Sustainable, Responsible &/or ESG Policy:

The fund's investment philosophy is anchored in the belief that markets are often inefficient in discounting future returns. The further we look into the future, the greater the potential inefficiency. This is because there is a cost to doing rigorous analysis and processing information, and such analysis is subject to behavioural bias. For this fund, the team focuses on areas where these inefficiencies are greatest, to find companies where the market is underestimating the longevity (duration) of company’s pricing power and where three-to five-year expectations are too low. The team also believes that consideration of ESG factors while analysing investment opportunities results in better financial and ESG outcomes, which aids the delivery of sustainable growth and high returns on capital over time.

At Fidelity, we use the term ‘sustainable investing’ to encompass ESG issues and related topics in this continually evolving area as we believe that Sustainable Investing better articulates what we aspire to as asset managers and stewards of our clients’ capital, which is to aim to enhance returns and promote responsible capital allocation.

Environmental: On the environmental side, this means the impact that companies have on their surroundings and anticipating how global themes such as climate change, water scarcity and the transition to a circular economy may impact their business models over the long-term. This is referred to as ‘dual materiality’ between the company and environment as they impact each other.

Social: Social issues are hugely important if companies are to ensure they are insulated against business risks. For example, companies must understand that their business relationships with suppliers and employees carry reputational and regulatory consequences. It is important that they comprehend the importance of having full oversight of their supply chain.

Governance: While governance issues have long been a focus of investors, today’s clients expect investment managers to play a key role in ensuring that investee companies operate to the highest standards. This is achieved by educating organisations on the benefits of strict and transparent accounting practices, diverse and inclusive leadership teams, and remuneration and incentive plans that align the goals of the company with those of the board.

The fund is subject to a firm-wide exclusion list, which includes, but is not limited to, companies involved in the production and/or distribution of cluster munitions and anti-personnel landmines. Besides our firm-wide Exclusion Policy, norms-based screening is performed and includes issuers which the Portfolio Managers consider have failed to conduct their business in accordance with accepted international norms, including as set out in the United Nations Global Compact. The fund also excludes civilian firearms, adult entertainment and gamily of issuers that derive more than 5% of their revenue threshold from those businesses.

Process:

The investment process of the fund can be broken down into following six different stages:

• Exclusions and screens
• Sustainable Investment (SI) assessment
• Idea generation
• Research and selection
• Portfolio construction and risk management
• Active ownership

Exclusions and screens

The starting investable universe of the fund consists of approximately 3,000 global companies in the fund’s index. For the fund, we aim to exclude companies whose activities or failures cause environmental or social harm. 

The exclusions which are applied to the strategy include:

Firm wide exclusions: The firm wide exclusion framework screens for issuers with involvement in the various categories of controversial weapons, the use of which is prohibited by international treaties or conventions. These include cluster munitions, landmines, biological weapons, chemical weapons, blinding laser weapons, incendiary weapons, non-detectable fragments. We also screen for nuclear weapons for non-signatories of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear-Weapons, specifically manufacturers of nuclear weapons, warheads, whole nuclear missiles, and/or nuclear fissile materials; manufacturers of components and delivery platforms developed and/or significantly modified for exclusive use in nuclear weapons; and issuers that provide support services related to nuclear weapons.

Fund exclusions: These apply to issuers who fail the Ten Principles of the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the United Nations Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights, Responsible Business Conduct and the International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions as identified by ISS-Ethix and MSCI and reviewed by Fidelity. This research is complemented by Fidelity’s forward-looking assessment of a company and any changes to its practices.

The above DNSH activities are excluded in the Sustainable Global Equity Fund at the indicated revenue threshold, along with the controversies and principal adverse impacts: For more details on Fidelity’s Sustainable Investing Framework please see: https://fidelityinternational.com/sustainable-investing-framework/ . *Qualifying criteria apply.

Companies that meet these criteria are then eligible for further consideration and sustainable investment assessment. 

SI assessment

The investible universe is defined using our SI assessment based on below criteria:

• Enabling environmental or social objectives. There are three possible routes to achieve this. The first is to have over 50% of revenues aligned to the EU Taxonomy. The second is to have over 50% of revenues aligned to UN Sustainable Development Goals, as determined by Fidelity’s SDG tool. The third is to have a validated Science Based Target Initiative (SBTi) target consistent with a 1.5 degree or lower scenario.
• Do No Significant Harm. We have a set of screens that identify issuers assessed to be causing harm. These are based on revenues from certain activities, controversies, and the worst performers on sustainability screens. (See exclusions section above).
• Minimum safeguards and good governance. This is covered by setting a minimum ESG rating threshold, fundamental analysis as well as the measures above.

