Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The fact sheet compares the climate policies of several major pension funds and endowments, detailing their net zero targets (ranging from 2040 to 2050), interim emissions reduction goals, and specific exclusions of fossil fuels in both public and private markets.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Net zero targets among the listed investors are set for either 2040 or 2050. New York City Pension Funds (NYCERS and TRS) and the New York State Common Retirement Fund (NYC CRF) have targets for 2040, while others, including CalPERS, CalSTRS, and ABP, target 2050.
  • Fossil fuel exclusion strategies vary by investor and asset class. For example, CalPERS and CalSTRS exclude thermal coal in public markets through legislation, while the New York City Pension Funds have a 2021 resolution to divest from publicly-traded fossil fuel reserve owners and a 2023 requirement for private managers to exclude investments in fossil fuel production, exploration, or extraction.
  • Several investors have established interim emissions reduction targets for 2030. CalPERS and CalSTRS both target a 50% reduction (intensity for CalPERS, absolute for CalSTRS), while ABP targets a 50% absolute emissions reduction across scopes 1, 2, and 3.
  • Private market exclusions are specifically noted for several entities: Harvard Management Company has had no private fund commitments with fossil fuels since 2019, and the New York State Common Retirement Fund has prohibited new upstream focused funds starting in 2024.
  • Emissions disclosure practices differ, with some investors excluding private equity from their measurements. CalPERS and CalSTRS note that private equity is not measured in their carbon footprinting or climate risk disclosure reports, whereas the Oregon Investment Council reports absolute emissions and intensity for all asset classes, including private equity and real assets.

Cite the original document

APA
Private Equity Stakeholder Project (2024). Investor Climate POLICY COMPARISON. https://pestakeholder.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PESP_Climate-Policy-Comparison_2024.pdf
Chicago
Private Equity Stakeholder Project. Investor Climate POLICY COMPARISON. 2024. https://pestakeholder.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PESP_Climate-Policy-Comparison_2024.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Private Equity Stakeholder Project |title=Investor Climate POLICY COMPARISON |date=October 2024 |url=https://pestakeholder.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PESP_Climate-Policy-Comparison_2024.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{privateequitystakeholderproject2024investor, author = {{Private Equity Stakeholder Project}}, title = {{Investor Climate POLICY COMPARISON}}, institution = {Private Equity Stakeholder Project}, year = {2024}, month = oct, url = {https://pestakeholder.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/PESP_Climate-Policy-Comparison_2024.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated