I believe big institutions have unique potential to create change, and I believe that we as individuals have unique power to influence the direction that those institutions take.
我相信大型机构 有能力带来改变, 我也相信我们每一个人 有能力 来影响这些大型机构的前进方向。
Now, these beliefs did not come naturally to me, because trusting big institutions, not really part of my family legacy. My mother escaped North Korea when she was 10 years old. To do so, she had to elude every big institution in her life: repressive governments, occupying armies and even armed border patrols. Later, when she decided she wanted to emigrate to the United States, she had to defy an entire culture that said the girls would never be the best and brightest. Only because her name happens to sound like a boy's was she able to finagle her way into the government immigration exam to come to the United States.
当然,我的这些想法并不是与生俱来的, 因为相信权威, 真的不是我们家的传统。 我的母亲在她10岁那年, 逃离了北朝鲜。 为达到这一目标,她逃离了 人生中所有的大型机构: 专制的政府,占领军, 甚至武装边防巡逻队。 之后,当她决定移民美国的时候, 她必须告别 轻视女性的文化传统。 仅仅因为她的名字像个男孩子, 她才得到了参加政府移民考试的机会, 来到美国。
Because of her bravery and passion, I've had all the opportunities that she never did, and that has made my story so different. Instead of running away from big institutions, I've actually run toward them. I've had the chance over the course of my career to work for The Wall Street Journal, the White House and now one of the largest financial institutions in the world, where I lead sustainable investing.
由于她的勇敢和坚持, 我才得到了她从未得到过的机会, 而这使我的人生大为不同。 我没有逃离大型机构, 而是奔向它们。 我的职业生涯从未远离过它们, 比如《华尔街日报》, 白宫, 现在我在一家全球最大型的金融机构任职, 主管可持续性投资。
Now, these institutions are like tankers, and working inside of them, I've come to appreciate what large wakes they can leave, and I've become convinced that the institution of the global capital markets, the nearly 290 trillion dollars of stocks and bonds in the world, that that may be one of our most powerful forces for positive social change at our disposal, if we ask it to be.
这些大型机构就像油轮, 而在其中工作, 使我能发现它们留下的巨大尾迹, 我逐渐相信, 这个掌管全球资本市场的机构, 手握全球价值290万亿美元的股票和债券, 是能供我们驱遣的,为社会带来积极变化的 最强大的力量之一, 如果我们愿意的话。
Now, I know some of you are thinking, global capital markets, positive social change, not usually in the same sentence or even the same paragraph. I think many people think of the capital markets kind of like an ocean. It's a vast, impersonal, uncaring force of nature that is not affected by our wishes or desires. So the best that our little savings accounts or retirement accounts can do is to try to catch some waves in the good cycles and hope that we don't get inundated in the turbulent ones, but certainly our decisions on how to steer our little retirement accounts don't affect the tides, don't change the shape or size or direction of the waves.
我知道你们有人会想, 全球资本市场和积极的社会变化, 好像八竿子打不着。 许多人认为,资本市场 就像一片汪洋。 它浩大、无情、冷漠, 不随我们的想法或意愿变化。 因此,我们储蓄账户 或者退休金账户上那点小钱,顶多能 搭一搭牛市的顺风车, 祈祷自己不要遇上熊市, 当然,我们对自己退休金账户的那点小操作, 对大局毫无影响, 改变不了大盘的走势或者规模。
But why is that? Because actually, one third of this ocean of capital actually belongs to individuals like us, and most of the rest of the capital markets is controlled by the institutions that get their power and authority and their capital from us, as members, participants, beneficiaries, shareholders or citizens. So if we are the ultimate owners of the capital markets, why aren't we able to make our voices heard? Why can't we make some waves?
但原因何在呢? 因为事实上,这个资本海洋的三分之一 都掌握在个人手里,就在我们手里 而剩余的大部分, 被那些大型机构掌握,而它们的权力 和资本都是来源于我们, 我们是成员、参与者、受益人、股东或者公民。 既然我们是资本市场的最终拥有者, 为什么我们没有话语权呢? 为什么我们不能弄出点动静来呢?
So let me ask you a different question: did any of you buy fair trade coffee the last time you were at a supermarket or at Starbucks? OK. Do any of you go to the restaurant and order the sustainably farmed trout instead of the miso-glazed Chilean sea bass that you really wish you could have? Do any of you drive hybrid cars or even electric cars?
我先问你们另一个问题: 你们最近一次去超市或者星巴克, 有没有买过公平贸易咖啡? 好的。有没有人去餐厅吃饭, 为了环保,点养殖鲑鱼, 而不是野生的智利鲈鱼, 尽管你很想吃野生的? 有没有人开混合动力车甚至电动车?