Our Sustainability Team has built a proprietary SDG tool that is used to measure a company's Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) alignment.  It works by taking FactSet’s Revere Business Industry Classification System (RBICS) dataset, which breaks down an issuer's revenues across approximately 1,800 different categories, and then maps these different revenue streams to SDGs, looking at the underlying targets and indicators to determine whether or not a specific business activity is making a contribution to any of the SDGs.

Idea generation

The Portfolio Managers have a pluralistic approach to idea generation, relying on a combination of our research inputs from 118* analysts across the globe including approximately 38* dedicated ESG specialists), our proprietary SDG tool (to identify companies making a meaningful impact to United Nations Sustainable Development Goals), company meetings and conferences and third-party research (sector and thematic research, consultants/industry experts meetings), and quantitative screens to help narrow the universe. 

Only stocks which meet the required sustainability criteria and are consistent with the investment philosophy are considered for further analysis. 

In practical terms, the Portfolio Managers reference the investment recommendations of the Sustainability Team as well as other global diversified and global sector portfolio managers which provides them with an overall perspective and highlights the most promising investment themes and their best stock ideas. 

*Source: Fidelity International, as at 31 March 2024.

Research and selection 

The research and selection process consists of three stages: (1) Sustainability – finding companies that enable a more sustainable economy, (2) Fundamentals – rigorous bottom-up financial analysis and (3) Valuation – selecting underappreciated stocks with attractive risk-rewards. 

Stage 1 – Sustainability. The Portfolio Management Team works in collaboration with our fundamental and ESG analysts to understand and analyse a company’s ESG profile and SDG alignment. This involves a thorough assessment of ESG risks and opportunities at the stock (ESG factors) and sector levels to select companies having best practices, sustainable development, high ESG scores and low controversy risks. At a stock level, the focus is on identifying the companies best positioned to drive positive change and also those that are poised to benefit from multi decade megatrends. This is informed by an in-depth assessment of the company’s products and services to assess contribution to the United Nations SDGs. We also believe investing in businesses contributing to the SDGs is a way of accessing several powerful economic themes such as decarbonisation, financial inclusion, and health and wellbeing. These themes (among others) are aligned to sustainable development and provide a rich source of investment opportunity. 

This is an iterative process conducted alongside fundamental/financial analysis, with the two aspects informing one another. This approach also serves as a tool to highlight areas for further engagement with companies.

Stage 2 – Fundamentals. Detailed financial model and industry analysis is carried out in conjunction with the relevant Fidelity analyst to build a deep understanding of industry structure and how this may evolve in the future. This includes analysis of the company’s financial model, industry structure, capital allocation and risk profile. 

Throughout the research process, the Portfolio Managers use company meetings not only to build conviction in ideas, but also to draw broader conclusions and identify implications for other industries and businesses within that specific industry value chain. 

The Portfolio Managers are looking for companies which fit the following profiles:

Duration – companies with the durable competitive advantages or underappreciated growth tailwinds, where the market overlooks the compounding potential of these businesses. 

Change

• Structural change – Companies which are changing for the better, and the market has failed to recognise this.
• Transitory change – Companies where a short-term event is weighing on the perception and valuation, and masking a higher quality business.

Stage 3 – Valuation. For selecting underappreciated stocks with attractive risk-rewards, the Portfolio Managers use a combination of absolute and relative valuation metrics for both existing holdings and new potential candidates.

They derive an intrinsic value range using a range of valuation tools; returns based multiples 3+ years out, multiples versus history, versus peers and long-term Discounted Cash Flows (DCF) to build an expectation of Total Shareholder Return (TSR), to be used as a guide not a rule. ESG considerations and SDG profile are integrated through the Portfolio Managers' views on future growth, returns on capital, and warranted multiple of the company.

Portfolio construction and risk management 

The portfolio typically consists of 40–60 stocks. Position sizes typically range between 1.0%-5.0% of the portfolio. Position sizes are a function of the Portfolio Managers’ perceived assessment of the range of outcomes, valuation versus intrinsic value range and versus other positions within the portfolio, stock characteristics (for example, volatility) and portfolio fit (for example, contribution to common factor tracking error). The Portfolio Managers have developed a tool in conjunction with the Risk function building on these inputs; they will use this tool to support the management of existing position sizes (providing nudges as a position evolves from its appropriate position size) and to help size new positions appropriately in the context of the broader portfolio.

