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, 大型機構有獨特的潛力 可以創造改變, 我也相信,身為個人的我們 也有獨特的力量, 可以影響那些 大型機構的決策方向。
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.
我過去不太信這套, 因為相信大型機構, 真的不是我家的家訓。 我的母親,10歲時從北韓逃出來。 為此,她這一生經常 必須躲避一些大型機構: 專制政府、佔領軍, 甚至邊境巡邏的武裝部隊。 之後,當她決定移民到美國時, 她必須對抗一個整體文化, 就是「女孩永遠不會是 最好跟最聰明」的文化。 因為她的名字乍聽 起來像個男孩子的名字, 她才得以唬弄的方式,通過政府 的移民考試,來到美國。
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.
由於她的勇氣與熱情, 我擁有了所有 她未曾有過的機會, 也因此彻底改变了我的 人生。 但我並沒有閃避大型機構, 反而是奔向它們。 在我的職業生涯中, 我有機會在華爾街日報、 白宮工作。 現在,我在全世界最大的金融機構 負責領導永續發展的投資。
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.
這些機構像是油輪, 而在裡面工作, 讓我很感激能領會到它們 所走過的痕跡。 我逐漸相信, 這個掌管全球資本市場的機構, 手中握有全球價值290萬億 美元的股票和債券, 是能供我們驅遣,為社會帶來積極變化的 強大力量之一,如果我們願意的話。
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.
現在,我知道你們有些人在想, 全球資本市場和 積極的社會變革, 好像八竿子打不著關係。 很多人會認為 資本市場就像一片汪洋。 它浩大、無情、冷漠, 不會因我們的期許 或渴望而受影響。 所以,我們存款帳戶 或退休帳戶裡面那點小錢能做的, 頂多就是搭一搭牛市的順風車, 並祈禱自己不要 遇上熊市就好了。 但可以肯定的是, 當然,我們對自己 退休金帳戶的那點小操作, 並引響不了世界的主流, 也改變不了他們投資的 內容、規模及方向。
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,這是為什麼呢? 因為實際上,這大海裡的 三分之一資本, 是掌握在像我們這樣 的個體戶手上的, 而剩餘的大部分, 是由機構掌控, 但他們的力量、 權力和資金 也是我們這些會員、參與者、 受益人、股東和公民所付予的。 所以,既然我們是 資本市場的最終擁有者, 為什麼我們沒有話語權呢? 為什麼我們不能 引響他們的投資方向呢?
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?
我先問各位另一個問題: 你們最近有沒有人在超級市場或星巴克 買過「公平貿易咖啡」? 好的,你們有沒有人去餐廳吃飯, 為了環保,點「永續養殖鱒魚」, 而不是點你超級想吃的 「味增釉面智利鱈魚」? 你們有沒有人開油電混合車 或甚至是電動車?
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.
所以,我們究竟為什麼 要做這些事情?對吧? 一部電動車的市場根本無法與 擁有120億個內燃機引擎的傳統汽車市場相比, 一條魚對於整個 海洋也算不了什麼。 而一杯咖啡 對於堆積成山的咖啡豆而言, 也同樣微不足道。 但我們做這些事情, 是因為我們相信它有意義, 我們的行為積少成多, 會影響到其他周圍的人, 最終會讓我們 匯聚成巨大的力量。
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.
我包包裡有一個咖啡杯, 好幾年前買的。 它可以重複使用, 杯身上印有文字和花紋, 杯身上寫著,
"This one cup can be used again and again."
「這個杯子能反複使用。」
"This one cup may inspire others to use one too."
「這個杯子可以鼓勵 其他人也買一個來用」
"This one cup helps save the planet." I had no idea this plastic cup was so powerful.
「這個杯子可以拯救我們的地球。」 我真搞不懂,這塑膠杯 為什麼這麼紅。(笑聲)
(Laughter)
所以,為什麼我們認為
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?
選擇一個四塊錢、可重複使用、 手工製作、公平貿易、 遮蔭種植的咖啡杯就有意義, 但善用我們的退休金投資賬戶裡 的4000美金,就沒意義呢? 為什麼我們不告訴 超級市場和資本市場, 我們真的在乎, 我們在乎公平的勞工規範, 我們關心永續的生產方法 及健康的社會。 為何我們不靠投資 來表明我們的立場, 而是要靠拿鐵呢?
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.
我覺得這跟我們的 錯誤觀念有關, 跟我們的集體意識有關。 大家還記得《格林童話》 中那個神奇的粥鍋嗎? 如果你對鍋子說, 「煮吧,小鍋子,煮吧」, 它就會煮出一鍋香甜的粥。 而如果你說, 「停,小鍋子,停」 它就會停下來。 但如果你說錯咒語, 它不會聽你的, 而且事情會變得很糟糕。 所以當談到市場, 我認為我們的腦袋裡也有一個 類似的小鍋子童話。 我們相信市場就是這個 只聽懂一條指令的魔法鍋, 就是:賺更多的錢。 只有準確地說出這幾個字, 才會讓鍋子裝滿黃金。 但如果說一些其他字眼, 像是「保護環境」, 咒語就可能無效了; 加上幾個錯誤的詞, 比如像是「提倡社會正義」, 那你可能會看到, 你的錢在變少, 甚至可能全部消失。
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.