So why do we do these things? Right? One electric car doesn't amount to much in a fleet of 1.2 billion combustion engine vehicles. One fish is just one fish in the sea. And one cup of coffee doesn't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. But we do these things because we believe they matter, that our actions add up, that our choices might influence others and collectively, what an impact we can have.
我们究竟为什么要做这些事情? 对吧?1辆电动车对12亿辆燃油车, 简直太微不足道。 一条鱼对于整个海洋算不了什么。 一杯咖啡 对于堆积成山的咖啡豆同样微不足道。 但我们做这些事情, 是因为我们相信它有意义, 我们的行动能积少成多, 能影响周围的人, 最终能汇聚成巨大的力量。
So, in my bag I have a coffee mug that I bought a couple of years ago. It's a reusable mug. It has all these things printed on it. Look at some of the things that are on it, that it says.
我包里有一个咖啡杯,好几年前买的。 它能反复使用。 上面印了许多话。 其中几句是这样说的。
"This one cup can be used again and again."
“这个杯子能反复使用多次。”
"This one cup may inspire others to use one too."
“这个杯子能鼓励越来越多的人也来使用它。”
"This one cup helps save the planet." I had no idea this plastic cup was so powerful.
“这个杯子能拯救我们的地球。” 我真没想到一个塑料杯子这么牛。
(Laughter)
(笑声)
So why do we think that our choice of a four dollar shade-grown fair trade artisanal cup of coffee in a reusable mug matters, but what we do with 4,000 dollars in our investment account for our IRA doesn't? Why can't we tell the supermarket and the capital markets that we care, that we care about fair labor standards, that we care about sustainable production methods and about healthy communities? Why aren't we voting with our investment dollars, but we would vote with our lattes?
因此,我们为何会认为 购买4美元一杯的公平贸易树荫咖啡, 用可重复使用的马克杯就有意义, 而善用我们的退休金投资账户 里的4000美金, 就没意义呢? 为什么我们不告诉超市,告诉资本市场 我们并不冷漠, 我们也关心公平劳动标准, 关心可持续发展的生产方式, 关心健康的社区。 为何我们不靠投资来表明态度, 而要靠拿铁?
So I think it has something to do with the myths, the fables that we all carry around in our collective consciousness. Do you remember the Grimm's fairy tale about the magic porridge pot? If you said to the pot, "Boil, little pot, boil," it would fill up with sweet porridge. And if you said, "Stop, little pot, stop," it would stop. But if you got the words wrong, it wouldn't listen, and things could go terribly awry. So I think when it comes to markets, we have a little bit of a similar fable in our heads. We believe that the markets is this magic pot that obeys only one command: make more money. Only those words said exactly that way will make the pot fill up with gold. Add in some extra words like "protect the environment," the spell might not work. Put in the wrong words like "promote social justice," and you might see your gold coins shrink or even vanish entirely, according to this fable.
我觉得这跟我们的错误观念有关, 而这一观念在我们的集体意识中根深蒂固。 大家还记得《格林童话》中那个神奇的粥锅吗? 如果你对粥锅说, “煮吧,小锅,煮吧” 它就会煮出一锅香甜的粥。 如果你说,“停止吧,小锅,别煮了” 它就会停下来。 但如果你记错了咒语, 小锅就不会听你的, 事情会变得一团糟。 因此当我们讲到市场的时候, 我们心里会有一个错觉。 我们觉得市场就像那个神奇的小锅一样, 只听从一种命令: 赚更多的钱。 只有准确无误地说出这句咒语, 小锅才会装满金子。 一旦加上多余的话,比如“保护环境”, 咒语就失效了。 加上几个错误的词,比如“促进社会公平”, 你的金币就缩水了, 甚至完全消失,这就是我们的错觉。
So we asked people, what do you really think? And we actually went out and polled a thousand individual investors, and we found something fascinating. Overwhelmingly, people wanted to add those extra words into the formula. 71 percent of people said yes, they were interested in sustainable investing, which we define as taking the best in class investment process that you already have traditionally and adding in the extra information you get when you think about the environment and society and good governance. 71 percent wanted that. 72 percent said that they believe that companies who did that would actually do better financially. So people really do believe that you can do well by doing good. But here was the weird thing: 54 percent of the people still said if they put their money in those kinds of stocks, they thought that they would make less money.