The holding period of any stock is impacted by the speed at which market consensus adjusts and the longevity of market cycles. Stocks are exited when the investment thesis breaks or is altered materially, or has played out and the company’s value consistently exceeds our intrinsic value range or in favour of better opportunities elsewhere and for portfolio risk management purposes. Also, the holding is revaluated when the company no longer qualifies as sustainable investment under our framework, a change in business mix undermines sustainability / SDG thesis, there’s an adverse change in ESG characteristics / controversy without adequate remediation, or if the company fails to address ESG issues following engagement on material issues. 

In a stable market environment, the expected turnover of the portfolio will be approximately 30 - 40%. An average holding period of around three years allows for deep and constructive engagement with companies held in the portfolio, driving better sustainability outcomes. 

Risk management: At the stock level, the Portfolio Managers undertake a thorough analysis of the fundamental and ESG risk profile of the company and the investment thesis. They also monitor all ongoing developments with the help of our analysts. 

At the total portfolio level, the Portfolio Managers assess intra-stock correlations and focus on calibrating position sizes in order to avoid unintended factor exposures or concentration risks. They also manage the portfolio’s style exposure with a view to delivering strong relative returns across a range of market environments. 

The Portfolio Managers participate in a Quarterly Fund Review (QFR) chaired by the relevant Head of Equities, which is also attended by a member of the Portfolio Construction and Risk Team. This review covers portfolio construction, liquidity, positions, trading activity, characteristics, style and risk in considerable detail.

Our risk oversight process also includes a Quarterly Sustainability Review (QSR) for sustainable funds. This review is supported an approximately 20-page data pack covering a range of ESG datapoints, including rating profiles and disparities (Fidelity and MSCI), engagement, voting, exclusions, carbon and climate data and Principle Adverse Impacts (PAIs). The QSR discussion is currently led by the Sustainability Team, in active dialogue with the Portfolio Managers, our Chief Investment Officer, the Investment Director, and data analysts. 

The QSR is designed to further strengthen the authentic integration of sustainability throughout our range of strategies, by providing a regular and structured forum for each fund to thoughtfully discuss and debate key sustainability aspects of the portfolio and its holdings, including whether the fund is meeting its sustainability objectives and how the strategy may seek to improve and monitor its outcomes. 

Although not the primary point of compliance or regulatory monitoring, the QSR provides an avenue for additional checks on and discussion of these issues. The QSR works as part of our established QFR process. 

The risk management processes described above are further bolstered by independent risk oversight checks and controls. These include daily monitoring of portfolio guidelines and constraints (considering regulatory requirements) by the Compliance function, and monthly Investment Risk Committees’ (IRCs’) evaluations of portfolio risk exposures and their alignment with expectations. 

Active ownership

The Portfolio Managers aim for sustainability focused meetings with all companies held within the fund at least once annually, to deliver improved ‘real world’ sustainability outcomes as well as improved long-term outcomes for shareholders. The Portfolio Managers along with the analyst and sustainable investing analyst will engage with the companies where needed to monitor and encourage improvement in a company’s ESG performance (including any shortcomings identified during the research process). These interactions also help us identify best practices that can inform other engagements and our investment process. As part of our active ownership, we communicate our voting practices and discuss areas of divergence with our holding companies. Failed engagements on material issues will also result in divestment. 

Resources, Affiliations & Corporate Strategies:

As an investment manager, we have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of our clients. In the context of sustainable investing, we have developed an approach with three key components (integration, stewardship, and solutions) that aim to provide our clients with investment offerings that meet their financial and non-financial objectives, and to comply with rapidly evolving sustainability regulations for product labelling and disclosure.

Fidelity’s sustainable investing approach is established on the foundation of our integration tools and processes. We believe ESG factors should be integrated into different investment processes. We have designed ratings and tools to identify the relevant risks and opportunities of issuers and established other processes to ensure that ESG factors are integrated consistently in our portfolios. We will also consider research insights from third-party data providers where relevant.

Our integration tools and processes also support the prioritisation of stewardship activities and the development of solutions that meet different regulatory requirements and client objectives. While sustainability ratings and scores allow for easier comparison of company performance, sustainability analysis should be both quantitative and qualitative and its findings should be interpreted in the context of financial performance to provide a holistic picture of a company’s performance.

