airtel, bt group, centurylink, china mobile, china telecom, china … · 2019-04-02 · appendix:...

América Móvil, AT&T, BCE, BhartiAirtel, BT Group, CenturyLink, China M o b i l e , C h i n a T e l e c o m , C h i n a Unicom, Deutsche Telekom, Etisalat,France Telecom, KDDI, KPN, MTN Group, Nippon Telegraph & Tel,R o g e r s C o m m u n i c a t i o n s , S a u d i Telecom, SingTel , Sistema JSFC,Softbank, Telecom Italia, Telefónica, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Telstra, Telus, V e r i z o n C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ,V i m p e l C o m , a n d V o d a f o n e .

2013 Sustainability Reporting of the World’s Major BanksPacific Sustainability Index Scores:

A benchmarking tool for online sustainability repor ng

Contents Topics Page Company Rankings 3 Lead Analyst’s Commentary 4 PSI Overview 9 PSI Scoring in a Nutshell 10 Sector Performance 11 Visual Cluster Analysis 12 Environmental Topics 13 Social and Human Rights Topics 14 Environmental Intent Scores Ranking 15 Environmental Reporting Scores Ranking 16 Environmental Performance Scores Ranking

17

Social Intent Scores Ranking 18 Social Reporting Scores Ranking 19 Social Performance Scores Ranking 20 Human Rights Reporting Element 21 Performance by Country 22 Relationship Between PSI Scores and Financial Variables

23

Explicit Numerical Goals Reported 26 Topics Showing Performance Improvement over Previous Year Data

29

Topics in which Performance was Better than Sector Average

35

Commentaries alphabetically listed by company name

38

Appendix: PSI Questionnaire 119 Questions should be addressed to: Dr. J. Emil Morhardt, Director ([email protected], 909-621-8190) Elgeritte Adidjaja, Research Fellow ([email protected], 909-621-8698) Roberts Environmental Center Claremont McKenna College 925 N. Mills Ave. Claremont, CA 91711-5916 USA

The Roberts Environmental Center has been the foremost analyst of corporate sustainability reporting for over a decade. We analyze corporate online disclosure using our Pacific Sustainability Index (PSI) and publish the results online. The goal of corporate report analysis conducted by the Roberts Environmental Center is to acquaint students with environmental and social issues facing the world’s industries, and the ways in which industry approaches and resolves these issues. The data presented in this report were collected by students at the Roberts Environmental Center:

Lead Analyst Hilary Haskell

Simone Berkovitz

Sustainability Management Analyst Damini Marwaha

Katherine Recinos

Environmental Analyst Simone Fine Jessica Pence

Social and Human Rights Analyst

Shane Griffee Erin Larsen Isabel Lane

Special Project Manager

Lucas Van Houten

Media/Public Relation Quinn Chasan Sierra Gibson Jacob Shimkus

Copyright 2013 © by J. Emil Morhardt. All rights reserved.

www.roberts.cmc.edu 2 Sustainability Reporting of the World's Major Banks

27.49

31.11

33.35

36.05

36.56

41.00

42.11

43.21

44.59

47.29

47.93

50.87

51.49

51.69

52.53

53.97

56.06

57.47

57.62

59.75

60.43

60.91

63.91

64.15

64.26

0 20 40 60 80 100

Bank of Communications

Barclays

Bank Of China

Mizuho Financial Group

Wells Fargo

ICBC

Société Générale SA

US Bancorp

Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group

Commonwealth Bank

BNP Paribas

Bank of Nova Scotia

Westpac Banking Group

Standard Chartered

Royal Bank of Canada

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group

HSBC Holdings

JP Morgan Chase

UniCredit Group

Intesa Sanpaolo

Bank of America Corp.

Deutsche Bank

TD Bank

Citigroup

Itaú Unibanco Holding

National Australia Bank

ANZ

Company Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ ANZ AustraliaA National Australia Bank AustraliaA Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilA Citigroup United StatesA- TD Bank CanadaA- Deutsche Bank GermanyA- Bank of America Corp. United StatesA- Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyA- UniCredit Group ItalyB+ JP Morgan Chase United StatesB+ HSBC Holdings United KingdomB Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanB Royal Bank of Canada CanadaB Standard Chartered United KingdomB Westpac Banking Group AustraliaB- Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaB- BNP Paribas FranceB- Commonwealth Bank AustraliaC+ Sumitomo Mitsui JapanC+ US Bancorp United StatesC+ Société Générale SA FranceC ICBC ChinaC Wells Fargo United StatesC- Mizuho Financial Group JapanC- Bank Of China ChinaD+ Barclays United KingdomF Bank of Communications China

13.93

68.49


Lead Analyst’s Commentary Hilary Haskell ‘14

ike all other business sectors, major banks have the opportunity to operate sustainably. However, major banks are also in the unique position to influence the performance of other sectors as well. Banks are able to intervene through economic, social, and environmental dimensions by influencing how other banks and industries do business. According to a Whitepaper published by SAS in 2009, the major banks sector was the most heavily and widely reported GRI Index industry.1 Furthermore, the International Institute for Sustainable Development reports that banks have approached sustainability through “…the integration of sustainability into a bank's core businesses through the integration of environmental and social considerations into product design, mission policy and strategies.”2 This Institute cites that the impetus for major banks to become more sustainable has mainly arisen in order “To decrease their exposure to environmental liability and to improve risk management...” and due to “...growing concern about clients' environmental performance...”ibid.

As a result, addressing the sustainability of the Major Banks sector is best addressed through a cross‐disciplinary approach, taking into account environmental, economic, and social factors. To begin, one of the most important guidelines by

1 Imeson, Michael, and Alastair Sim. "Sustainable Banking Why Helping Communities and Saving the Planet Is Good for Business." SAS Business Analytics. SAS Business Analytics, 2009. Web. 28 May 2013. 2 "Sustainable Banking." International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2013. Web. 01 June 2013.

which major banks base their sustainability efforts are the Equator Principles. First adapted in June 2006, the Equator Principles (EP) provides “a credit risk management framework for determining, assessing and managing environmental and social risk in project finance transactions.”3 These guidelines serve as the industry best practice in promoting responsible investment. Through adoption of the EP, financial institutions demonstrate that they do not finance environmentally or socially harmful projects. The EP include: Review and Categorization “based on the magnitude of its potential impacts and risks in accordance with the environmental and social screening criteria;” Social and Environmental Assessment[s] “to address... the relevant social and environmental impacts and risks of the proposed project;” Applicable Social and Environmental Standards determined as appropriate for “the respective Performance Standards and EHS Guidelines;” Action Plan and Management System[s] “to address[es] the relevant findings, and draw[s] on the conclusions of the Assessment,...[which]describe and prioritize the actions needed to implement mitigation measures, corrective actions and monitoring measures necessary to manage the impacts and risks identified in the Assessment;” Consultation and Disclosure to demonstrate that the project “has consulted with project affected communities in a structured and culturally appropriate manner;” Grievance Mechanisms to “to ensure that consultation, disclosure and community engagement continues throughout construction and operation of the project, the borrower will, scaled to the risks and adverse impacts of the project, establish a grievance mechanism as part of the management system;” Independent Review to ensure “EP compliance;” Covenants for networks of establishing compliance; and Independent Monitoring and Reporting of impacts of the loan over the course of its lifetime.ibid. All of these principles put forth in the EP are the result

3 "About the Equator Principles." About the Equator Principles. The Equator Principles Association, 2011. Web. 2 June 2013.


of the International Finance Corporation Performance Standards and the World Bank Group Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines, in order to create a comprehensive best‐practice guide for sustainable project finance in the Major Banks sector. Many banks throughout the sector have indeed adopted the EP, with 79 financial institutions currently participating worldwide.ibid.

After considering these overarching principles commonly adopted by major banks, focusing on more specific aspects of banks’ operations is important in considering the sustainability of the banking sector. Of the direct environmental impacts from major banks’ operation, perhaps the most obvious and notable is that of paper usage and recycling practices. For the Pacific Sustainability Index (PSI) scoring parameters, the importance of these practices is captured in both the “Green Purchasing,” and “Supplier Screening” Sustainability Management points as well as Environmental Quantitative data for “Waste Recycled: Office.” The main method in which banks can promote and ensure responsible paper procurement, whether it be for office use, customer interactions, or janitorial hygiene is through the Forest Stewardship Council. According to the Council, its mission is to “promote environmentally sound, socially beneficial and economically prosperous management of the world's forests,” which are all areas that the Major Banks sector exerts its influence upon.4 Certification by the Forest Stewardship Council provides third party assurance that the paper banks source from suppliers complies with the Council’s fifty‐seven strict criteria and ten principles, which include compliance with laws and FSC principles, tenure and use rights responsibilities, indigenous peoples’ rights, community relations and workers’ rights, benefits from the forest, environmental impact, management plan, monitoring and

4 "Forest Stewardship CouncilUnited States." FSC Forest Stewardship Council U.S. (FSC‐US) ∙ Who We Are. Forest Stewardship Council, n.d. Web. 1 June 2013.

assessment, maintenance of high conservation value forests, and plantations managed with all other principles.ibid. By adhering to these principles, paper suppliers demonstrate to major banks that they are committed to responsible supply and procurement policies. For example, within its Environmental Policy Statement, Scotia Bank “prefers paper products that contain a significant mix of fiber certified to sustainable forestry standards and will increase its purchase of Forest Stewardship Council or similarly recognized) products for its paper purchases where cost and availability allow.”5 Bank of America demonstrates a similar commitment, but does not specifically mention the Forest Stewardship Council as the means by which the bank obtains sustainably sourced paper products.

Although many of the major banks have developed and implemented comprehensive policies addressing paper procurement, usage, and recycling practices, the overall waste management strategies for many of these banks seems to lack transparency. Few of the banks in the sector reported their waste produced or recycled, and even fewer reported hazardous waste production and management. For example, Bank of Nova Scotia reports full coverage of its paper recycling practices; however, the bank fails to cover its waste disposal and recycling practices with the same comprehensive information. Not only do banks produce waste aside from that of paper waste (such as other typical office waste), but also, banks may produce hazardous waste in the form of e‐waste, printer cartridges, and fluorescent light bulbs. Fortunately, these types of hazardous wastes are highly recyclable in most cases, or are part of product take‐back programs. Therefore, within the Major Banks sector, there is considerable room for improvement in addressing recycling practices, of both hazardous and nonhazardous waste.

5 "Scotia Bank Environmental Paper Policy." Scotia Bank Corporate Responsibility. Scotia Bank, n.d. Web. 28 May 2013.