因此我们问了很多人,你们到底是怎么想的? 我们针对一千名个体投资者进行了问卷调查, 发现了一些很有意思的事情。 绝大部分的人, 希望在咒语中加入更多的词。 71%的人说,没错, 我们对可持续投资有兴趣, 我们对“可持续投资”的定义是, 首先,按照传统标准来看, 这项投资要是最好的(最赚钱的) 除此之外,还要兼顾 环境(保护)、社会(责任)和良好管理。 71%的投资者表示认可。 72%的人认为,上述三点完成得好的公司, 赚的钱也不会少。 由此看来,人们真的相信善有善报。 但奇怪的是, 有54%的人 依然认为,如果他们把钱投到这样的股票上, 他们会赚得比较少。
So is it true? Do you get less sweet porridge if you invest in shade-grown coffee instead of drinking it? Well, you know, the investors in companies like Burt's Bees or Ben & Jerry's wouldn't say so. Right? Both of those started out as small, socially conscious companies that ended up becoming so popular with consumers that the giants Unilever and Clorox bought them for hundreds of millions of dollars each. But here's the important thing. Those corporations realized that if they wanted to protect the value of their investments, they had to preserve that socially conscious mission. If they didn't keep adding in those extra words of environmentally friendly and socially conscious, those brands wouldn't make more money.
是这样吗? 你不喝树荫咖啡,而是投资它, 你会亏吗? 伯特小蜜蜂和本杰利公司的投资者 他们可不会这么想。 对吧?这两家公司创立之初都很小, 怀有社会责任, 结果赢得了众多的消费者, 最后被联合利华和高乐氏这样的大公司 以数亿美元的价格收购, 两家都是。 重要的是, (收购他们的)这两家大公司都明白, 如果他们想保护自己的投资, 他们就必须继续保留这种社会责任。 如果这些品牌不在生财咒语里加点词, 例如“环境友好”、“社会责任”之类, 他们就没法赚更多的钱。
But maybe this is just the exception the proves the rule, right? The serious companies that fund our economy and that fund our retirements and that really make the world go round, they need to stick to making more money. So, Harvard Business School actually researched this, and they found something fascinating. If you had invested a dollar 20 years ago in a portfolio of companies that focused narrowly on making more money quarter by quarter, that one dollar would have grown to 14 dollars and 46 cents. That's not bad until you consider that if instead you'd invested that same dollar in a portfolio of companies that focused on growing their business and on the most important environmental and social issues, that one dollar would have grown to 28 dollars and 36 cents. almost twice as much sweet porridge.
但也许他们仅仅只是例外,对吧? 那些专注于赚钱的公司推动了我们的经济, 支付我们退休金,少了他们这世界真没法转, 他们必须专注于创造更多财富。 因此,哈佛商学院进行了一项研究, 研究结果非常有意思。 假设你在20年前用1美元 购买了一份理财组合产品, 你投资的公司只关心如何赚钱, 业绩逐渐上升, 这1美元 最终会变成14美元46美分。 这已经很不错了, 但同样是1美元, 如果你投资的公司 不仅关心其业绩增长, 还关注最紧迫的环境和社会问题, 那这1美元 最终会变成28美元36美分, 几乎是前者的2倍。
Now, let's be clear, they didn't make that outperformance by giving away money to seem like a nice corporate citizen. They did it by focusing on the things that matter to their business, like wasting less energy and water in their manufacturing processes; like making sure the CEO contracts had the CEOs incentivized for the long-term results of the company and the communities they served, not just quarterly results; or building a first class culture that would have higher employee loyalty, retention and productivity. Now, Harvard's not alone. Oxford also did a research study where they examined 120 different studies looking at the effect of sustainability and economic results, and they found time and time and time again that the companies that cared about these kinds of important things actually had better operational efficiency, lower cost of capital and better performance in their stock price.
当然,我们要明白一点, 他们并没有作秀, 通过四处撒钱来换取好名声。 他们采取了许多对于生意有利的措施, 比如在生产过程中 减少能源和水的浪费; 比如给予首席执行官适当激励, 使其专注于公司和所在社区的长期发展, 而不仅仅盯着每季财报; 比如建立一流的企业文化, 提高员工的忠诚度, 减少员工流失,提高生产率。 除了哈佛大学 牛津大学也开展了一项研究, 分析了120项不同研究(的结果) 这些研究都致力于弄清 可持续性对于公司收益的影响, 而结果一而再,再而三的表明, 那些重视可持续发展的公司 往往具有更高的经营效率, 更低的成本, 更高的股票价格。
And then there's Al Gore. So 20 years ago, when I worked for Al Gore in the White House, he was one of the early pioneers pleading with businesses and governments to pay attention to the challenges of climate change. Post-White House, he opened an investment firm called Generation, where he baked environmental sustainability and other things right into the core investment process. And at the time there was a good bit of skepticism about his views. Ten years later, his track record is one more proof point that sustainable investing done right can be sound investing. Far from making less sweet porridge because he added sustainability into the mix, he actually significantly outperformed the benchmark.