Proprietary ratings and tools sit at the heart of Fidelity’s sustainable investing approach. They build on Fidelity’s heritage of fundamental research, the contribution from investment analysts and the expertise of the Sustainability Team. These tools include:

ESG Ratings: an assessment of management and mitigation of ESG risks

The Fidelity ESG Ratings aim to provide a forward-looking assessment of the extent to which an issuer’s performance on material sustainability issues either supports, or is likely to impair, long-term value creation for shareholders. The ratings are differentiated in their forward-looking emphasis and their use of issuer interaction and due diligence by Fidelity’s fundamental analysts as the main input to identify and assess the material ESG risks impacting an issuer. 

Our ESG Ratings are integrated into Fidelity’s investment process and are available to all members of the investment team on our internal research platform. Our rating serves as an additional source of insight and as a tool to support investment decisions.

Our ratings comprise a combination of E, S, and G indicators that aim to address the most material issues in each sector, providing a forward-looking view of an issuer’s ESG practices. The ratings’ methodology reflects the evolution of Fidelity’s ESG integration approach, founded on the principle of ‘double materiality’, focusing on ESG both from a business risk perspective and in terms of the environmental and societal implications of the issuer’s operations.

Four key principles underpin our ESG Ratings:

• Consideration of both non-financial and financial impacts ('double materiality'). A focus on absolute impacts allows comparison across sectors and geographies.
• Providing a forward-looking perspective that is complementary to our financial forecasts, helping to inform the long-term prospects of an individual issuer. 
• Consideration of material impact across more than 100 individual subsectors for a more focused and relevant set of indicators.
• Flexible output for different use cases. Individual E, S, and G scores provide guidance for determining an overall ESG score at the issuer level and trajectory ratings.

Our ESG Ratings framework is reviewed regularly to help identify the most material ESG factors for each sector. We aim to provide training on the ratings framework as it evolves and on specific themes and sectors to help enhance understanding of the material ESG factors required for analysis, and to enhance the quality and consistency of ratings. The in-depth nature of our approach means that our coverage is not as broad as a third-party provider, therefore we also use external research and rating providers, such as MSCI and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), to complement our internal research process and for the construction of our funds with specific sustainability objectives. Where possible and practical, we aim to use our own ESG ratings as a preferred data source for fundamental insight and measurement of product-level characteristics.

Climate Ratings: alignment to the outcome of net zero carbon emissions by 2050

Our Climate Ratings assess an issuer’s operational alignment to the objectives of the Paris Agreement, providing a holistic view of climate-related risks and opportunities.

To facilitate our assessment of an issuer’s net zero transition, we have developed a Climate Rating that assesses an issuer’s operational alignment to the objectives of the Paris Agreement (to limit global average temperature rise this century well below 2°C and to drive efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels). The Climate Rating is designed to be used in conjunction with our other ESG and climate tools to provide a more holistic view of an issuer’s exposure to climate-related risks and opportunities. 

Assessment criteria cover three key areas: 

• Carbon emissions disclosure: This assessment focuses on disclosure of Scope 1, Scope 2 and material Scope 3 (based on the definition of the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol). 
• Emissions reduction targets: This assessment concentrates on the issuer’s current emissions, net zero GHG emissions ambitions, targets and carbon reduction targets. 
• Climate governance: This assessment analyses executive remuneration plans linked to climate ambitions; governance responsibilities for climate at executive level; and board committees with responsibility for oversight of climate change policies. 

For high impact sectors, additional criteria may be included to take into account the unique requirements of certain hard-to-abate sectors in relation to achieving net zero. The Climate Rating does not rely on a single climate change model or scenario. The assessment undertaken takes into account a wide range of data sources including companies’ disclosure, inputs from the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), ISS Climate data (e.g., Implied Temperature Rise), and the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi).

SDG Tool: an assessment of positive contribution to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Fidelity’s SDG Tool aims to provide an assessment of an issuer’s positive contribution to environmental and social outcomes. It is intended to complement Fidelity’s ESG Ratings which provide an assessment of an entity’s management of adverse impacts arising from ESG issues. The SDG Tool also supports Fidelity’s definition of ‘sustainable investments’ under Europe’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). We aim to provide a separate analysis of the positive and negative issues an issuer may be exposed to, to help prevent the signal value from identifying a risk being offset by an unrelated positive contribution (e.g., poor corporate governance and a catastrophic tailing-dam failure are not mitigated by selling products that help the energy transition).