Aside from the sustainability of banks’ own operations, project financing is perhaps the most important aspect of this sector’s sustainability initiatives. Microfinance, community investment, and funding for environmentally sustainable projects are the most pertinent aspects of responsible financing. According to the World Bank’s Microfinance Handbook, microfinance is defined as “…an economic development approach intended to benefit low‐income women and men,…[and] refers to the provision of financial services to low‐income clients, including the self‐employed.”6 This publication describes microfinance recipients as not the “poorest of the poor,” but rather the poor who include “traders, street vendors, small farmers, service providers... and artisans and small producers.” ibid. Major banks have the potential to greatly impact microfinance, as this sustainable development initiative depends on “the idea that low‐income individuals are capable of lifting themselves out of poverty if given access to financial services.”7 By providing essential financial services in “micro” terms, such as savings accounts with small balances or loans of small amounts of money, the Major Banks sector has the potential to remove the “serious limitations” of “informal banking mechanisms” used by the poor, such as unstable savings practices through livestock, gold, etc., and thus promote more sustainable development in the Third World.8 Nonetheless, providing microfinance services does not come without costs to major banks, as “[banks] can make a lot more money on a large loan than a small loan, and [banks] won't make much money holding savings accounts with very little funds in them... Banks can make more money if they only provide financial services to those who already have money.”ibid. However, banks such as Deutsche Bank, ICBC, National Australia Bank, Standard Chartered, and TD Bank have developed 6 Ledgerwood, Joanna. "Sustainable Banking with the Poor: Microfinance Handrook." The World Bank Group. The World Bank Group, 1999. Web. 28 May 2013. 7 "About Microfinance | Kiva." About Microfinance | Kiva. Kiva, 2013. Web. 1 June 2013. 8 "CGAP." CGAP. CGAP, 2013. Web. 1 June 2013.

impressive microfinance initiatives and reported these initiatives with transparency. Standard Chartered reports having “...provided $540 million of credit and financial instruments to 63 microfinance institutions... to 14 countries [over the past three years],”9 and Deutsche Bank was the first “the first global bank to establish a socially motivated microfinance fund more than a decade ago.”10

Aside from microfinance, another important means by which the banking industry can support communities and the economically disadvantaged is through community investment. In the United States, the Community Reinvestment Act (1977) “is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low‐ and moderate‐income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound operations.”11 According to a study by Simpson and Kohers, due to initiatives such as the Community Reinvestment Act, there is “…empirical support for a positive Corporate Social Performance‐Financial Performance link” for the Major Banks sector.12 This positive relationship between corporate responsibility and financial performance is realized through community investment practices. Aside from not only providing fair banking to the surrounding community, many banks demonstrate an outstanding commitment to their communities through direct donations as well. Standard Chartered demonstrates transparent reporting on its community investment initiatives, providing previous and current years’ data, as well as background context for its contributions. Also, JP Morgan’s Global Corporate Philanthropy program

9 "Standard Chartered Annual Report 2009." Standard Chartered Sustainability Review ‐ Microfinance. N.p., 2009. Web. 29 May 2013. 10 "Microfinance." Microfinance. Deutsche Bank, 11 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 June 2013 11 "Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)." FRB:. Federal Reserve Gov., n.d. Web. 1 June 2013. 12 Gary Simpson, W., and Theodor Kohers. "The Link between Corporate Social and Financial Performance: Evidence from the Banking Industry." Journal of Business Ethics 35.2 (2002): 97‐109. Print.


is thoroughly covered in the banks sustainability reporting.

Occasionally, the projects that banks choose not to finance are just as important as those that banks choose to finance. By taking a stance on the fraudulent practice of money laundering, banks are able to exert considerable influence on ethical banking practices. This method of acquiring illicit funds is an issue as global banking continues to grow. Bank of America and Standard Chartered both exemplify substantial policies and monitoring to ensure that money laundering does not occur. Bank of America has not only established a policy against money laundering, but also established a compliance program, questionnaire, and Patriot Act certification process to guard against any instances of this crime. Standard Chartered has also taken great strides in addressing money laundering, by providing staff training and developing the reliability of its Norkom Money Laundering Monitoring system.ibid.

Sustainable investments have an environmental dimension as well. Responsible finance practices in renewable energy sources have the potential to create a drastic impact on greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change‐ far beyond the reach of major banks’ operations in reducing their own greenhouse gas emissions. According to Buoma Jaap et al., clean energy technologies (CETs) “have to overcome a series of financial and nonfinancial barriers before they can penetrate the market...” and that “the financial sector plays a crucial role in overcoming the financial barriers.”13Although these are general roadblocks for financing of clean energy for major banks, JP Morgan’s Energy Investments group “has grown to more than 6,600 MW from 2003 through 2010” with investments that include “67 wind farms and two solar projects in 19 states, owned jointly with

13 Bouma, Jan Jaap., Marcel Jeucken, and Leon Klinkers. Sustainable Banking: The Greening of Finance. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Pub., 2001. Print.

15 different energy firms.”14 These investments total “$3.2 billion of projects from [J.P. Morgan]’s own capital and [has] raised an additional $3.5 billion from other institutional co‐investors” ibid.

Therefore, it is essential for banks such as J.P. Morgan to promote renewable energy investments, to ensure that banks do not continue to under invest in these projects, largely due a lack of “understand[ing] of the economic and environmental advantages of CETs,” and an “outdated or incorrect information on their technical and financial performance,” making CETs seem “riskier” than they truly are.” ibid.

Still, what exactly constitutes a “green investment” is debatable: Buoma Jaap et al. suggest that these types of investments generally take into account “ecological goals” or can be understood as “successfully counteract[ing] negative effects on the environment.”ibid. Furthermore, the authors argue that “Green Investments” can be considered as either an “outflow” of traditional investment goals such as liquidity, risk, and return on investment or as a “new dimension,” making green investments an entirely new market area. Nonetheless, by partaking in projects that are environmentally conscious, or promote renewable energy development, banks can receive recognition from the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes in collaboration with Robeco SAM. Many of the banks in the sector have already received recognition from this index, which is driven by the fact that “...corporate sustainability is attractive to investors because it aims to increase long‐term shareholder value....Since corporate sustainability performance can now be financially quantified, they now have an investable corporate sustainability concept...sustainability leaders are increasingly expected to show superior performance and favorable risk/return profiles..,” and because “...investors are convinced that sustainability is a catalyst for enlightened and disciplined management, and, thus, a crucial 14 "Investment Banking." Energy Investments, Energy. JP Morgan Chase, 2013. Web. 3 June 2013.


success factor.”15 A number of organizations are also dedicated to the development of sustainable investments. The Sustainable Investments Institute, “seeks to elevate the debate on investor responsibility and expand the market for robust, impartial analysis of corporate sustainability concerns”16 as its main goal. The Institute aims to make investment information more readily available to the public through unique research on the sustainability of investment practices in the banking industry. Strategic Sustainable Investments acts as a consultant for investors, “by helping investors choose funds and companies that are profitable, innovative and dedicated to creating a more sustainable future,” in order “to help clients invest $1 billion towards a more sustainable future.”17 Finally, The Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment acts as the “... the US membership association for professionals, firms, institutions and organizations engaged in sustainable and responsible investing....US SIF and its members advance investment practices that consider environmental, social and corporate governance criteria to generate long‐term competitive financial returns and positive societal impact” The US SIF is part of the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSIA), which is an international organization that also works “... to deepen the impact and visibility of sustainable investment organizations at the global level... [in] a world where sustainable investment is integrated into financial systems and the investment chain and where all regions of the world have coverage by vigorous membership based institutions that represent and advance the sustainable investment community.”18 Through this variety of sustainable investment organizations, it is clear that banks that promote

15 "Sustainability Investing." Sustainability Indexes ‐ . Dow Jones Sustainability Indices, n.d. Web. 1 June 2013. 16 "Si2 ‐ Index." Si2 ‐ Index. Si Institute, 2010. Web. 1 June 2013 17 "Vision, Mission & Values." Strategic Sustainable Investments. Strategic Sustainable Investments, 2011. Web. 2 June 2013. 18 "About Us | GSIA." About Us | GSIA. GSIA, 2013. Web. 1 June 2013.

investments in both environmentally conscious projects and renewable energy are posed to have an advantage in an emerging market for these sustainable investments.

Major banks play a pivotal role in ensuring not only sustainable business in their own operations, but the operations of other industries as well. Providing finance for some projects results in environmentally harmful or socially unjust externalities, and by choosing not to support these projects, banks take a major step in setting precedence for other sectors. Additionally, in choosing to fund projects such as those related to sustainable energy and microfinance, considerable progress is made in demonstrating the importance of these sustainability issues in both the developed and developing world. Aside from project finance, banks must also take into consideration their own sustainability initiatives from social, economic, and environmental standpoints. Just as any other sector must take operations into consideration, the banking sector must consider the impacts of its business on sustainability, through initiatives such as e‐waste recycling and responsible paper procurement. Nonetheless, the main opportunity for banks in sustainability involves influencing other sectors beyond the scope of most other industries’ reach.


The Pacific Sustainability Index (PSI) Overview

The PSI Scoring System

The Paci�ic Sustainability Index (PSI) uses a systematic questionnaire to analyze the quality of the overall industry corporate sustainability reporting (CSR), as well as the individual companies' CSRs. Sample companies are the largest corporations listed by the current Forbes list. This report provides a summary �indings of CSR analyses conducted by a team of undergraduate students of the Claremont Colleges--mostly of Claremont McKenna College of which Roberts Environmental Center was founded--for a semester-long research--typically a four month period. The assigned team pre-selected the topics for current analysis from the preliminary review of the downloaded reports, based on the topic's prevalence to the sector and relevance to the current issues faced by the industry.

The Roberts Environmental Center

The Roberts Environmental Center is an environmental research institute at Claremont McKenna College (CMC). Its mission is to provide students of all the Claremont Colleges with a comprehensive and realistic understanding of today’s environmental issues and the ways in which they are being and can be resolved--beyond the con�ines of traditional academic disciplines and curriculum--and to identify, publicize, and encourage policies and practices that achieve economic and social goals in the most environmentally benign and protective manner. The Center is partially funded by an endowment from George R. Roberts (Founding Partner of Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Co. and CMC alumnus), other grants and gifts, and is staffed by faculty and students from the Claremont Colleges.

MethodologyThe team downloads revelant English languages web pages from the main corporate website for the �irst month of analysis and convert them into a PDF format, then a survey of topics for inclusion in the questionnaire is underway. Data exclusively and independently available outside the main corporate website are omitted to keep transparancy score only to include innate information provided by the company. Although we aim to be objective in our analysis, our analysts are encouraged to expressed their subjective view of what they see in the report, allowing creativity to permeate in the individual analyzes of companies and the industry-wide reporting of topics.

Scores and RanksWe offer the opportunity for all companies/institutions analyzed in this report to give answers to the PSI questionnaire we are using, as long as the source of information provided are publicly available online. Our analysts would go through the website analyzing the same questionnaire, irrespective of the response, and merge the results. After scoring is �inalized, we issue a draft report and make it available for companies’ review. We encourage all companies to provide feedback and should it put out additional new online materials within the publication timeline, we will incorporate the new information into our analysis. We will use the contact information speci�ied online or provided in the report for these purposes, however, if the contact information is not provided, we will write a letter to the Public Relation Staff of the company requesting a review our report prior to publication. When response is not received in the time, usually within four weeks, we will publish the results without company’s review.

What do the Scores Mean?

