This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

Ohman

PRI reporting framework 2020

Export Public Responses
Pdf-img

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » Outputs and outcomes

成果および結果

LEA 09. Number of companies engaged with, intensity of engagement and effort

報告年度中に貴社がエンゲージメントを行った、上場株式ポートフォリオ内の企業の割合を示してください。
報告年度内にエンゲージメントを一切行わなかった.​
エンゲージメントを行った企業の数
割合(5%刻み)

単独/貴社内のスタッフのエンゲージメント

26
1
協働的なエンゲージメント
305
13
サービスプロバイダーのエンゲージメント
25
1

09.2. 報告年度内に行ったエンゲージメントの内訳を対話(貴社の代理で行われた対話を含む)の回数ごとに示してください。

企業との対話の回数
 エンゲージメントの割合
対話回数 1回
対話回数 2 ~ 3回
対話回数 4回以上
合計
100%

09.3. 報告年度中に協働的なエンゲージメントの中で、貴社が主導したエンゲージメントの割合を記載してください。

エンゲージメントの種類
主導的役割を果たした割合(%)
協働的なエンゲージメント

09.4. 報告年度のサービスプロバイダーのエンゲージメントの中で、貴社がある程度関与した割合を記載してください。

エンゲージメントの種類

ある程度関与した割合(%)
サービスプロバイダーのエンゲージメント

09.5. 補足情報 [任意]


LEA 10. Engagement methods

10.1. 貴社のエンゲージメントが以下のどの項目を含むか明示してください。

10.2. 補足情報 [任意]

A normal engagement process starts with a letter to the company (IR) adressing the issue and asking for a meeting. If the dialogue is contstructive and fruitful we keep talking to IR or the person most relevant to talk to within the company. If a company is reluctant to talk to us we address the CEO or Chair person. We also seek to work togehter with other investors when a case is challenging.   

Engagement cases are discussed within the esg-team on a weekly basis. On a need-to-do basis we discuss the the most relevant fund managers. 


LEA 11. Examples of ESG engagements

11.1. 報告年度に貴社または貴社のサービスプロバイダーが実行したエンゲージメントの事例を挙げてください。

ESGトピック
General ESG|Sustainability reporting
実行者
目標

A swedish micro cap company. Our aim was to convince the company to launch a project with the ambition to develop a sustainability strategy. 

対象範囲およびプロセス

During the year we initiated a dialogue with the biotech company. The company is in a development phase and we have discussed at meetings how the company can establish and develop a sustainability strategy. During the year, the company decided to conduct a stakeholder dialogue and materiality analysis something that Öhman encouraged, which we believe is positive for their continued work.

結果
ESGトピック
Climate Change|Company leadership issues|Pollution|Sustainability reporting|Labour practices and supply chain management|Other

具体的に記入してください

          
        
実行者
目標

Öhman engages in a dialogue with a number of major players in the fishing industry to improve their work on responsible fishing
The project aims in particular to strengthen the companies' efforts to manage environmental risks related to fisheries and aquaculture, such as overfishing, biodiversity, energy consumption and the presence of chemicals and antibiotics, and increase transparency around this.

対象範囲およびプロセス

Since the beginning of 2018, several meetings have been held with the six companies. They have shown a general openness and willingness to enter into a dialogue with us investors. In 2019, all companies have improved one or two steps. All companies now meet the CPI for sustainable fisheries policy. This also means that compared to the base report from June 2018, all companies have now shown improvements. The three best-performing companies all have a solid commitment to sustainable fishing, which is manifested either in a formal policy or code of conduct, together with a thorough process for risk assessment and risk management. The criterion where all companies are weak is about the supply chain. Failure to control the risks of subcontractors poses a serious risk to a company. Our experience shows that companies have more in place than what is published publicly. Openness is the key because it is the way they can show that they are taking responsibility. Since we started the dialogues, half of the companies have reported an increased number of certified production facilities according to ASC (Aquaculture Stewardship Council).

結果
ESGトピック
Climate Change|Sustainability reporting|Other

具体的に記入してください

          
        
実行者
目標

Climate change is one of the biggest risks we as long-term investors face. Although many companies have officially endorsed the Paris Agreement and published climate commitments, they also fund industry organizations that actively oppose political solutions that are crucial to a fair transition to a future climate-smart economy. We want companies to ensure that they do not support these organizations. We want to see greater transparency from our portfolio companies. We want to know if they are members of organizations working towards important political changes. The objective is to get the companies : • identify all climate policy commitments undertaken by the company, directly or indirectly • assess whether the commitments are adapted to the company's position for climate change • assess whether the commitments support cost-effective climate measures to mitigate

 

対象範囲およびプロセス

In 2019, we have focused our dialogues on four Swedish companies, all of which are members of the National Association of Manufactures (NAM). NAM is one of America's largest corporate networks and lobbying organizations with over 14,000 companies as members. Among other things, NAM supported the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. They are working to repeal climate legislation that has already been introduced, including the US Clean Power Plan. Of the four companies, only one publicly reports membership in NAM. None of the companies report how to act in cases where an organization you are a member of acts in a way that is not in line with the company's attitude. The dialogues do not develop in the way we wish.

結果
ESGトピック
Human rights|Sustainability reporting|Labour practices and supply chain management
実行者
目標

The target company is a global leader in e-commerce. The aim is to get the company to adopt and publicly disclose a comprehensive policy to respect human rights, including ensuring safe and healthy workplaces; prohibiting discrimination and retaliation; affirming the right of workers to form and join trade unions and bargain collectively; and describing the process the Company will use to identify, assess, prevent, mitigate, and, where appropriate, address adverse human rights impacts.

対象範囲およびプロセス

The dialogue was initiated late 2018. During 2019 we have had several meetings with the company. Both individually and also collalboratively. During the summer we launched a collaborative initiative in PRI to collect signatures to a letter. In the letter we asked for a meeting to top-management to discuss human rights. By the end of the year we filed a resolution.  

結果

11.2. 補足情報[任意]


Top