Nun sag, wie hast du’s mit der Geldanlage“, lautet die moderne Gretchenfrage. Für Klimaaktivisten ist sie besonders komplex. Denn im Dschungel der Finanzprodukte müssen sie den Kampf gegen die Klimakrise mit den Realitäten des Finanzmarkts in Einklang bringen. Die F.A.Z. hat mit Menschen gesprochen, die beides sind: Aktivisten und Anleger. Wie bahnen sie sich einen Weg durch den Dschungel?
Wer auf der Vergleichsplattform justetf.com nach Aktien-ETF sucht und den Filter „nur nachhaltige ETF“ setzt, erhält 710 Produkte angezeigt. Es gibt zahlreiche Siegel und Ratings, die Anlegern zeigen wollen, welche Finanzprodukte „grün“ sind. Da wäre etwa das FNG-Siegel, das vom Forum Nachhaltige Geldanlage seit 2015 vergeben wird.
Ein anderes Beispiel ist das Climetrics-Rating. Es soll Anlegern helfen, Klimaauswirkungen in ihre Anlageentscheidung einzubeziehen. Die Ratingagentur Morningstar zeichnet Fonds mit ein bis fünf „Nachhaltigkeits-Globen“ aus. Der amerikanische Finanzdienstleister MSCI bewertet mit seinem ESG-Rating seit 1999 die ökologischen und sozialen Risiken von Unternehmen.
Datenbank bietet Einblicke
Einfach sei es mit der Nachhaltigkeit aber nicht, stellt Matthias Schmitt fest. Er ist Teil der Bürgerinitiative „Klimaentscheid“, die vor Kurzem ein Themenpaket für mehr Klimaschutz mit der Stadt Frankfurt verhandelt hat. „Ich gebe mir wirklich Mühe, und trotzdem wäre mir kein Finanzprodukt bekannt, das ich sofort meinen Freunden empfehlen würde“, konstatiert er. Und das, obwohl er sich selbst als „Finanz-Nerd“, also mit tiefem Interesse, charakterisiert.
When Schmitt examines financial products for their sustainability, he likes to use the “Fair Funds” database. The portal is operated by Facing Finance, an association for “responsible use of financial resources,” and Urgewald, an organization for climate protection and human rights. You scan over 3,000 actively managed funds and ETFs on the platform for controversial company investments. Activists particularly like to use this database.
EU classified gas and nuclear power as sustainable
Why is sustainable investing so difficult? Frederike Potts from the Facing Finance association points out a definition problem: “Different forms of sustainable investment are regularly mixed up,” she explains. The EU actually wanted to solve the definition problem with the taxonomy regulation. This determines whether an economic activity is ecologically sustainable. “Instead we now have a trust problem,” regrets Potts.
Because in 2022 the EU will classify gas and nuclear power as sustainable. But the problems don’t end with definition and trust. In addition, it is very difficult or impossible to measure in numbers how sustainable financial products are. This is how fund companies keep getting into trouble: In 2023, the Deutsche Bank subsidiary DWS had to pay a fine of $25 million to the American stock exchange regulator. DWS committed label fraud by portraying funds sold as “sustainable” as greener than they actually were.
As a physics teacher, Holger Schmid deals a lot with sustainability. In his free time he is involved with the Koala Collective, a Frankfurt activist group. As a civil servant, he is not particularly worried about his financial situation in old age: “My main concern is to invest money that I don’t need in everyday life in something that makes the world a better place. “I don’t want it to just lie around and, in the worst case, go to supporting fossil fuels,” says Schmid. That’s why he doesn’t have an account with a traditional major bank, but rather with a sustainable bank.
“We only finance what the world receives”
The activist points to GLS Bank as an example of a sustainable bank. “It is only logical that climate activists also look at their accounts to see what happens to them in the end,” says Angelika Ivanov, spokeswoman for GLS Bank. By deciding who to lend to, banks enable either organic farming or new gas power plants.
The latter contradicts the basic principles of GLS Bank. Who receives loans from her is made transparent. “Roughly speaking, we only finance what the world receives. “Companies or projects that are related to fossil fuels, nuclear power, weapons, child labor or genetic engineering are therefore excluded,” explains Ivanov. A specially set up committee reviews the investment proposals several times a year. Banks such as “Bunq”, “Tomorrow” and the Umweltbank also promise more sustainability.