We normalize all the scores to the potential maximum score. Scores of subsets of the overall score are also normalized to their potential maxima. The letter grades (A+, A, A-, B+, etc.), however, are normalized to the highest scoring company analyzed in the report. Grades of individual companies in the report might be different from grades posted online on the Roberts Environmental Center's website, since the normalization of scores of an individual company online is not limited to the companies analyzed in the sector report, but also includes other companies of the same sector irrespective of the year of analysis.

Companies with scores in the highest 4% get an A+ and any in the bottom 4% get an F. We assign these by dividing the maximum PSI score obtained in the sector into 12 equal parts then rounding fractional score up or down. This means that A+ and F are under-represented compared to the other grades. The same technique applies to the separate categories of environmental and social scores. Thus, we grade on the curve. We assume that the highest score obtained in the sector and any scores near it represent the state-of-the-art for that sector and deserve an A+.


Environmental Qualitative

5%

Social Quantitative

9%

Social Qualitative

9%

Social Human Rights

18%

Social Intent21%

Environmental Intent20%

Environmental Quantitative

18%

Distribution of Scores by Topics

PSI Scoring in a Nutshell

Types of InformationOur analysis of sustainability reporting are divided into environmental and social categories—the latter including human rights—and into three types of information: 1) intent, 2) reporting, and 3) performance.3. PerformanceFor each “Reporting” topic, two performance points are available. For quantitative topics, one point is given for improvement from the previous reporting period, and one point for better performance than the sector average (based on the data used for this sector report normalized by revenue). For qualitative topics, we give one point for any indication of improvement from previous reporting periods, and one point for perspective.The “human rights” topics are scored differently, with five “reporting” points; 2.5 points for formally adopting a policy or standard and 2.5 points for a description of monitoring measures. In addition, there are two “performance” points; one point for evidence of actions to reinforce policy and one point for a quantitative indication of compliance.

2. ReportingThe “Reporting” topics are each worth five points and are either quantitative (for which we expect numerical data) or qualitative (for which we don’t). For quantitative topics, one point is available for a discussion, one point for putting the information into perspective (i.e. awards, industry standards, competitor performance, etc., or if the raw data are normalized by dividing by revenue, number of employees, number of widgets produced, etc.), one point for the presence of an explicit numerical goal, one point for numerical data from a single year, and one point for similar data from a previous year. For qualitative topics, there are three criteria summed up to five points: 1.67 points for discussion, 1.67 points for initiatives or actions, and 1.67 points for perspective.

1. IntentThe “Intent” topics are each worth two points; one point for a discussion of intentions, vision, or plans, and one point for evidence of specific actions taken to implement them.


Sector Performance

Each vertical-line—sorted by the companies with the highest to lowest overall PSI scores—illustrates the range of the total environmental and social score of each company, divided right in the center with a tick-mark, which is also the PSI overall score. The longer the line, shows the larger discrepancies between the amount of the environmental or social topics reported.

Discriptive Statistics of the Overall Environmental, Social, and PSI Scores

-55

1525

3545

5565

7585

AN

Z

Nat

iona

l Aus

tral

ia B

ank

Itaú

Uni

banc

o H

oldi

ng

Citi

grou

p

TD

Ban

k

Deu

tsch

e Ba

nk

Bank

of A

mer

ica

Cor

p.

Inte

sa S

anpa

olo

Uni

Cre

dit

Gro

up

JP M

orga

n C

hase

HSB

C H

oldi

ngs

Mits

ubis

hi U

FJ F

inan

cial

Gro

up

Roy

al B

ank

of C

anad

a

Stan

dard

Cha

rter

ed

Wes

tpac

Ban

king

Gro

up

Bank

of N

ova

Scot

ia

BNP

Pari

bas

Com

mon

wea

lth B

ank

Sum

itom

o M

itsui

Fin

anci

al G

roup

US

Banc

orp

Soci

été

Gén

éral

e SA

ICBC

Wel

ls F

argo

Miz

uho

Fina

ncia

l Gro

up

Bank

Of C

hina

Barc

lays

Bank

of C

omm

unic

ati o

ns

E n v iro n m e n ta l S o c ia l O v e ra l l

Environmental Score Social Score Overall Score

68.49

13.93

13.08

48.82

77.60

9.94

15.87

49.66

17.92

76.81

12.85

47.98

Minimum Score

Standard Deviation

Average Score (mean)

Maximum Score


Visual cluster analysis multivariate data of the sort produced by the PSI are difficult to summarize. Here we have created radar diagrams of the performance of each company analyzed in the sector by its environmental and social intent, reporting, and performance sorted by company ranking. Maximum scores will match the outer sides of the hexagon, which total up to 100 percent. A proportional spider-web shape suggests a balance of reporting in all areas. Visual Cluster Analysis

EI = Environmental Intent, ER = Environmental Reporting, EP = Environmental PerformanceSI = Social Intent, SR = Social Reporting, SP = Social Performance

ANZ

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Citigroup

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

TD Bank

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Deutsche Bank

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Intesa Sanpaolo

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

UniCredit Group

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

JP Morgan Chase

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

HSBC Holdings

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Standard Chartered

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Bank of Nova Scotia

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

BNP Paribas

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Commonwealth Bank

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

US Bancorp

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

ICBC

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Wells Fargo

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Bank Of China

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O

Barclays

- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


- 2 E

+2 5

7

E R

E P

SP

SRSI

E I

O


0.73

0.77

0.67

0.70

0.10

0.43

0.90

0.67

0.73

0.83

0.27

0.70

0.67

0.83

0.77

0.30

0.90

0.87

0.90

0.63

0.67

0.80

0.77

0.77

0.50

0.83

0.90

0.73

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Water used

Waste recycled: solid waste

Waste (solid) disposed of

Waste (office) recycled

Waste (hazardous) released to the environment

Waste (hazardous) produced

Stakeholder consultation

Report contact person

Renewable energy used

Protection & enhancement of natural environment

(environmental )Notices of violation

Microfinancing

Habitat/ecosystem conservation

Greenhouse gases (or CO2 equivalents), total

Green purchasing

(environmental )Fines

Financing ecologically friendly projects

Environmental visionary statement

Environmental policy statement

Environmental management system

Environmental management structure

Environmental impediments and challenges

Environmental expenses and investments

Environmental education

Environmental accounting

(total )Energy used

Climate change/global warming

Biodiversity

Percentage of Companies Addressing Environmental Topics


0.770.57

0.470.87

0.700.80

0.900.67

0.470.80

0.730.33

0.600.60

0.800.27

0.900.47

0.000.03

0.800.60

0.630.83

0.400.87

0.700.30

0.830.77

0.730.57

0.900.93

0.770.77

0.800.87

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Workforce profile: genderWorkforce profile: ethnicities/race

Workforce profile: ageWomen in management

Third-party validation

Supplier screening based on social or environmental performancesupplier management

Social visionary statement Social policy statement

Social impediments and challengesSocial community investment

Sexual harassmentRecordable incident/accident rate

Reasonable working hoursPolitical contributions

Occupational health and safety protectionLost workday case rate

Investment prioritiesHealth and safety, or social organizational structure

Health and safety finesHealth and safety citations

Free association and collective bargaining of employeesFair compensation of employees

Employment for individuals w ith disabilitiesEmployee volunteerismEmployee turnover rate

Employee training for career developmentEmployee satisfaction surveys

Emergency preparedness programElimination of discrimination in respect to employment and occupation

Elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory laborEffective abolition of child labor

Degrading treatment or punishment of employeesCommunity education

Community developmentCode of conduct or business ethics

BriberyAnti-Money Laundering Policy

Anti-corruption practices

Percentage of Companies Addressing Social and Human Rights Topics


15.38

57.69

57.69

57.69

61.54

69.23

73.08

73.08

73.08

76.92

76.92

80.77

80.77

84.62

84.62

84.62

88.46

88.46

88.46

88.46

92.31

92.31

92.31

92.31

96.15

0 20 40 60 80 100


Bank Of China

Barclays



BNP Paribas

Commonwealth Bank

Wells Fargo

US Bancorp

ICBC

JP Morgan Chase

Bank of Nova Scotia

HSBC Holdings

ANZ

Intesa Sanpaolo


Standard Chartered

Citigroup

Sumitomo Mitsui

TD Bank


Mitsubishi UFJ Financial

Deutsche Bank


UniCredit Group



Environmental Intent Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ Bank of America Corp. United StatesA+ National Australia Bank AustraliaA Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanA UniCredit Group ItalyA Deutsche Bank GermanyA Royal Bank of Canada CanadaA Citigroup United StatesA Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilA TD Bank CanadaA Sumitomo Mitsui JapanA- Westpac Banking Group AustraliaA- Standard Chartered United KingdomA- Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyA- ANZ AustraliaA- HSBC Holdings United KingdomB+ Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaB+ JP Morgan Chase United StatesB+ US Bancorp United StatesB+ ICBC ChinaB+ Wells Fargo United StatesB Commonwealth Bank AustraliaB- BNP Paribas FranceC+ Société Générale SA FranceC+ Mizuho Financial Group JapanC+ Barclays United KingdomC+ Bank Of China ChinaF Bank of Communications China

53.85

96.15


5.78

11.11

16.89

19.11

29.77

34.22

34.66

35.99

36.44

42.22

43.10

45.77

48.88

51.99

55.55

55.99

56.44

58.66

61.33

61.77

63.10

63.55

65.33

69.77

69.77

71.99

0 20 40 60 80 100

Barclays

Bank Of China

Mizuho Financial

Commonwealth Bank

BNP Paribas

US Bancorp

ICBC

Wells Fargo


Sumitomo Mitsui

Mitsubishi UFJ


Bank of Nova Scotia

Westpac Banking

TD Bank

UniCredit Group

Standard Chartered

HSBC Holdings

JP Morgan Chase

ANZ

Itaú Unibanco

Deutsche Bank

Citigroup


Intesa Sanpaolo

National Australia

Environmental Reporting Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ National Australia Bank AustraliaA Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyA- Bank of America Corp. United StatesA- Citigroup United StatesA- Deutsche Bank GermanyB+ Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilB+ ANZ AustraliaB+ JP Morgan Chase United StatesB+ HSBC Holdings United KingdomB+ Standard Chartered United KingdomB UniCredit Group ItalyB TD Bank CanadaB Westpac Banking Group AustraliaB- Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaB- Royal Bank of Canada CanadaC+ Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanC+ Sumitomo Mitsui JapanC+ Société Générale SA FranceC Wells Fargo United StatesC ICBC ChinaC US Bancorp United StatesC BNP Paribas FranceC- Commonwealth Bank AustraliaD Mizuho Financial Group JapanD Bank Of China ChinaD- Bank of Communications ChinaF Barclays United Kingdom

