FinanceMap scores this financial institution in the following areas. Please navigate to the relevant tab for in-depth analysis
FinanceMap assesses these portfolios for this financial institution. Please navigate to the relevant tab for in-depth analysis.
Fossil fuel production companies are defined as those with primary sector of operations in the up-, mid-, and/or downstream segments of fossil fuel production. Green companies are defined as companies having over 75% revenue deriving from Substantial Contribution to Mitigation activities under the EU Taxonomy.
Portion of AUM Assessed: $66.1B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors in which the asset manager has shareholdings. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Azure Power Global Ltd | 4.9% |
| Nextera Energy Inc | 4.7% |
| Duke Energy Corp | 4.4% |
| Enel SpA | 3.6% |
| SSE PLC | 3.4% |
| Korea Electric Power Corp | 3.4% |
| Iberdrola SA | 3.2% |
| Southern Co | 3.1% |
| Engie SA | 3.0% |
| Kansai Electric Power Co Inc | 2.9% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Renault SA | 20.0% |
| Nissan Motor Co Ltd | 15.4% |
| Toyota Motor Corp | 9.9% |
| Volkswagen AG | 9.2% |
| Hyundai Motor Co | 7.2% |
| Mercedes Benz Group AG | 5.0% |
| Honda Motor Co Ltd | 4.8% |
| Stellantis NV | 4.5% |
| Bayerische Motoren Werke AG | 4.2% |
| General Motors Co | 3.2% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Glencore PLC | 65.7% |
| China Shenhua Energy Co Ltd | 15.5% |
| Coal India Ltd | 6.7% |
| Yankuang Energy Group Co Ltd | 3.6% |
| Exxaro Resources Ltd | 2.4% |
| Banpu PCL | 1.6% |
| Adaro Energy Indonesia TBK PT | 1.1% |
| Whitehaven Coal Ltd | 0.8% |
| Peabody Energy Corp | 0.7% |
| Arch Resources Inc | 0.6% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| BP PLC | 33.3% |
| Shell PLC | 28.6% |
| Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras | 5.9% |
| Exxon Mobil Corp | 3.1% |
| TotalEnergies SE | 2.9% |
| Chevron Corp | 2.5% |
| Eni SpA | 2.2% |
| CNOOC Ltd | 1.9% |
| Harbour Energy PLC | 1.8% |
| Conocophillips | 1.5% |
All equity funds that FinanceMap has identified as being managed by this asset manager. Click through to a fund's profile page to view in-depth analysis.
Legal & General Investment Management (LGIM) appears to be a leading corporate engager on climate. The asset manager has a clear strategy for engaging companies in all material climate sectors, assessing companies on climate drawing on around 40 data points across 5 key pillars. It has set out clear expectations for various climate-related sectors and clearly describes processes for monitoring engagements. Additionally, it has a robust escalation strategy should companies not comply, outlining minimum standards in its 2022 Climate Impact Pledge.
LGIM is actively engaging companies to transition their business models in line with the Paris Agreement. It is engaging across material climate sectors and has selected 59 companies for in-depth engagement which are influential in their sectors but not yet leaders in climate. LGIM’s engagements have supported behavior change on climate at the sector level, for example, in the autos sector, engagements with Honda resulted in improving its decarbonization commitment by aligning it to a 1.5 scenario, while targets at Ford and Honda are progressing towards SBTi approval. The asset manager is engaging on climate policy influence and has been engaging with General Motors since 2017 on the topic, which has resulted in improvements in climate-related lobbying disclosure. It is also an active collaborative engager on climate, co-leading several engagements as part of CA100+ including with BP and Fortum.
The asset manager appears to have highly effective governance structure and processes to support stewardship, having described stewardship roles and responsibilities in the organization as well as how it has sought clients’ views in its stewardship approach. LGIM is transparent about its engagements, regularly disclosing engagement subjects and content of engagements. It is also transparent about its voting record, disclosing proxy data along with rationale.
The asset manager appears to be willing to use shareholder authority to engage on climate, for example, it opposed the re-election of ExxonMobil’s Lead Independent Director and its chair/CEO and has laid out criteria for supporting management-proposed transition plans.
Insightia data suggests that Legal and General is broadly supportive of AGM resolutions InfluenceMap categorizes as in line with the Paris Agreement, supporting 67.3% in 2019, 85.2% in 2020, 85.1% in 2021, and 80.3% in 2022.
FinanceMap's methodology to measure the engagement process on climate was developed in consultation with several of the world's leading asset managers and uses key aspects of the UK Financial Reporting Council's 2020 Stewardship Code . The Stewardship Code was chosen to benchmark engagement quality as it provides an ambitious framework and detailed definitions of what constitutes effective engagement. FinanceMap defines the term ‘engagement’ as referring to all investor actions undertaken to influence the management strategy of the companies they own including private communications with corporate management and appointed advisors; questions at AGMs/other company meetings; comments on the company in the media; escalation and the shareholder resolution process (filing, voting behavior). FinanceMap’s methodology breaks the engagement process down into a set of sub-activities and looks for evidence associated with these across publicly available data sources.
