In 2016, 37% of institutional investors have “incorporated ESG
factors into decision making,” up from 29% in 2015 and 22% in 2013,
according to Callan’s fourth annual survey to assess the status of
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factor integration in the
U.S. institutional market.
Some of this increase appears to be
driven by funds in the health care sector, which saw particularly high
adoption rates (62%). Endowments (53%) and foundations (48%) continue to
be the highest adopters relative to other fund types, though corporate
funds saw a material uptick in incorporation relative to a year ago,
doubling from 15% in 2015 to 30% in 2016.
By fund size, large
funds (greater than $3 billion in assets) tend to have higher rates of
adoption of ESG factors into investment decision making than smaller
funds. The largest funds (with more than $20 billion in assets) had the
highest adoption rates at 71%.
The most common implementation of
ESG is to add language to the investment policy statement (cited by 53%
of respondents that incorporate ESG). The greatest barrier to funds
incorporating ESG into investment decision making continues to be a lack
of clarity over the value proposition (cited by 63% of respondents that
do not incorporate ESG).
This year there were 84 unique institutional U.S. funds that responded
to the survey, representing approximately $843 billion in assets. The
research report is available on Callan’s website. A free registration is required.
Across all income groups, retirees are collecting more in retirement income from employer sponsored retirement plans today than they were in the mid-1970s, according to a new report by the Investment Company Institute (ICI).
The study found that the share of retirees with private-sector pension income nearly doubled between 1975 and 2015. Moreover, the median income received by people with private-sector retirement income is up by more than 50%.
“Contrary to popular belief, private-sector pension income has become more prevalent over time, not less prevalent,” says Peter Brady, ICI senior economist and coauthor of the report. “This report refutes the myth that the period before the emergence of 401(k) plans in 1981 represented a ‘golden age’ of pension coverage and income—a belief that seems to be the basis of many retirement policy discussions.”
However, the paper also found that coverage by a defined benefit (DB) plan does not always result in retirement income.ICI says that although many retirees may have worked for companies that offered DB plans at some point in their careers, the combination of vesting rules, the timing of benefit accrual, and labor mobility resulted in many retirees getting little or no retirement income from these plans, according to the paper.
ICI notes that in 1975, when nearly 90% of private-sector pension plan participants were covered by DB plans, only 21% of retirees received any income—either directly or through a spouse—from private-sector pensions. Among those with private-sector retirement plan income, the median amount received per individual was about $5,000 in constant 2015 dollars.
In 2015, 42% of retirees received private-sector retirement plan income, and their median per capita amount of income increased to $7,800.
ICI concludes that “evidence suggests that retirement plan income continues to be under-reported in the survey data used to analyze retiree income, and thus, the increase of pension income since the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) may be understated.”
Furthermore, the paper found that Social Security remains the largest component of retiree income and the predominant income source for lower-income retirees. In 2015, Social Security benefits represented 52% of total retiree income and more than 85% of total income for retirees in the lowest 40% of the income distribution. Even for retirees in the highest income quintile, Social Security benefits represented nearly 30% of income in 2015.
ICI’s paper analyzes data on annual income from the Current Population Survey, a monthly survey conducted by the Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Every March, the BLS supplements the typical monthly survey questions with the Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC), a special set of detailed questions on the components of income which is one of the most widely used sources for statistics on annual income.
The BLS recently revised the ASEC questionnaire in response to growing evidence that income, including pension retirement income, was under-reported in the survey. ICI’s paper also includes an appendix, which provides additional information about the changes to the survey questionnaire and the impact those changes had on the reporting of pension income.