Bank Of Communications

79.99


0.00

3.33

3.33

6.67

10.00

13.33

13.33

20.00

20.00

20.00

23.33

23.33

23.33

23.33

23.33

26.67

26.67

30.00

33.33

33.33

33.33

36.67

36.67

36.67

36.67

43.33

0 20 40 60 80 100

Barclays



Bank Of China

Commonwealth Bank

BNP Paribas

ICBC


UniCredit Group

Wells Fargo




US Bancorp

Bank of Nova Scotia

TD Bank

HSBC Holdings


JP Morgan Chase

Standard Chartered

Deutsche Bank


Citigroup

ANZ


Intesa Sanpaolo


Environmental Performance Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ National Australia Bank AustraliaB+ Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyB Bank of America Corp. United StatesB ANZ AustraliaB Citigroup United StatesB Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilB- Standard Chartered United KingdomB- JP Morgan Chase United StatesB- Deutsche Bank GermanyC+ Westpac Banking Group AustraliaC+ TD Bank CanadaC+ HSBC Holdings United KingdomC Royal Bank of Canada CanadaC US Bancorp United StatesC Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaC Société Générale SA FranceC Sumitomo Mitsui JapanC- UniCredit Group ItalyC- Wells Fargo United StatesC- Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanD+ BNP Paribas FranceD+ ICBC ChinaD Commonwealth Bank AustraliaD- Bank Of China ChinaD- Mizuho Financial Group JapanD- Bank of Communications ChinaF Barclays United Kingdom

56.67


36.67

50.00

50.00

50.00

50.00

56.67

56.67

60.00

60.00

63.33

63.33

66.67

66.67

70.00

70.00

73.33

73.33

73.33

73.33

73.33

80.00

80.00

83.33

83.33

83.33

0 20 40 60 80 100


Wells Fargo

Barclays

Bank Of China

ICBC


US Bancorp


Standard Chartered

HSBC Holdings

Bank of Nova Scotia

Sumitomo Mitsui

Commonwealth Bank

Deutsche Bank



JP Morgan Chase

Intesa Sanpaolo



TD Bank

BNP Paribas


Citigroup

UniCredit Group


ANZ

Social Intent Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ ANZ AustraliaA Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilA UniCredit Group ItalyA Citigroup United StatesA- Bank of America Corp. United StatesA- BNP Paribas FranceB+ JP Morgan Chase United StatesB+ TD Bank CanadaB+ National Australia Bank AustraliaB+ Royal Bank of Canada CanadaB+ Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyB Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanB Société Générale SA FranceB- Deutsche Bank GermanyB- Commonwealth Bank AustraliaC+ Sumitomo Mitsui JapanC+ Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaC+ HSBC Holdings United KingdomC+ Standard Chartered United KingdomC Westpac Banking Group AustraliaC US Bancorp United StatesD+ Mizuho Financial Group JapanD+ Barclays United KingdomD+ Bank Of China ChinaD+ ICBC ChinaD Wells Fargo United StatesF Bank of Communications China

46.67

86.67


12.75

29.56

30.14

34.06

35.35

45.36

46.08

46.22

50.57

50.72

52.02

52.45

54.49

54.92

55.50

61.44

62.31

62.74

63.18

63.61

64.63

66.37

67.24

70.43

75.35

0 20 40 60 80 100


Wells Fargo

ICBC

Sumitomo Mitsui

Barclays

Bank Of China

US Bancorp



Standard Chartered

Intesa Sanpaolo


Bank of Nova Scotia




Commonwealth Bank

UniCredit Group

JP Morgan Chase


Deutsche Bank

HSBC Holdings

BNP Paribas


Citigroup

TD Bank

ANZ

Social Reporting Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ ANZ AustraliaA TD Bank CanadaA Citigroup United StatesA- Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilA- BNP Paribas FranceB+ HSBC Holdings United KingdomB+ Deutsche Bank GermanyB+ Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanB+ JP Morgan Chase United StatesB+ UniCredit Group ItalyB+ Commonwealth Bank AustraliaB National Australia Bank AustraliaB Royal Bank of Canada CanadaB Westpac Banking Group AustraliaB- Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaB- Bank of America Corp. United StatesB- Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyB- Standard Chartered United KingdomC+ Société Générale SA FranceC+ Mizuho Financial Group JapanC+ US Bancorp United StatesC- Bank Of China ChinaC- Barclays United KingdomD+ Sumitomo Mitsui JapanD+ ICBC ChinaD Wells Fargo United StatesF Bank of Communications China

24.92

78.54


4.35

6.52

10.87

15.22

17.39

17.39

17.39

19.57

19.57

21.74

21.74

23.91

23.91

23.91

23.91

23.91

23.91

28.26

28.26

30.43

30.43

30.43

34.78

41.30

45.65

45.65

0 20 40 60 80 100



Sumitomo Mitsui Financial

Wells Fargo


Barclays

ICBC

US Bancorp

Bank of Nova Scotia

Standard Chartered

Intesa Sanpaolo




Bank Of China



BNP Paribas

JP Morgan Chase

Commonwealth Bank

HSBC Holdings

UniCredit Group

Citigroup

Deutsche Bank

TD Bank


ANZ

Social Performance Rankings

Grade Company Name CountryA+ ANZ AustraliaB Itaú Unibanco Holding BrazilB TD Bank CanadaB- Deutsche Bank GermanyC+ Citigroup United StatesC UniCredit Group ItalyC HSBC Holdings United KingdomC Commonwealth Bank AustraliaC BNP Paribas FranceC JP Morgan Chase United StatesC- Mitsubishi UFJ Financial JapanC- Bank of America Corp. United StatesC- Bank Of China ChinaC- National Australia Bank AustraliaC- Mizuho Financial Group JapanC- Westpac Banking Group AustraliaD+ Intesa Sanpaolo ItalyD+ Standard Chartered United KingdomD+ Bank of Nova Scotia CanadaD+ US Bancorp United StatesD+ Royal Bank of Canada CanadaD+ Barclays United KingdomD+ ICBC ChinaD Wells Fargo United StatesD- Sumitomo Mitsui JapanF Société Générale SA FranceF Bank of Communications China

65.22


ecnailpmoCgnirotinoMtnemecrofnieRnoitpodAscipoT sthgiR namuH

Human Rights Reporting Elements of the PSI Scores

Percent of Companies Reporting*

Anti-corruption practices 80.00% 60.00% 36.67% 26.67%

Bribery 83.33% 43.33% 30.00% 10.00%

Degrading treatment or punishment of employees 66.67% 43.33% 16.67% 3.33%

Effective abolition of child labor 70.00% 43.33% 16.67% 13.33%

Elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labor

73.33% 36.67% 10.00% 13.33%

Elimination of discrimination in respect to employment and occupation

86.67% 60.00% 23.33% 20.00%

Fair compensation of employees 73.33% 33.33% 10.00% 16.67%

Free association and collective bargaining of employees

73.33% 46.67% 10.00% 20.00%

Political contributions 60.00% 26.67% 10.00% 10.00%

Reasonable working hours 50.00% 26.67% 13.33% 13.33%

Sexual harassment 66.67% 50.00% 16.67% 6.67%

We assign one point for adoption of a policy standard or for an explicit discussion of an organization’s stance on each of 11 human rights principles.

Adoption

We assign one point for a description of reinforcement actions to make a policy stronger, such as providing educational programs, training, or other activities to promote awareness.

Reinforcement

We assign one point for a description of monitoring measures including mechanisms to detect violations at an early stage, providing systematic reporting, or establishment of committee structure to oversee risky activities.

Monitoring

We assign one point for a quantitative indication of compliance, such as a description of incidences of failure of compliance, or a statement that there were no such incidences.

Compliance

Basis of Scores


Average Overall, Environmental, and Social PSI Scores Performance by Country

Australia

Australia

Australia

Brazil

Brazil

Brazil

Canada

Canada

Canada

China

China

China

France

France

France

Germany

Germany

Germany

Italy

Italy

Italy

Japan

Japan

Japan

United Kingdom

United Kingdom

United Kingdom

United States

United States

United States

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Social

Environmental

Overall

This graph illustrates the average PSI in three categories--overall, environmental, and social--breakdown by countries. Since our sample size follows the world's largest companies from the Forbes list, several countries have only one company score to represent the whole country's sustainability reporting in the sector.

Country N

United States 5United Kingdom 3Japan 3Italy 2Germany 1France 2China 3Canada 3Brazil 1Australia 4


CompanyName Overall Score

Sales ($B)

Log Sales

Profits ($B)

Log Profits

Assets ($B)

Log Assets

Market Value

($B)

Log Market

Value

Relationship Between Overall PSI Score and Financial IndicatorsIntesa Sanpaolo 57.62 47.00 1.67 3.60 0.56 875.70 2.94 33.90 1.53

Bank of Communications 13.93 24.90 1.40 5.90 0.77 598.50 2.78 48.80 1.69

Standard Chartered 51.49 23.50 1.37 4.70 0.67 598.70 2.78 62.50 1.80

US Bancorp 42.11 21.40 1.33 4.90 0.69 340.10 2.53 60.50 1.78

UniCredit Group 57.47 56.30 1.75 1.60 0.20 1231.80 3.09 31.80 1.50

JP Morgan Chase 56.06 110.80 2.04 19.00 1.28 2265.80 3.36 170.10 2.23

ICBC 36.56 82.60 1.92 25.10 1.40 2039.10 3.31 237.40 2.38

HSBC Holdings 53.97 102.00 2.01 16.20 1.21 2550.00 3.41 164.30 2.22

Wells Fargo 36.05 87.60 1.94 15.90 1.20 1313.90 3.12 178.70 2.25

Citigroup 63.91 102.60 2.01 11.10 1.05 1873.90 3.27 107.50 2.03

BNP Paribas 47.29 119.00 2.08 7.90 0.90 2539.10 3.40 61.50 1.79

Bank Of China 31.11 60.80 1.78 15.80 1.20 1583.70 3.20 129.10 2.11

Itaú Unibanco Holding 64.15 75.50 1.88 7.40 0.87 426.40 2.63 91.20 1.96

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group 52.53 53.30 1.73 7.00 0.85 2478.80 3.39 74.50 1.87

Commonwealth Bank 44.59 49.50 1.69 6.90 0.84 713.70 2.85 81.60 1.91

Deutsche Bank 60.43 65.70 1.82 5.40 0.73 2809.40 3.45 47.30 1.67

Barclays 27.49 66.30 1.82 4.70 0.67 2425.20 3.38 49.10 1.69

Westpac Banking Group 50.87 44.10 1.64 7.20 0.86 651.70 2.81 67.50 1.83

Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group 43.21 45.90 1.66 5.70 0.76 1654.90 3.22 47.80 1.68

Royal Bank of Canada 51.69 35.90 1.56 4.70 0.67 812.70 2.91 84.40 1.93

National Australia Bank 64.26 38.20 1.58 5.00 0.70 730.40 2.86 56.30 1.75

ANZ 68.49 34.70 1.54 5.20 0.72 577.20 2.76 62.60 1.80

TD Bank 60.91 27.70 1.44 5.80 0.76 771.50 2.89 76.10 1.88

Bank of America Corp. 59.75 115.10 2.06 1.40 0.15 2129.00 3.33 105.20 2.02

Bank of Nova Scotia 47.93 27.30 1.44 5.30 0.72 635.20 2.80 62.20 1.79

Société Générale SA 41.00 98.60 1.99 3.30 0.52 1531.10 3.19 25.80 1.41

Mizuho Financial Group 33.35 32.20 1.51 5.00 0.70 1934.40 3.29 40.60 1.61


Log MarketVal #Name?