Climate-relevance categorization of shareholder resolutions is based on the IPCC’s Special Report on 1.5°C and its concluded need for “rapid and far-reaching transitions in land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities.” FinanceMap scored voting on any resolution where the intent and likely outcome is consistent with this IPCC stated need. The voting data is drawn from asset managers' disclosures to the US Security Exchange Commission (SEC), asset manager websites (including third-party websites they link to), directly from the asset managers, and through specialist voting data provider Insightia. The full list of resolutions assessed is available here.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess financial institutions’ sustainable finance policy engagement. Every evidence piece is assessed on a five-point scale of -2,-1,0,1,2 or NA (not applicable)/NS (not scored). All queries, data sources, and evidence pieces are weighted against one another in a matrix system to arrive at a final top-level score. Clicking on specific cells will load the underlying evidence and information on how it has been assessed.
Legal & General appears to be actively advocating for ambitious regulation on sustainable finance, with most of its engagement carried out by its asset management arm, Legal & General Investment Management (LGIM).
Legal & General has supported net-zero by 2050 goals in the UK and the EU and appears to support reform to address short-termism in markets. In 2021, Legal & General’s CEO, Nigel Wilson, co-signed a letter to UK’s Prime Minister advocating for action to achieve net-zero by 2050. LGIM also appears to be strongly supportive of net-zero by 2050 and ambitious regulation on sustainable finance.
Legal & General appears to be most engaged on the issue of mandatory corporate climate disclosures, particularly in the UK and US. In various blogs throughout 2020-2021, LGIM has called for mandatory implementation of the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and advocated for EU policymakers to increase the ambition of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD). In its 2020 Active Ownership report, as well as in response to DWP and FCA during 2020-2021, LGIM strongly supported mandatory implementation of the TCFD for both pension schemes and listed issuers. It also advocated for increased ambition of BEIS’ proposed regulated corporate disclosures for public companies in 2020. In a 2022 letter to the US SEC, LGIM strongly supported its proposed climate change disclosure rule. In its 2021 Active Ownership report, LGIM stated support for the adoption of the TCFD standards in Japan. In its 2022 Active Ownership report, LGIM states support for mandatory nature-related disclosure.
In its Q1 2022 Active Ownership report, LGIM stated that it was engaging with policymakers on the EU taxonomy, advocating against weakening of criteria for agriculture and supporting the extension of the taxonomy to transition and harmful activities. In a 2023 article in Responsible Investor, LGIM stated support for the development of the UK green taxonomy.
In its 2021 CDP response, Legal & General indicated high-level support for the EU's new labels for climate benchmarks and the EU Ecolabel.
Legal & General stated high-level support for policy to integrate sustainability into investor duties regulation in its 2020 CDP response and LGIM's 2019 Active Ownership Report. However, in feedback to the European Commission on the EU’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation in 2020, LGIM argued that the regulation should be more flexible and suggested a key set of indicators in place of those proposed.
In a 2020 ESG Impact report and in response to the US Department of Labor consultation on fiduciary duties in 2020, LGIM strongly opposed proposed regulations that would limit fiduciaries' ESG Investing and voting on ESG issues. In 2020, it also opposed an SEC proposed rule which would limit shareholder rights.
LGIM's Active Ownership Report and ESG Impact reports contain a clear disclosure on sustainable finance policy engagement. There does not appear to be a group level disclosure, but Legal & General states that its policy engagement is primarily conducted by LGIM. Legal & General does not appear to disclose details of indirect engagement through trade associations at the group level. LGIM has disclosed memberships to third-party organizations in its Active Ownership reports, without further details of governance of its indirect engagement.
InfluenceMap’s methodology for assessing lobbying on sustainable finance policy closely follows InfluenceMap’s established methodology on climate policy engagement, which is used extensively by investors, including via the Climate Action 100+ investor engagement process. Our full methodology can be found here.
Under our assessment of sustainable finance lobbying, InfluenceMap considers engagement on all financial policies which intersect with climate and/or other sustainability issues. The analysis takes into account both the engagement of the financial institution and the activities of industry associations they hold membership of.
InfluenceMap’s methodology covers seven publicly available data sources, searching for evidence of engagement and corporate positioning since 2017. To determine the policy issues within the scope of the analysis, InfluenceMap breaks down sustainable finance policy engagement into a series of subcategories, or 'queries'. These are designed to cover high-level issues relating to the importance of sustainable finance, as well as more specific areas of sustainable finance policymaking. InfluenceMap’s research process searches for evidence of an organization's engagement with each sustainable finance policy issue, across each of the data sources.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess asset managers' corporate engagement programs. Every evidence piece is assessed on a five-point scale of -2,-1,0,1,2 or NA (not applicable)/NS (not scored). All queries, data sources, and evidence pieces are weighted against one another in a matrix system to arrive at a final top-level score. Clicking on specific cells will load the underlying evidence and information on how it has been assessed.
In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party.
In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Emma Douglas, Head of DC at Legal & General Investment Management is Chair of the Policy Board at the PLSA
Emma Douglas (Head of DC, LGIM)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Emma Douglas, Head of DC at Legal & General Investment Management is Chair of the Policy Board at the PLSA
Emma Douglas (Head of DC, LGIM)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Michelle Scrimgeour is Deputy Chair of the Board at The Investment Association (last checked September 2023).
Michelle Scrimgeour (CEO, LGIM)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Michelle Scrimgeour is Deputy Chair of the Board at The Investment Association (last checked September 2023).
Michelle Scrimgeour (CEO, LGIM)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Legal & General Investment Management is a member of UK Finance which is a national association member of EBF (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Legal & General Investment Management is a member of UK Finance which is a national association member of EBF (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Legal & General Investment Management is a member of the Investment Association which is a national association member of EFAMA (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Legal & General Investment Management is a member of the Investment Association which is a national association member of EFAMA (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
Open PDF file of Data Source