接下来我们聊聊阿尔•戈尔。 20年前,我在白宫为阿尔•戈尔工作, 他是最早呼吁商业和政府 重视气候变化问题的先锋之一。 离开白宫后,他创立了一家名为“世代”的投资公司, 将环境可持续发展和其他课题 作为公司的主要投资方向。 当年他的观点可是遭到了不少怀疑。 10年过后,他的经历又一次证明 可持续投资是可以大有作为的。 将可持续性加入咒语, 不但不会减少甜粥的数量, 反而使它更加美味。
Now, sustainable investing, the good news is it doesn't require a magic spell and it doesn't require some investment secret, and it's not just for the elite. It is not just about private equity for billionaires. It's not just groovy-sounding investments like clean technology or microfinance in emerging markets or artisanal bakeries in Brooklyn. It's about stocks and bonds and Fortune 500 companies. It's about mutual funds. It's about all the things we already see in the market today.
说到可持续投资, 它的好处在于并不需要念咒语, 也不需要什么内幕消息, 普通百姓也能参与。 它不仅仅是亿万富翁的私募股权。 它不是那些噱头十足的投资,比如清洁技术 或者新兴市场的小额信贷 或者布鲁克林的手工烘培坊。 而是股票、债券和财富500强公司。 是共有基金。 是我们今天能在市场上 所看到的一切。
So here's why I'm convinced that we collectively have the power to make sustainable investing the new normal.
这就是为什么我坚信, 只要我们联合起来,就有能力 创造可持续投资的新常态。
First, the proof points are coming out all the time that sustainable investing done right, preserving all the same good principles of investing, the traditional sphere, can pay. It makes sense.
首先,不容置疑的真理, 可持续投资是可以赚到钱的, 它跟传统领域的优秀投资一样, 保持了能赚钱的优良传统。 这说得通。
Secondly, the biggest obstacle standing in our way may actually just be in our heads. We just need to let go of that myth that if you add your values into your investment thinking, that you get less sweet porridge. And once you get rid of the fable, you can actually start appreciating those facts we've been talking about.
第二, 我们面前最大的障碍, 可能只存在我们的臆想中。 我们要消除这种错觉, 就是一旦在投资决策中加入了(道德)价值, 你就赚不到钱了。 只要你摈弃这种错误念头, 你就能开始认识到 我们刚刚讲的都是事实。
And third, the future is already here. Sustainable investment today is a 20 trillion dollar market and it's the fastest-growing segment of the investment industry. In the United States, it has grown enormously, as you can see. It now represents one out of every six dollars under professional management in the United States.
第三点,未来已经到来。 可持续投资的市场规模已经达到20万亿美元, 是所有投资行业中增长最快的。 在美国,可持续投资已经相当可观。 它占据了全美专业投资金额 的六分之一。
So what are we waiting for? For me, it goes back to the inspiration that I received from my mother. She knew that she wanted a life where she would have the freedom to make her own choices and to have her voice heard and write her own story. She was passionate about that goal and she was clear that she would let no army, no obstacle, no big institution stand in her way. She made it to the States, and she became a teacher, an award-winning author and a mother, and ended up sending her daughters to Harvard. And these days, you can tell that she is amply comfortable holding court in the most powerful institutions in the world. It seems almost too prophetic that her name in Korean means "passionate clarity."
我们还犹豫什么? 对我而言,它让我想起了母亲那令人鼓舞的经历。 她明白自己一生的追求, 就是能拥有选择的自由, 能发出自己的声音,书写自己的故事。 她为自己的目标激动不已, 她清楚的知道,无论是军队,还是政府, 都无法阻止自己。 她成功来到了美国, 成为了一名教师, 一名获奖作家, 一名母亲, 最后还把女儿送到哈佛。 事到如今,你们可能毫不怀疑 她在这个世界上 最强大的机构中也能吃得开。 不可思议的是 她的名字在韩语里的意思是 “充满激情,目标明确”。
Passionate clarity: that's what I think we need to drive change. Passion about the change we want to see in the world, and clarity that we are able to help chart the course. We have more opportunity today than ever before to make choices. We have more power than ever before to make our voices heard.
充满激情,目标明确, 这正是我们的变革所需要的。 激情说的是我们渴望改变世界, 目标明确则保证我们不会跑偏。 我们如今拥有前所未有的机会 来做出选择。 我们也拥有前所未有的能力 来发出自己的声音。
So change your perspective. Vote with your small change. Invest in the change you want to see in the world. Change the fables and change the markets.
不要墨守陈规了。 让我们都来做出一点改变。 出一份力,将世界变成你想要的样子。 破除迷信, 改变市场。
Thank you.
谢谢大家。
(Applause)
(掌声)