R2 = 0.021

0

0 .5

1

1.5

2

2 .5

0 10 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0

Log Sales ($B)

Ove

rall

PSI S

core

s

R2 = 0.0089

0

0 .5

1

1.5

2

2 .5

3

3 .5

4

0 10 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0

Log Assets ($B)

Ove

rall

PSI S

core

s


R2 = 0.0423

0

10

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

0 0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

Log Profits ($B)

Ove

rall

PSI S

core

s

R2 = 0.0008

0

0 .5

1

1.5

2

2 .5

0 10 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0

Log Market Value ($B)

Ove

rall

PSI S

core

s


1111111223333334556668

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

JP Morgan ChaseBarclays

BNP ParibasCommonwealth Bank

Intesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco Holding

UniCredit GroupUS Bancorp

Royal Bank of CanadaBank of Nova Scotia

Société Générale SAWestpac Banking Group

Sumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupStandard Chartered

Wells FargoMitsubishi UFJ Financial Group

ANZTD Bank

Deutsche BankCitigroup

National Australia BankBank of America Corp.

HSBC Holdings

Number of Explicit Numerical Goals Reported

Topics reported: Companies reporting: Energy used (total) Bank of America Corp.CitigroupDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupNational Australia BankRoyal Bank of CanadaSociété Générale SAStandard CharteredSumitomo Mitsui Financial Group


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Energy used (total) TD BankWells FargoEnvironmental expenses and investments ANZBank of America Corp.CitigroupHSBC HoldingsUS BancorpFines (environmental) CitigroupGreenhouse gases (or CO2 equivalents), total ANZBank of America Corp.Bank of Nova ScotiaCitigroupCommonwealth BankDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsJP Morgan ChaseMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupNational Australia BankSociété Générale SASumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupTD BankUniCredit GroupWells FargoWestpac Banking GroupLost workday case rate ANZRenewable energy used ANZDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsNational Australia BankRoyal Bank of CanadaTD BankSocial community investment


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Social community investment Bank of America Corp.BarclaysWaste (office) recycled Bank of Nova ScotiaHSBC HoldingsMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupStandard CharteredTD BankWestpac Banking GroupWaste (solid) disposed of Bank of America Corp.CitigroupHSBC HoldingsNational Australia BankWells FargoWaste recycled: solid waste BNP ParibasDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsNational Australia BankSociété Générale SATD BankWestpac Banking GroupWater used Bank of America Corp.CitigroupDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsNational Australia BankStandard CharteredSumitomo Mitsui Financial Group


233444445666777778999911

14

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

ICBCBarclays

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupUS Bancorp

BNP ParibasBank of Nova Scotia

Royal Bank of CanadaSociété Générale SA

Wells FargoBank Of China

Sumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupUniCredit Group

Commonwealth BankJP Morgan Chase

CitigroupWestpac Banking Group

Bank of America Corp.Deutsche Bank

Standard CharteredHSBC Holdings

ANZItaú Unibanco Holding

TD BankIntesa Sanpaolo


Number of Topics Showing Performance Improvement Over Previous Year Data

Topics reported: Companies reporting: Community development ANZCommonwealth BankJP Morgan ChaseCommunity education Bank Of ChinaTD BankEmployee satisfaction surveys Bank Of ChinaBNP ParibasCommonwealth BankHSBC Holdings


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Employee satisfaction surveys Intesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingTD BankUniCredit GroupEmployee turnover rate Deutsche BankNational Australia BankTD BankEmployee volunteerism ANZBank of America Corp.Bank of Nova ScotiaBNP ParibasCitigroupDeutsche BankWells FargoEnergy used (total) ANZBank of America Corp.Bank Of ChinaCitigroupHSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingJP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankSociété Générale SAStandard CharteredSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupTD BankUS BancorpWestpac Banking GroupEnvironmental expenses and investments Deutsche BankItaú Unibanco HoldingMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupRoyal Bank of Canada


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Environmental expenses and investments US BancorpFinancing ecologically friendly projects ANZBank of America Corp.Commonwealth BankDeutsche BankItaú Unibanco HoldingNational Australia BankRoyal Bank of CanadaStandard CharteredTD BankWells FargoWestpac Banking GroupFines (environmental) Bank of America Corp.CitigroupIntesa SanpaoloJP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankUniCredit GroupGreenhouse gases (or CO2 equivalents), total ANZBank of America Corp.Bank of Nova ScotiaCitigroupCommonwealth BankDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloJP Morgan ChaseMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupNational Australia BankRoyal Bank of CanadaSociété Générale SAStandard CharteredSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupTD Bank


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Greenhouse gases (or CO2 equivalents), total UniCredit GroupWells FargoHealth and safety citations BarclaysLost workday case rate Deutsche BankHSBC HoldingsNational Australia BankWestpac Banking GroupMicrofinancing ANZDeutsche BankICBCItaú Unibanco HoldingNational Australia BankStandard CharteredTD BankNotices of violation (environmental) Bank of America Corp.CitigroupIntesa SanpaoloNational Australia BankUniCredit GroupOccupational health and safety protection Commonwealth BankRecordable incident/accident rate HSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloTD BankRenewable energy used HSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloNational Australia BankSociété Générale SASocial community investment ANZBank Of ChinaBarclays


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Social community investment BNP ParibasJP Morgan ChaseStandard CharteredWaste (hazardous) produced Intesa SanpaoloSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupWestpac Banking GroupWaste (office) recycled ANZBank of Nova ScotiaCitigroupNational Australia BankSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupUS BancorpWestpac Banking GroupWaste (solid) disposed of ANZCitigroupHSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingJP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankStandard CharteredWestpac Banking GroupWaste recycled: solid waste HSBC HoldingsItaú Unibanco HoldingJP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankWater used Bank of America Corp.Bank Of ChinaIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupNational Australia Bank


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Water used Royal Bank of CanadaSociété Générale SAStandard CharteredSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupUniCredit GroupWells FargoWestpac Banking GroupWomen in management Bank of Nova ScotiaBNP ParibasCommonwealth BankHSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingNational Australia BankStandard CharteredSumitomo Mitsui Financial GroupTD BankUniCredit Group


11111222222233333444444

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

ICBCBank Of China

UniCredit GroupSociété Générale SA

Bank of CommunicationsBarclays

Wells FargoTD Bank

Standard CharteredRoyal Bank of Canada

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupWestpac Banking Group

HSBC HoldingsBank of Nova Scotia

CitigroupItaú Unibanco Holding

US BancorpIntesa SanpaoloDeutsche Bank

ANZBNP Paribas

JP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankBank of America Corp.

Number of Topics in which Performance was Better than Sector Average*

Topics reported: Companies reporting: Environmental expenses and investments ANZBank of America Corp.Bank of Nova ScotiaBNP ParibasCitigroupDeutsche BankIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingJP Morgan ChaseMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupNational Australia Bank


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Royal Bank of CanadaTD BankUS BancorpWells FargoRenewable energy used ANZBank of America Corp.BNP ParibasCitigroupDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsIntesa SanpaoloItaú Unibanco HoldingJP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankSociété Générale SAStandard CharteredSocial community investment ANZBank of America Corp.Bank Of ChinaBank of CommunicationsBank of Nova ScotiaBarclaysBNP ParibasDeutsche BankHSBC HoldingsICBCIntesa SanpaoloJP Morgan ChaseNational Australia BankRoyal Bank of CanadaStandard CharteredTD BankUniCredit GroupUS BancorpWells FargoWestpac Banking Group


Topics reported: Companies reporting: Waste (office) recycled ANZBank of America Corp.Bank of Nova ScotiaBNP ParibasCitigroupDeutsche BankItaú Unibanco HoldingJP Morgan ChaseMitsubishi UFJ Financial GroupNational Australia BankUS BancorpWestpac Banking Group


ANZ

Overall, ANZ performed well on its sustainability reporting; it received discussion and action points for most topics included in this part of the PSI score. The company could improve its reporting by reporting workforce profile(gender) and habitat conservation/preservation. ANZ did well on reporting social qualitative and social quantitative topics in comparison to the other banks that were scored. The bank stands out in its assessesment of occupational health and safety protection, which few other banks include in their reporting. Particularly notable were ANZ's initiatives to assist women in acquiring management positions. Like most other banks, ANZ could improve its score by providing additional social quantitative data outside of social community investment. For environmental quantitative reporting, ANZ goes above and beyond expectations, providing thorough data for energy, renewable energy, and water use; solid and office waste recycled; and waste disposal. For environmental qualitative data, ANZ excels especially in its explanation of financing ecologically friend projects.

A+

Environmental Grade: B+Social Grade: A+

Overall Grade: A+

E=Total Environmental Score, ESA=Environmental Sector Average Score, EI=Environmental Intent, ER=Environmental Reporting, EP=Environmental Performance, S=Total Social Score, SSA=Social Sector Average Score, SI=Social Intent, SR=Social Reporting, SP=Social Performance

Sustainability Management TopicsTopics Percent Coverage 0 2 5 50 75 10 0

E

ESA

S56%

E44%

Comparison with sector averages Source of points Distribution of points

EI SI ER SR EP SP

A NZ

81 8 7

6 37 9

37

6 5

Environmental visionary statement 100

Environmental impediments and challenges 100

Environmental policy statement 100

Climate change/global warming 100

Habitat/ecosystem conservation 0

Report contact person 100

Biodiversity 50

Green purchasing 100

Environmental education 100

Environmental management structure 50


Environmental TopicsTopics Percent Coverage

Environmental management system 100

Environmental accounting 50

Stakeholder consultation 100

Social visionary statement 100

Social impediments and challenges 100

Social policy statement 100

Code of conduct or business ethics 100

Supplier screening based on social or environmental performance/ supplier management

100

Health and safety, or social organizational structure 50

Workforce profile: age 100

Workforce profile: gender 0

Workforce profile: ethnicities/race 100

Emergency preparedness program 100

Third-party validation 100

Employment for individuals with disabilities 100

Employee training for career development 100

Investment priorities 100

Anti-Money Laundering Policy 50

Energy used (total) 71.43

Renewable energy used 85.71

Water used 57.14

Waste recycled: solid waste 57.14

Waste (office) recycled 85.71

Waste (solid) disposed of 71.43

Waste (hazardous) produced 0.00

Waste (hazardous) released to the environment 0.00

Notices of violation (environmental) 0.00

Environmental expenses and investments 71.43

Fines (environmental) 0.00

Greenhouse gases (or CO2 equivalents), total 85.71


Social and Human Rights TopicsTopics Percent Coverage Anti-corruption practices 64.29

Bribery 50.00

Political contributions 64.29

Degrading treatment or punishment of employees 64.29


64.29

Free association and collective bargaining of employees 64.29

Fair compensation of employees 64.29

Elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labor 64.29

Reasonable working hours 64.29

Effective abolition of child labor 64.29

Community development 100.00

Employee satisfaction surveys 80.00

Community education 80.00

Occupational health and safety protection 80.00

Employee volunteerism 60.00

Recordable incident/accident rate 14.29

Lost workday case rate 28.57

Health and safety citations 0.00

Health and safety fines 0.00

Social community investment 71.43

Employee turnover rate 14.29

Women in management 80.00

Sexual harassment 64.29

Protection & enhancement of natural environment 80.00

Financing ecologically friendly projects 100.00

Microfinancing 60.00



Although Bank of America reports a considerable amount of material in relation to its sustainability management initiatives, most of the information presented was not relevant to the company's own sustainability initiatives. Much of the information provided by Bank of America includes research and case studies on sustainability issues in society as a whole. The company received discussion and action points for most sustainability management topics, except for the company's workforce profile (age) for its employees. Bank of America consistently reports environmental quantitative data for both the current and previous years, but could benefit from showing more historical data. The Bank thoroughly reports on its financing of ecologically friendly projects. An interesting project which helps to promote conscious energy consumption and investment is the Bank’s Global Energy Exposure Stock List. The project identifies energy efficiency opportunities in seven areas to provide investors with the information necessary to identify risks and pathways for success in a green economy. In relation to its human rights reporting, Bank of America mentions a harassment policy. However, this harassment policy does not appear to be publicly available. Bank of America could improve its human rights PSI score by disclosing the data that the bank has collected on collective bargaining.