Primary use cases for the output of the model are: 

• Issuer and entity-level assessment: The model provides an assessment of the percentage of an issuer’s revenue that contributes to each SDG. This can be used as an input to help define a thematic investment universe. 
• SFDR: Under SFDR, there is a requirement to identify issuers that make a positive contribution to an environmental or social outcome and can qualify as ‘sustainable investments’. The SDG Tool is a key input in this process. 
• Reporting: The SDG Tool provides the ability to report the contribution of a fund’s investments to the SDGs to our clients on a consistent and scalable basis

Quarterly Sustainability Reviews (QSR): an internal forum to review relevant quantitative and qualitative metrics and discuss sustainability integration in specific strategies

The QSR is a component of the Quarterly Fund Reviews (QFRs) which cover performance risk, liquidity, etc. The QSR is a quantitative and qualitative exploration of a product’s sustainability profile, and may include aspects such as ESG ratings, engagement activity, climate characteristics, impact indicators and other datapoints. Attendees may include representatives from the Sustainability Team, the asset class CIO, portfolio manager(s), and risk professionals. The discussion is supported by a data pack which draws together various ESG data sources. The targeted scope of QSRs is actively managed products with a higher level of ESG integration, which may include certain EU SFDR Article 8 and Article 9 products, and UK SDR Labelled and ESG Promoted (unlabelled) products. Products disclosing under SFDR Article 6 are not subject to the QSR process. SI-related investment mandates could be covered by QSR on an optional basis or at the request of clients.

Our integration tools and processes also support the prioritisation of stewardship activities and the development of solutions that meet different regulatory requirements and client objectives. Furthermore, we promote active ownership as the stewards of our clients’ assets, supporting real world sustainability outcomes that help us to fulfil our fiduciary duty. Effective and outcomes-focused stewardship combines bottom-up corporate engagement, top-down thematic engagement, and system-wide stewardship. This approach is essential to drive change and encourages regular engagement and dialogue which we believe is more efficient than exclusions because this simply diverts the problem elsewhere. We believe that monitoring the progress of engagements is as important as initiating them to assess change over time. The outcomes (or lack of outcomes) resulting from our engagements can be reflected by investment analysts in our ESG ratings and used to inform investment decisions. Our Voting Principles and Guidelines sets out our minimum expectations for our investee companies in key areas including climate change, deforestation, and gender diversity. 

For further details, please refer to our Sustainable Investing Principles sustainable-investing-principles.pdf. 

Sustainability Team

As an active bottom-up research house, we have always looked beyond financial reporting to gauge the value of an investment. This involves maintaining ongoing dialogue with investee companies, staying vigilant to the evolving regulatory landscape, and monitoring other factors that could influence sustainable cash flows over our investment horizon, including those currently categorised as ESG. We began formally integrating ESG considerations into our investment and research processes since becoming a signatory to the Principles for Responsible Investment in October 2012. 

As a logical consequence of our focus on sustainability, we established our Sustainability Team over a decade ago. Initially a small group based in London, the team has now grown to include 30* professionals with the global presence spanning London, Singapore, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sydney and Luxembourg. Members of our Sustainability Team bring a diverse skill set, including expertise in research, climate science, and governance, with many boasting over a decade of experience.

*Source: Fidelity International, as at 31 December 2025.

The team’s scope now encompasses a wide range of activities related to ESG integration, engagement, policy, product development, sales and marketing, proxy voting as well as corporate sustainability. New members have contributed additional skills in legal and thematic areas, client and distribution expertise, and governance. 

The Sustainability Team functions across Fidelity in several ways:

• Collaborates closely with the broader investment team, supporting analysts in producing ESG research and conducting company-specific engagements, driving thematic engagement outcomes with sector analysts' input, and assisting portfolio managers in integrating ESG into their investment processes through proprietary tools, training, and frameworks.
• Works in tandem with the product team to develop sustainable investing frameworks and strategies in compliance with ESG regulations and tailored to diverse investor needs.
• Assists client-facing teams and clients with sustainable investing requirements and needs, including client communications, questionnaires, reporting, and training.

The team continues to evolve based on Fidelity's sustainable investing strategy, ensuring comprehensive support for all business areas and improving the quality and outcomes of engagement across asset classes.