GLS Bank is organized as a cooperative. What is characteristic of cooperatives is that the individual members have a comparatively large right of co-determination. The cooperative is therefore sometimes loosely referred to as a “democratic form of company”. Activists like Holger Schmid and Matthias Schmitt like to buy shares in cooperatives. Schmid, for example, invested in an agricultural project. “Organic farmers can use the money to pay their rent and produce organic food. I don’t get a cent back, but it’s a good thing. Before the money doesn’t do anything for me, they should do business sustainably and preserve our biodiversity.”
The right cooperative
However, a return cannot be ruled out when investing in cooperatives. However, finding the right cooperative can be difficult. Matthias Schmitt advises focusing on people’s basic needs: “You can see which cooperatives satisfy these needs. It’s often particularly easy to get started in the food sector.”
The Hamburg Consumer Center points out the risks when investing in cooperatives. In contrast to cooperative banks, cooperatives are not subject to state control by Bafin. “In addition, there is no deposit protection for the money invested,” warns the Hamburg consumer advice center. “Long notice periods make repayment more difficult. We have received numerous inquiries from those affected who would like their money back.”
While Holger Schmid does not pay attention to financial returns when investing, many people feel differently. Almost half of Germans are worried about their financial situation in old age, shows a survey commissioned by the Federal Association of German Banks. One of these people is Frederike Potts from the Facing Finance association, which runs the “Fair Funds” database. As a young woman, when she looks at her pension gap, she feels very anxious, she says. Potts consciously chose an actively managed fund and looked intensively into the companies it contains and the provider’s commitment. “It wasn’t an impulse investment,” she notes.
Everyone has the choice
Goethe’s Faust doesn’t have a proper answer to Gretchen’s question, “Now tell me, how do you feel about religion?” So Gretchen gets specific: “Do you believe in God?” Even when it comes to sustainable investments, at some point the fundamental question arises: Does it even exist? “There are many sectors of the economy that cause less or no damage compared to the fossil industry,” says Mathias von Gemmingen, who is involved in the Fossil Free activist network in Berlin.
He points out that all players in the financial market have a choice. Nobody is forced to invest in fossil fuels. Globally, $4.3 trillion is invested in stocks and bonds of companies active in the fossil fuel industry. The number can be found in the “Investing in Climate Chaos 2024” report.
The umbrella organization of critical shareholders is pursuing a different strategy. The group draws attention to sustainability at general meetings of large corporations. According to German stock corporation law, every shareholder has the right to speak at the general meeting. The association sees itself as a shareholders’ association, but also as a human rights and environmental protection organization.
Shareholder activism and engagement
The Fridays for Future activist Helena Marschall spoke at the Siemens general meeting in 2020 about a controversial contract for a coal mine in Australia to remind Siemens of its climate responsibility. Although Siemens ultimately carried out the order, Marschall sees this as a successful “warning to German companies that they have a responsibility to the global community and future generations.”
In this case we are talking about shareholder activism and commitment. For this reason, Matthias Schmitt holds a single RWE share. He has transferred his right to speak and vote to the umbrella organization of critical shareholders. The thought that he holds a share, albeit a very small one, in a major producer of lignite gives him a stomach ache. “But I try everything that could help more climate protection because I don’t know what works,” says Schmitt.
Mathias von Gemmingen has long since lost faith in change from within through shareholders. What bothers the Berlin activist is the “double game” of many financial companies: “Anyone who is worried about the future of our planet not only demands a handful of eco-funds from their financial provider, but also that all products are 100 percent free of investments in the fossil industry.” He has never heard a doctor advise his patient to continue chain smoking if he eats a few apples in return.
In addition, the state as a shareholder would have to become much more at the center of the debate. He remembers discussions in the Bundestag on the subject of capital investment: “There were many excuses as to why the German state was still investing money in the fossil fuel industry. “It’s not all that easy,” reports the activist. Then a representative of the Dutch pension fund PME was connected via video conference.
The pension fund withdrew all investments from the fossil industry in 2021 after trying in vain to change something as a major shareholder. The PME representative was visibly happy. Finally he is no longer being lied to by fossil fuel companies and the returns have remained the same. “He joked that deputies could call him if they wanted to know how to do it. “It’s not all that complicated,” says von Gemmingen. Goethe’s Gretchen would have been happy if she had received such a clear answer to her question.
#Sustainable #funds #activists #investors