Baillie Gifford

The institution publishes an engagement report detailing the outcomes of its sustainability impact initiatives. Decision-making and oversight for the sustainability strategy are assigned to the highest governance body, while implementation responsibilities are delegated to various functions, teams, or committees. The stewardship policy outlines criteria for successful outcomes, escalation routes for unsuccessful efforts, and defines when escalations should occur.

It discloses the monetary amounts or shares of products, services, and capital linked to high-emitting and fossil fuel sectors, as well as the key sectors, clients, and investees targeted for climate engagement. Additionally, it reveals the financial provisions related to priority sectors with significant negative impacts on nature and the aggregate amounts allocated to nature-positive solutions. The institution also monitors its scope 1-2 emissions and discloses financial provisions for usually excluded groups, as defined by its own criteria.

The institution has the opportunity to disclose its method for determining a living wage in its operational regions. It includes anti-bribery and anti-corruption clauses in contracts but lacks specified consequences for breaches. It is recommended to link senior executive remuneration to sustainability targets. While stewardship principles incorporate environmental and social considerations, a more robust stewardship policy could better support environmental transitions and social best practices.

The institution discloses that it does not provide products or capital to certain fossil fuel projects but does not address all fossil fuels. It monitors scope 3 emissions beyond financed emissions but could expand coverage and rationale for exclusions. The methodology for carbon footprint calculation is partially detailed, with opportunities to include emissions coverage, data types, sources, and standards.

A breakdown of clients by income group is recommended, as is disclosing staff numbers or revenue by country. The institution should clarify processes to avoid unintended divestment from low-income countries due to sustainability strategies. Its risk assessment includes some ILO fundamental rights but could encompass the full set, with a recommendation to disclose mitigation processes for identified risks. Lastly, it is advised to provide examples of conclusions and actions taken regarding salient human rights issues from assessments in the past three years.

This scorecard refers to information in English which was publicly available by July 15 2024. AuM and Total assets are stated in USD for comparability and have been calculated based on reported local currency values multiplied by applicable IMF currency converter values.