Industry collaboration

Fidelity recognises the importance of networks and information platforms for sharing tools and pooling resources, using investor reporting as a source of learning. Our Sustainability Team keeps its current and potential membership of investor organisations under constant review. We monitor all international treaties, supranational organisations and other sustainability memberships to ensure we are up to date with market trends and to stay involved in the debate. We are proactive in strengthening our links within the investment industry, to determine effective ESG initiatives, maintain ethical standards, and attend seminars and conferences to integrate ESG into the investment process. Additionally, our Sustainability Team speaks publicly at industry events on responsible investment practices and promotes transparency in corporate governance issues. Please refer to the following list of our memberships, affiliations and signatories, listed by category:

Social Disparities

• 30% Club Australia (2021)
• 30% Club Hong Kong (2022)
• 30% Club Investors Group (2020)
• 30% Club Japan (2019)
• 40:40 Vision (2020)
• Armed Forces Covenant (2019)
• BBBA Talent Accelerator (2020)
• Business in the Community, Race at Work Charter (2020)
• Diversity Project (2017)
• DWP Disability Confident Scheme (2022)
• Find it, Fix it, Prevent it (CCLA) (2020)
• Global Business Collaboration Leadership Pledge (2022)
• If not now, then when? Campaign on Racial Diversity (2020)
• Investor Initiative on Human Rights Data (2024)
• Investors Against Slavery and Trafficking Asia-Pacific (2020)
• Investor Alliance for Human Rights (2025)
• Lord Mayor's Appeal - We Can Be (2019)
• LGBT Great (2019)
• Luxembourg National Diversity Charter (2020)
• Mental Health First Aid Training (2017)
• Minority Supplier Development UK (2020)
• Mindforward Alliance (2022)
• OutBritain (2022)
• President’s Challenge Enabling Employment Pledge and Enabling Mark (2023)
• PRI Reference Group on Human Rights and Social Issues (2025)
• Progress Together (2022)
• Purple Space (2019)
• Social Mobility Foundation (2021)
• Social Enterprise UK (2021)
• Stonewall (2016)
• Talent-Wise Employment Charter and Inclusive Organisations Recognition Scheme (2022)
• UN LGBTI Standards of Conduct in Business (2019)
• Valuable 500 (2019)
• Veteran-owned UK (2021)
• WEConnect International (2021)
• Women in Finance Charter (2017)
• WorkWell Leaders (2023)
• #10000 Black Interns (2020)

Climate Change:

• Asia Investor Group on Climate Change (2020)
• CDP - formerly Carbon Disclosure Project (2019)
• China Climate Engagement Initiative (2023)
• Climate Action 100+ (2019)
• Climate Bonds Initiative (2019)
• Coalition for Climate Resilient Investment (2019)
• Financial Services Development Council (2022)
• Global Standard on Responsible Corporate Climate Lobbying (2022)
• Green Finance Industry Taskforce Singapore (2020)
• Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (2021)
• Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (2020)
• Investor Group on Climate Change (2021)
• Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative (NZAMI) (2020)
• One Planet Asset Manager Initiative (2021)
• Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials (2022)
• Point Zero Carbon Programme (2022)
• Powering Past Coal Alliance (2021)
• Singapore Sustainable Finance Association (2024)
• Transition Pathway Initiative (2021)
• UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association (2010)

Good Governance:

• Asia Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (2015)
• Asian Corporate Governance Association (2004)
• Assogestioni (2007)
• Corporate Governance Forum (2009)
• European Sustainable Investment Forum (2017)
• European Public Real Estate Association (2023)
• Hong Kong Green Finance Association (2020)
• Hong Kong Principles of Responsible Ownership (2017)
• International Corporate Governance Network (2005)
• Investment Association (2010)
• Investor Agenda (2021)
• Investor Forum - UK (2014)
• Japanese Stewardship Code (2014)
• Principles for Responsible Investing (2012)
• Responsible Investment Association Australasia (2020)
• Taiwan Stock Exchange’s Stewardship Principles for Institutional Investors (2016)
• Transition Finance Council (2025)
• UK Stewardship Code (2010)
• World Benchmarking Alliance (2020)

Nature Loss:

• Ceres - Valuing Water Finance Initiative (2022)
• Farm Animal Investment Risk and Return (2020)
• Finance for Biodiversity Pledge (2021)
• Green Praxis Biodiversity (2022)
• Investor Policy Dialogue on Deforestation (2024)
• Natural Capital Investment Alliance (2021)
• Nature Action 100 (2023)
• Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures Forum (2021)
• Finance Sector Deforestation Action (2021)