A-

Environmental Grade: A-Social Grade: B-

Overall Grade: A-



E

ESAS

43% E57%

Comparison with sector averages Source of points Distribution of pointsEI SI ER SR EP SP

Bank ofA merica Corp.

9680 70

5 237

24







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43









Bribery 50.00




50.00


























Bank Of China

For the sustainability management aspect of the PSI score, Bank of China provides information that is fairly inconsistent: these topics are either discussed in great detail or they are not addressed at all. Topics not addressed include environmental management structure or system, report contact person, or an emergency preparedness program. Generally, Bank of China needs to report more thoroughly in regards to both environmental qualitative and quantitative aspects of its corporate social responsibility. The report provides very few quantitative data parameters, which indicates some issues with environmental data transparency. Bank of China can improve its human rights PSI score by adopting more defined policies. It is especially important for the bank to create more defined policies about bribery and sexual harassment, as these are two of the most important issues in the banking industry.

C-

Environmental Grade: D+Social Grade: C-

Overall Grade: C-



E

ESA

S59%

E41%


Bank Of China

54 5 0

1735

724







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 42.86














Bribery 0.00




14.29



















Microfinancing 0.00



Overall, Bank of Communications could improve its PSI score by posting more information on a holistic and general level. Furthermore, the company does not report a code of conduct, which would also improve the company's sustainability management score. Generally, Bank of Communications needs to report more thoroughly in both environmental qualitative and quantitative sectors of its corporate social responsibility. The report does not indicate transparency in environmental data reporting. However, despite these issues, the Bank does a commendable job reporting both ecological financing and microfinancing efforts. Bank of Communications needs to create or publicize its code of conduct, as well as implement the associated social and human rights policies associated with a code of conduct, such as anti-discrimination and fair wage assurance.

F

Environmental Grade: FSocial Grade: F

Overall Grade: F



E

ESA

S64%

E36%


Bank ofCommunications

15

37

11 1 33 4







Biodiversity 0

Green purchasing 0













0













Water used 0.00














Bribery 0.00




0.00





















Bank of Nova Scotia

Bank of Nova Scotia provides fairly thorough reporting of its sustainability management initiatives. However, although the company reports a comprehensive environmental policy, it does not seem to mention a social policy statement. If the company provides one in the future, its sustainability management score could be increased. The Bank reports more heavily on non-quantitative aspects of its environmental initiatives. To improve its PSI score, the company would benefit from providing more quantitative data on its recycling efforts, which have already been implemented by the company's Environmental Policy. In general, Bank of Nova Scotia did fairly well in reporting the social qualitative aspects of its PSI score. However, the bank failed to provide any information on community education and occupational health and safety. The bank could easily earn more points by discussing these areas of corporate responsibility. For the social quantitative aspect of its PSI score, Bank of Nova Scotia did not report any quantitative data. Therefore, the bank should focus more heavily on reporting information such as employee turnover or accident rates within the company.

B-

Environmental Grade: B-Social Grade: C+

Overall Grade: B-



E

ESA S47%

E53%


Bank of NovaScotia

776 3 52 5 2

23 2 0







Biodiversity 50














100













Water used 14.29












Bribery 14.29




14.29























Barclays

Barclays demonstrates a commitment to sustainability management through detailed environmental and social policies. However, Barclays' reporting is weakened by the lack of data on the workforce profile. Two particularly notable aspects of the company's report are the detailed overview of the environmental and social risk assessments the company carries out in its lending process and the statement on supply chain sustainability. Barclays fails to provide any environmental quantitative data. The only points received for environmental qualitative were for brief mention of plans to invest in renewable energy. The bank reports a detailed social policy statement and code of conduct, but fails to provide any quantitative data outside of social community investment figures. In order to improve reporting, Barclays should provide more detailed reporting of social initiatives and data related to the way the company treats its employees. Barclays has received awards for "Where Women Want to Work" and "Women in Banking," but the bank does not report what measures it takes to support women in management positions.

D+

Environmental Grade: DSocial Grade: D+

Overall Grade: D+



E

ESA

S62%

E38%


EI SI ER SR EP SP

Barc lays

5850

6

3 4

017







Biodiversity 0

Green purchasing 0













100













Water used 0.00












Bribery 50.00




14.29





















Microfinancing 0.00


BNP Paribas

BNP Paribas’ sustainability management reporting is fairly comprehensive; however it was slightly inconsistent at times. When the Bank reports sustainability management information, the topics are covered in great detail. However, there are certain questions for which no information is available such: as report contact person, environmental management structure, and environmental accounting. The environmental reporting section can be improved on slightly to make it a more well-rounded report. The reporting practices/trends of BNP Paribas are similar to those of other banks in this sector, and hence the Bank fails to disclose any information on health and safety programs or emergency preparedness. For environmental quantitative reporting, BNP Paribas does a poor job of providing data regarding its energy and water consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. Although there is discussion of these parameters, there is no data. BNP Paribas’s environmental qualitative reporting is commendable. BNP Paribas demonstrates impressive initiatives for promoting policies which allow for a force of “well-informed employees.” In 2011, over 1,070 employees attended 20 presentations on the company's Corporate Social Responsibility policy and more specific topics, such as energy efficiency and corporate social responsibility of financing and investment policies.

B-

Environmental Grade: CSocial Grade: B

Overall Grade: B-



E

ESA

S62%

E38%


BNP Paribas

6280

34

6 6

1328







Biodiversity 50



Green purchasing 0











100













Water used 0.00









Bribery 50.00




50.00


























Citigroup

Citigroup thoroughly reports its sustainability management initiatives. The bank receives discussion and action points for all aspects if sustainability management, except for workforce profile(age) and third-party validation. Citigroup's reporting initiatives for total energy and water consumption are impressive, but the bank could provide better data on its greenhouse gas emissions. Citigroup’s environmental qualitative reporting is notable, providing thorough discussion of a variety of topics. Still, the bank should work towards demonstrating its improvement over previous years, concerning its environmental quantitative data. Concerning its human rights reporting, Citigroup could improve its PSI score by providing quantitative compliance indicators of its human rights policies.

A

Environmental Grade: A-Social Grade: B+

Overall Grade: A



E

ESA S49%

E51%


EI SI ER SR EP SP

Citigroup

88 8370 70

37 35







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43














Bribery 50.00




50.00





















Commonwealth Bank

For sustainability management reporting, Commonwealth Bank provides a fairly comprehensive account of its initiatives. The Bank does not have any information on health and safety initiatives or its emergency preparedness programs. Additionally, the company does not disclose its environmental accounting policies. However, the bank demonstrates impressive commitment to diversity through a variety of programs, including programs that address unconscious bias in the workplace. Commonwealth Bank thoroughly reports its greenhouse gas emissions for current and previous years, and also provides context for the impact of these emissions. However, other environmental quantitative data categories such as energy, water and hazardous waste are left entirely unaddressed. Commonwealth Bank’s environmental qualitative reporting does not provide much information, especially for microfinance initiatives. Commonwealth Bank needs to take more actions to reinforce and monitor its human rights policies, as well as provide quantitative indicators of compliance for these policies. Overall, the sustainability reporting of Common Wealth Bank could be improved upon substantially.

B-

Environmental Grade: CSocial Grade: B-

Overall Grade: B-



E

ESA

S59%

E41%


Commonw ealthBank

69 67

30

61

1 030







Biodiversity 0














100













Water used 28.57












Bribery 14.29




50.00





















Microfinancing 0.00


Deutsche Bank

For its sustainability management initiatives, Deutsche Bank lacks information on the following topics: health and safety programs, emergency preparedness, and employment for individuals with disabilities. However, the bank reports its environmental accounting initiatives. For both environmental quantitative and qualitative data, Deutsche Bank thoroughly reports data with comprehensive background information, including contextual explanations and demonstrated improvement over previous years. Furthermore, Deutsche Bank focuses on the discussion of microfinance and financing of ecologically friendly projects. Human rights appear as a priority at, Deutsche Bank as the company provides a strong labor rights section in its corporate responsibility reporting. The bank could improve its score by providing quantitative indications of compliance for its human rights policies.

A-

Environmental Grade: A-Social Grade: B

Overall Grade: A-



E

ESA S47%

E53%


Deutsche Bank

92

67 65 64

33 4 1







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43














Bribery 50.00




14.29





















HSBC Holdings

A particularly concerning aspect of HSBC's sustainability management initiatives is the fact that the company does not have a code of conduct, nor has it provided any information on its social practices (perhaps due to a lack of social policy statement). The bank could also better address green purchasing initiatives through responsible paper procurement set forth by the Forest Stewardship Council guidelines, as is common in the major banks industry. HSBC reports environmental quantitative data in great detail for most environmental quantitative areas. However, the bank should provide more data on recycling practices and hazardous waste disposal. Additionally, HSBC’s environmental qualitative reporting is commendable, but the bank could work on developing or reporting its microfinance programs. HSBC does fairly well in reporting its social quantitative and qualitative initiatives. In the social quantitative section, the bank provides information for employee turnover, accident/ incident, lost workday rates case rates; as well as social community investment, which is uncommon for companies within the major banks sector.

B+

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: B-

Overall Grade: B+



E

ESA S48%

E52%


HSBC Holdings

8160 6 1 65

27 30







Biodiversity 50

Green purchasing 0













100













Water used 71.43












Bribery 50.00




64.29





















Microfinancing 0.00


ICBC

The social aspect of ICBC's sustainability management initiatives lacks information; the bank does not report its social policy statement, employment for individuals with disabilities, or code of conduct. The company fails to discuss its supplier screening process; however ICBC does report information on its environmental accounting practices. ICBC’s environmental qualitative reporting is commendable. However, ICBC should work toward demonstrating its improvement over previous years for environmental quantitative data. Overall, the company's environmental quantitative data is adequate, but could be improved through reporting energy consumption and water use. To greatly improve its PSI score, ICBC should develop and implement human rights policies for its sustainability reporting, which could be achieved through publishing a code of conduct.