所以我想問, 你們真正的想法是甚麼? 我們針對一千名個體投資者 進行了問卷調查, 我們發現了一些 有趣的現象, 絕大部分的人,希望在 咒語中加入更多的詞。 71%的人說,「沒錯, 我們對永續發展投資有興趣。」 大家對「永續發展投資」的定義是, 以傳統的投資標準來看, 這項投資要是最好最賺錢的, 除此之外,還要兼顧環保、 社會責任和良好的管理。 71% 的投資人都認同。 72% 的投資人說,他們相信 這樣做的公司會有 較佳的財務表現。 人們的確相信,如果你做好的事, 就會有好的投報。 奇怪的是: 54% 的人說, 如果他們把錢 放在這類股票上面, 他們認為他們會賺得比較少。
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.
真的是這樣嗎? 如果你不喝樹蔭咖啡, 而是投資它, 你的收益就會減少嗎? 像Burt's Bees或Ben & Jerry's 這種投資公司, 他們可不會這麼認為。 這兩家公司都發展自 很小的社會關懷公司, 最後因深受顧客的喜愛, 最後被聯合利華和 高樂氏這樣的大公司 分别以數億美元的價格所收購。 但這裡有件重要的事, 這些企業了解, 如果他們想保護 自己的投資價值, 他們就必須持續保留 這種社會責任。 如果這些品牌不在 生財咒語裡加點詞, 例如「友善環境」、 「社會責任」之類, 它们就沒法賺更多的錢。
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,這也許只是例外。 那些專注於賺錢的公司 推動了我們的經濟, 支付了我們的退休金, 少了他們這世界還真沒辦法運轉, 哈佛大學商學院做了這項研究, 他們發現了一些有趣的現象。 如果你在20年前投資一塊錢 到只關心單一季度盈餘 的投資組合公司, 那一塊錢20年後會成長到14.46元。 這算不錯了。 但是,如果你把同樣的 一塊錢轉而投資到 專注關心社會環境議題 的投資組合公司, 你就會知道,後者是更好的選擇, 因為那一塊錢 20年後會成長到28.36元, 相當於兩倍的收益。
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.
當然,我們要明白一點, 他們並不是靠四處撒錢 來換取好的名聲。 他們是靠專注於 影響業務的重要事情, 比如在製造過程中, 減少浪費的能源及水資源; 或是確認公司的聘僱合約中, 可以激勵CEO專注於 公司及社區的長期發展, 而不是只看短期的季度表現; 或是建立一流的公司文化, 使員工有更高的忠誠度、 更高的留職率及生產力。 不只哈佛,牛津大學 也做了類似研究, 对120項不同研究的結果進行分析。 他們致力於研究永續發展 對公司收益的影響, 他們一次次地發現, 那些重視永續發展的公司 往往具有較佳的經營效率、 較低的資本成本, 及較高的股價表現。
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.
接下來我們聊聊艾爾.高爾。 (柯林頓任內的副總統) 20年前我在白宮 為艾爾.高爾工作, 他是最早呼籲企業和政府 要重視氣候變化 問題的先鋒之一。 離開白宮後, 他創立了一家名為 《世代》的投資公司, 將永續環境發展及其他議題放進 公司的核心投資流程裡面。 當年他的觀點可是遭到了不少懷疑。 10年後,他的投資經歷又再次證明, 只要做法正確, 永續投資是大有可為的。 將永續發展加入咒語, 不但不會減少甜粥的數量, 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.
說到永續發展投資, 它的好處在於並不需要念咒語, 也不需要什麼內幕消息, 它不是菁英的特權, 也不是億萬富翁的私人股權。 它不是那些噱頭十足的投資, 比如清潔技術 或是新興市場的微型貸款, 或者布魯克林的手工烘培坊。 而是股票、債券 與財富500強企業。 這是共同基金, 是我們今天能在市場上 所看到的投資產品。
So here's why I'm convinced that we collectively have the power to make sustainable investing the new normal.
這就是為什麼我堅信, 只要我們聯合起來,就有能力 可以為永續發展投資 創立一個新的常態典範。
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.
第一,一直以來 都有大量證據顯示, 永續發展投資是做對的事情, 它保存了投資的優點, 也保存了能賺錢的優良傳統。 這是說得通的。
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,我們面臨的最大障礙, 也許只存在於我們的腦袋裡。 我們要消除這種錯誤觀念, 就是一旦在投資決策中 加入了道德價值, 你的收益就會減少的錯誤觀念。 只要你拋棄這種錯誤觀念, 你會開始感激 我們今日談的那些事實。
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,未來已經到來了。 今日的永續發展投資 是一個20萬億的市場, 而它專注的投資產業 是成長最快的類別。 它在美國已經大幅成長。 在專業經理人的管理下, 現在每六塊就有一塊錢 投資於這個產業。
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."
所以,我們還在等甚麼? 對我而言,它代表著 從我母親身上獲得的鼓舞。 她明白自己一生的追求, 就是能擁有選擇的自由, 能發出自己的聲音, 寫出自己的故事。 她為自己的目標激動不已, 她也清楚地知道, 她不會讓軍隊、困難、 大型機構擋住她的去路。 她成功地來到了美國, 她成為了一名老師, 一名獲獎的作家, 一名母親, 最後還把女兒們送進哈佛。 這些年來,你可以這麼說, 她在這個世界上 最強大的機構中也能吃得開。 這簡直太不可思議了, 因為她的名字在 韓語中的意思就是 「充滿激情,目標明確」。
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.
「充滿激情,目標明確」, 這正是我們變革所需要的。 激情說的是, 我們渴望改變世界, 而目標明確說的是, 我們走在正確的路上。 我們比以前有更多的機會, 可以做出各種選擇。 我們比過去有更多的能力, 可以發出自己的聲音。
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.
所以,改變你的看法吧! 為你的小改變投下神聖一票。 投資在你想要讓世界 變不一樣的地方。 破除迷信! 改變市場!
Thank you.
謝謝各位!
(Applause)
(掌聲)