of Actuaries report looked at the pending insolvency on 115 “critical and declining” multiemployer pension plans, their participants, and contributing employers. The plans cover approximately 1.4 million participants, 719,000 of whom are retired and receiving annual benefits totaling more than $7.4 billion. Approximately 11,600 employers contribute to the plans, many of which are at risk of becoming insolvent within fewer than 10 years, according to the report.

The current estimated liability for the 115 plans covered is approximately $98 billion using the minimum funding requirements’ approach. Some $57 billion of that is not funded, for an overall funded ratio of 42%. When using a discount rate of 2.90%, it is $108 billion, according to the report. The discount rate of 2.90% represents a liability-weighted average of Treasury rates in April.

The report forecasts a steady increase in the number of insolvent plans: by 2028, 50 plans are projected to become insolvent, increasing to 91 by 2033, and 107 by 2038. The 21 plans projected to become insolvent by 2023 will cover approximately 95,000 participants at that time, and include 350 contributing employers. The 50 plans projected to become insolvent by 2028 will cover approximately 545,000 participants, with about 2,700 contributing employers.

The 91 plans projected to become insolvent by 2033 are expected to cover approximately 920,000 participants, and about 5,100 contributing employers; and the107 plans that are projected to become insolvent by 2038 will cover roughly 875,000 participants and approximately 11,350 contributing employers.  

Although the number of insolvent plans increases over time, the report found the number of participants in insolvent plans will decline after 2032, at which time deaths among the aging participants are expected to outpace the number of new employees among the ongoing plans.

The report also said that freezing benefit accruals, or closing plans to new entrants or new benefit accruals has little effect on either the timing or financial impact of insolvencies among the plans over the next 10 years.

Additionally, closing a plan to new entrants and freezing accruals “would deny the plan future contributions associated with active participants,” said the report, “which could outweigh the value of their future benefit accruals.”

Tags: , , ,

«