C

Environmental Grade: CSocial Grade: D+

Overall Grade: C



E

ESA S44% E

56%


EI SI ER SR EP SP

ICBC

7350

3 6 3 013 17







Biodiversity 100

Green purchasing 50













0













Water used 42.86














Bribery 64.29




0.00





















Intesa Sanpaolo

Intesa Sanpaolo provides comprehensive sustainability management reporting for most topics. If the bank provided more information on: environmental accounting, social impediments, health and safety, workforce profile (age) and emergency preparedness; it would receive a higher PSI score. Intesa’s environmental qualitative and quantitative data is difficult to asses because the company does not provide "total" company-wide data. Rather, Intesa Sanpaolo splits its data between Italy and the rest of the world. Therefore, this makes it difficult to score the entire company for transparency in its total environmental quantitative data. Due to the lack of consolidated company-wide data, the bank fails to gain points for current period data. Intesa Sanpaolo could improve its human rights reporting by adopting a sexual harassment policy and publicizing its actions to reinforce all other policies. The bank also needs a more comprehensive anti-money laundering policy. Intesa Sanpaolo should be applauded though for its notable quantitative indication of compliance for anti-corruption and non-discrimination policies.

A-

Environmental Grade: A-Social Grade: C+

Overall Grade: A-



E

ESAS

42%E

58%


Intesa Sanpaolo

85 73 725 1 43

2 2







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43












Bribery 14.29




64.29
























Itau Unibanco Holding reports information for all sustainability management topics, except environmental education and emergency preparedness. Furthermore, the bank provides its corporate social responsibility reporting in a clear format, making the report concise and easily understood. Itau Unibanco Holding provides thorough reporting on both its environmental quantitative and qualitative topics. The main area for improvement would be through setting goals for a variety of environmental quantitative parameters, such as water use, office waste recycling, or renewable energy consumption. Itau Unibancio Holdings provides satisfactory information in most social quantitative categories. For social quantitative reporting, the bank provides information for employee turnover; however this data broken down by age and gender, when a total turnover rate is necessary. Itau is one of the few major banks that does not provide information for social community investment; however, the bank did provide data for lost workday case rate and recordable incident/accident rate, which is uncommon for the major banks sector.

A

Environmental Grade: B+Social Grade: A-

Overall Grade: A



E

ESA S51%

E49%


Itaú UnibancoHolding

88 8 364 6 7

37 4 6







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43












Bribery 64.29




64.29























JP Morgan Chase

JP Morgan Chase provides thorough accounting of its sustainability management practices. In addition to reporting workforce profile for race and gender composition, the company could also report workforce profile for the age of its employees to improve its PSI score. JP Morgan Chase demonstrates impressive initiative in reporting its environmental quantitative data. An area for improvement would be reporting current period data on its environmental expenses and investments, rather than just context for this corporate social responsibility initiative. The bank provides a comprehensive definition of what constitutes discrimination and harassment. The bank also has a strong political contributions policy that is structured upon voluntary corporate transparency of contributions. The human rights aspect of the company's PSI score could be improved by providing more information on free association and collective bargaining. Although the company mentions its anti-corruption policy numerous times throughout the report, this document does not seem to be available publicly for reference. To improve its PSI score, the company should also provide numerical data for the social quantitative aspect of the PSI score.

B+

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: B

Overall Grade: B+



E

ESA S49%

E51%


JP MorganChase

77 7362 6 3

3 3 2 8







Biodiversity 50














100













Water used 42.86











Bribery 14.29




50.00

























Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group provides little information on most of the sustainability management topics. There is no information available on: social impediments, social policy, supplier screening or emergency preparedness. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial's reporting of environmental costs and benefits is extremely thorough, and provides excellent context for the company's Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives. However, the company's PSI score could be improved through reporting data for its recycling initiatives. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group could improve its human rights section PSI score by establishing a policy on political contributions and free association and collective bargaining of employees. Mitsubishi also needs to take more initiative to enforce its anti-money laundering policy.

B

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: B-

Overall Grade: B



E

ESA S50%

E50%


Mitsubishi UFJFinanc ial Group

927 0

4 663

2 0 2 4







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43














Bribery 50.00




50.00



















Microfinancing 0.00



Mizuho Financial Group lacks information for its sustainability management reporting; the company does not have any information on its environmental accounting practices or its investment priorities. Additionally, the company fails to provide information on many of its social policies, such as emergency preparedness and workforce profile. Mizuho Financial does not report any environmental quantitative data, or provide information on its microfinancing initiatives. To improve its PSI score, Mizuho Financial should focus on providing more environmental quantitative data. For the social aspect of Mizuho Financial's PSI score, the bank could improve its score by reporting qualitative information for employee satisfaction . The bank also has room for improvement in the social quantitative section, by providing more numerical data. Mizuho could improve its score by supporting its human rights policies with quantitative indicators of compliance.

C-

Environmental Grade: D+Social Grade: C-

Overall Grade: C-



E

ESA

S60%

E40%


Mizuho Financ ialGroup

58 50

1 946

32 4







Biodiversity 100














50













Water used 0.00













Bribery 14.29




14.29




















Microfinancing 0.00



National Australia Bank reports a fair amount of information on its sustainability management practices. A notable effort includes its commitment to its health and safety and emergency preparedness programs. Additionally, the company has also disclosed its environmental accounting policies. Furthermore, National Australia Bank is extremely thorough in reporting its environmental quantitative data. The company demonstrates initiative in setting goals for reducing its environmental quantitative impacts. National Australia bank performed well in reporting its social qualitative initiatives, yet the bank could improve its PSI score by providing more contextual information and demonstrating improvement over previous years in each of the social qualitative sections.

A

Environmental Grade: A+Social Grade: B-

Overall Grade: A



E

ESAS

40%E

60%


NationalA us tralia Bank

967 3 8 0

5 5 5 7

24







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 85.71














Bribery 50.00




64.29






















Royal Bank of Canada provides a fair amount of information on its sustainability practices. However, the bank does not provide much information on its social policies. The company provides a clear and concise environmental policy statement, but could provide more information on its environmental management system and structure. Royal Bank of Canada does not report extensively on its microfinancing initiatives. Developing these efforts or reporting more thoroughly on existing microfinance efforts would increase Royal Bank of Canada's PSI score. Although the Bank clearly reports environmental data for a number of areas, more thorough reporting on water use and waste diversion efforts would improve the company's reporting initiatives. Royal Bank of Canada could also improve its PSI score by monitoring the enforcement of its human rights policies and providing quantitative data to support these claims. The Bank performed well on the social qualitative section of the PSI score, yet the bank could improve its score by providing contextual information and data demonstrating improvement over previous years for each of the social qualitative sections. Royal Bank of Canada could also could improve its social quantitative score by providing quantitative data for parameters within this section, aside from the quantitative data reported for social community investment. Overall, the bank could improve its reporting initiatives with more quantitative data.

B

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: C+

Overall Grade: B



E

ESA S47%

E53%


Royal Bank ofCanada

927 3

49 55

2 3 1 7







Biodiversity 50














100













Water used 42.86









Bribery 14.29




50.00



























Societe Generale reports a considerable amount of information for its sustainability management practices; however it does not have a code of conduct available to the public. The company fails to disclose information on: environmental accounting, investment priorities, social impediments, emergency preparedness and third-party validation. Societe Generale could improve its PSI score by providing more of previous years' environmental quantitative data. Additionally, more thorough reporting of waste and recycling initiatives would improve the company's PSI score. Societe Generale should implement actions to reinforce and monitor all of its human rights polices, especially corruption, sexual harassment, and discrimination as these are critical issues in the banking sector. Furthermore, Societe Generale should implement an anti-money laundering policy, and the necessary actions to enforce this policy.

C+

Environmental Grade: C+Social Grade: C

Overall Grade: C+



E

ESA S50%

E50%


Soc iétéGénérale SA

58 7042 46

237







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 57.14














Bribery 14.29




14.29





















Standard Chartered

Standard Chartered provides fairly comprehensive sustainability management reporting. However, the bank could improve its reporting by addressing social impediments that the company faces, workforce profile(age), emergency preparedness, employment for individuals with disabilities, environmental management systems and structure, and by providing more coherent statements on conservation and biodiversity. Standard Chartered provides clear and thorough environmental qualitative reporting. One of the bank's most impressive initiatives is its commitment to microfinance, and its thorough reporting of this parameter with previous years' data and contextual information. The bank provides thorough harassment and child labor policies. The bank could improve its PSI score by monitoring compliance with its human rights policies, and providing quantitative indications of compliance with these policies.

B

Environmental Grade: B+Social Grade: C

Overall Grade: B



E

ESAS

43% E57%


StandardChartered

8560 59 5 1

332 2







Biodiversity 50














50













Water used 85.71














Bribery 64.29




50.00






















Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group provides thorough comprehensive reporting of its sustainability management initiatives. The bank could be more transparent by providing assurance of third party validation from an external auditor. Sumitomo Mitsui Financial fails to provide quantitative data for its environmental reporting. By including this information in its reporting initiatives, the company could greatly improve its PSI score. A strong commitment to social responsibility is seen through the strong social policy, commitment to employee well-being, and extensive social contribution activities. However, Sumitomo Mitsui fails to provide social quantitative data.

C+

Environmental Grade: B-Social Grade: D+

Overall Grade: C+



E

ESAS

40%E

60%


Sumitomo MitsuiFinanc ial Group

8863

4 330 2 3

1 1







Biodiversity 100














0













Water used 71.43















Bribery 0.00




14.29




















TD Bank

TD Bank funds multiple projects to support renewable energy, such as solar panels and more environmentally conscience vehicles. Additionally, the bank provides thorough environmental quantitative data reporting for greenhouse gas emissions and energy use, but could improve upon its environmental quantitative data reporting for other parameters such as water use. TD Bank could improve its social quantitative reporting by providing more quantitative data. The company is dedicated to the communities it works in, working with the government, and providing the human rights its employees deserve. Additionally, the report discussed the environmental education and involvement of its employees, indicating that the company emphasizes employee engagement.

A-

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: A-

Overall Grade: A-



E

ESAS

53%

E47%


EI SI ER SR EP SP

TD Bank

8873

567 5

2746







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 0.00














Bribery 64.29




50.00





















UniCredit Group

The UniCredit sustainability report thoroughly discusses its environmental and social impacts, and addresses he company's actions to mitigate any of these impacts. The company could improve its score by reporting its environmental accounting. The report provides evidence of the bank's financial support for environmentally conscience projects. However, UniCredit Group could include more transparent environmental quantitative information. There is little contextual information for any environmental quantitative data. The UniCredit Group demonstrates a clear dedication to human rights throughout its report, with a consistent emphasis on elimination of discrimination in the workplace and compliance to the laws of the countries the company works in. Important topics were not discussed though, such as a rejection on sexual harassment or a position on political contributions.

A-

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: B

Overall Grade: A-



E

ESA S51%

E49%


UniCredit Group

92 8 3

5 6 62

20 30







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43














Bribery 14.29




50.00





















US Bancorp

US Bancorp's report emphasizes the company's work with communities, with a focus on its environmental visionary statement (specifically, climate change) and social initiatives (like education). The company is very charitable, and overall, it seems dedicated to protecting the environment and assisting the communities it works in. The report discusses sustainable loans, funding of ecologically friendly projects, and protection of forests thoroughly. However, there is little environmental quantitative data, and even less discussion of goals and improvement in environmental initiatives over previous years. US Bancorp demonstrates a clear dedication to treating its employees fairly, especially with its adoption of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However the company should provide more thorough discussion of the actions it takes to ensure compliance with these polices. Furthermore, there is hardly any social quantitative data for areas such as employee turnover rate or lost workday case rate.

C+

Environmental Grade: C+Social Grade: C

Overall Grade: C+



E

ESA S48%

E52%


US Bancorp

7357

3 5 4 52 3 20







Biodiversity 0














100













Water used 0.00













Bribery 50.00




64.29






















Wells Fargo

Wells Fargo fails to provide comprehensive sustainability management reporting. The bank has very little information, and could add information to ensure clarity for most of the questions within the sustainability management section. Overall, the information is not organized clearly or concisely throughout the bank's sustainability reporting. Wells Fargo only reports environmental quantitative data for greenhouse gas emissions and environmental expenditures/investments. The company discusses other aspects of environmental quantitative reporting; however, does not provide any quantitative data. Wells Fargo performs quite poorly in reporting its human rights initiatives. The bank needs to provide information on its policies for harassment, bribery, discrimination, collective bargaining, and treatment of its workforce as a whole.

C

Environmental Grade: C+Social Grade: D

Overall Grade: C



E

ESAS

40%E

60%


Wells Fargo

7347

3 6 2 5 2 0 15







Biodiversity 0














50













Water used 28.57














Bribery 0.00




0.00






















Overall, Westpac Banking Group's sustainability reporting is fairly comprehensive. However, the company fails to report its environmental accounting practices, the social impediments that the bank faces, health and safety initiatives implemented by the bank, or the emergency preparedness plan the bank follows. To improve its transparency, Westpac Banking Group should provide a statement on the third-party assessment of its sustainability report. Westpac Banking Group does not demonstrate clear initiatives for the protection and enhancement of the natural environment. By providing more ample reporting on this topic, the company could improve its PSI score. However, the bank does report a great deal of environmental quantitative information to substantiate its environmental initiatives. Westpac Banking Group could improve its score by reporting its monitoring initiatives and quantitative indicators of compliance for its human rights policies. Westpac could improve its PSI score by reporting content and improvement over previous years for social qualitative initiatives. For the social quantitative aspect of the PSI score, the bank only provided data for lost workday case rate and social community investment.

B

Environmental Grade: BSocial Grade: C+

Overall Grade: B



E

ESA S44% E

56%


WestpacBanking Group

8557 5 6 54

30 24







Biodiversity 100














100













Water used 71.43











Bribery 50.00




14.29
























EI4Report contact person

-Discussion: identifies the person specifically designated to answer questions about the report or sustainability issues. Investor relations or public relations contact representatives are not valid contacts for this question. -Initiatives/actions: to facilitate such contact, i.e. providing email address, phone number, or a link for feedback and questions.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

1

Links: 5Environmental visionary statement

-Discussion: includes a clear visionary statement expressing an organizational commitment to good environmental performance. -Initiatives/actions: include measures to fulfill that commitment.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

2

Links: 6Environmental impediments and challenges

-Discussion: of impediments and challenges faced by the organization in attempting to realize its environmental vision and commitments.-Initiatives/actions: include measures to overcome them.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

3

Links: 9Environmental policy statement

-Discussion: includes a formal statement of the organization's environmental policy or plan.-Initiatives/actions: include a description of how the policy is being implemented.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

4

Links: 10Climate change/global warming

-Discussion: of the organization's position on climate change and/or global warming.-Initiatives/actions: include measures taken by the organization to decrease its contribution to climate change.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

5

Links:

Page 1 of 15www.roberts.cmc.edu 119 Sustainability Reporting of the World's Major Banks

11Habitat/ecosystem conservation-Discussion: of the organization's position on conserving natural ecosystems and habitat.-Initiatives/actions: taken to increase conservation of natural ecosystems either associated with or separate from the organization's business

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

6

Links: 12Biodiversity

-Discussion: of the organization's position on biodiversity.-Initiatives/actions: taken by to the organization to foster biodiversity.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

7

Links: 13Green purchasing

-Discussion: about preferential purchasing of eco-friendly (non-polluting, recycled, recyclable, etc.) products.-Initiatives/actions: taken to implement such purchasing.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

8

Links: 16Environmental education

-Discussion: of efforts to promote environmental education and awareness of employees, the general public, or children.-Initiatives/actions: taken to provide such education.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

9

Links: 19Environmental management structure

-Discussion: of the organization's environmental management structure or staffing.-Initiatives/actions: include identification of individuals currently holding the staff positions.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

10

Links: 20Environmental management system

-Discussion: includes a statement of adoption of ISO 14001 or other formal environmental management system. -Initiatives/actions: include information on the extent to which the system has been implemented.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

11

Links:


21Environmental accounting-Discussion: of environmental expenditures.-Initiatives/actions: include detailed accounting of such expenditures.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

12

Links: 23Stakeholder consultation

-Discussion: of consultation and dialogue with stakeholders about the organization's environmental aspects or impacts.-Initiatives/actions: include identification of specific consultation activities.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

13

Links:

SI17Workforce profile: ethnicities/race

-Discussion: of racial or ethnic distribution of workforce.-Initiatives/actions: taken to avoid racial or ethnic discrimination.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

1

Links: 18Workforce profile: gender

-Discussion: of gender distribution of workforce.-Initiatives/actions: taken to avoid gender discrimination and achieve appropriate balance

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

2

Links: 42Social visionary statement

-Discussion: includes a clear visionary statement expressing an organizational commitment to good social performance.-Initiatives/actions: include measures taken to fulfill that commitment.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

3

Links: 43Social impediments and challenges

Discussion: of impediments and challenges faced by the organization in attempting to realize its social vision and commitments.Initiatives/actions: include measures taken to overcome them.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

4

Links:


45Social policy statement -Discussion: includes a formal statement of the company's social policy or plan.-Initiatives/actions: include a description of how the policy is being implemented.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

5

Links: 47Code of conduct or business ethics

-Discussion: includes a formal organizational code of conduct or of ethical behavior.-Initiatives/actions: include measures to assure that the code of conduct is followed.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

6

Links: 49Supplier screening based on social or

environmental performance/ supplier management-Discussion: or description of procedures to evaluate and select suppliers on their ability to meet the requirements of the company's social or environmental policy and principles.-Initiatives/actions: include measures to implement or assure such screening or selection.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

7

Links: 51Health and safety, or social organizational

structure-Discussion: of organizational structure or staffing for ensuring health and safety or social responsibility.-Initiatives/actions: include identification of the individuals currently holding the staff positions.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

8

Links: 52Workforce profile: age

-Discussion: of age distribution of workforce.-Initiatives/actions: include measures taken to avoid age discrimination or to encourage a balanced age structure.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

9

Links: 53Emergency preparedness program

-Discussion: of emergency preparedness programs to prepare employees or the public to cope with potential emergencies at the organization's facilities.-Initiatives/actions: include measures taken to implement such programs.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

10

Links:


54Third-party validation-Discussion: of the value (or lack thereof) of third-party auditing or validation. -Initiatives/actions: include formal auditing or validation by a qualified external third-party source.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

11

Links: 80Employment for individuals with disabilities

-Discussion: of appropriate actions to accommodate employees with disabilities.-Initiatives/actions: taken to implement such accommodations.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

12

Links: 82Employee training for career development

-Discussion: of training, skills and learning programs appropriate to support employees' upward mobility.-Initiatives/actions: taken to implement such training.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

13

Links: 295Investment priorities

-Discussion: of consideration of socially responsible investing, such as in renewable energy funds or community development loan funds.-Initiatives/Actions: taken to make such investments.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

14

Links:

ERTo provide credit/saving/insurance service to low-income entrepreneurs

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context

Improvement Over Previous

191Microfinancing1

Links:

To finance environmentally benefical project such as reforestation or renewable energy generation.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


190Financing ecologically friendly projects2

Links:


Efforts to enhance, protect, and conserve the natural environment beyond what is required.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


41Protection & enhancement of natural environment

3

Links:

ERThe sum of all greenhouse gases released, which could include CO2, CH4 (methane), N2O (nitrous oxide), SF6 (Sulphur hexafluoride), PFCs (Perfluorocarbons) and HFCs (hydrofluorocarbons).

Discussio

Context

GoalCurrent Period Quantitativ

Previous Quantitative

Improvement Over Pre

83Greenhouse gases (or CO2 equivalents), total1

Year Data Values Units

Links:

Government imposed fines for environmental infractions.

Discussio

Context




40Fines (environmental)2


Links:


An accounting of money spent or invested specifically to decrease environmental damage or to benefit the environment.

Discussio

Context




39Environmental expenses and investments3


Links:

Notices of violation (NOVs) for environmental infractions.

Discussio

Context




38Notices of violation (environmental)4


Links:


Amounts of hazardous materials released into the environment, total (TRI, PRTR, HAP (Hazardous Air Pollutants), and similar indices), may include mercury or lead. Depending on the nationality of the organization, this could be labeled "TRI" (Toxic Release Inventory), "substance releases," or something else.

Discussio

Context




37Waste (hazardous) released to the environment

5


Links:

Sum of all hazardous materials remaining after production, irrespective of final disposition. Hazardous wastes include items identified as TRI, PRTR, HAP (Hazardous Air Pollutants), and similar indices, and may include mercury or lead. Depending on the nationality of the organization, this could be labeled "TRI" (Toxic Release Inventory,) "substance releases" , or something else.

Discussio

Context




35Waste (hazardous) produced6


Links:


Includes solid hazardous and non-hazardous waste landfilled, incinerated, or transferred.

Discussio

Context




34Waste (solid) disposed of7


Links:

Office recycling of paper, cardboard, metal, or plastic.

Discussio

Context




32Waste (office) recycled8


Links:

Sum of all solid waste recycled, including hazardous waste.

Discussio

Context




30Waste recycled: solid waste9


Links:


Sum of all water used during operations.Discussio

Context




29Water used10


Links:

Energy used from renewable sources such as wind, solar, hydroelectric, or other renewable sources.

Discussio

Context




27Renewable energy used11


Links:

Sum of the energy used by the organization in all different forms, including electricity, fuel, natural gas and others.

Discussio

Context




26Energy used (total)12


Links:


SRRelative numbers of women in management.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


2Women in management1

Links:

Efforts to promote employee volunteerism in social or environmental projects.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


72Employee volunteerism2

Links:

Efforts to provide a safe and healthy working environment at all sites.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


70Occupational health and safety protection3

Links:

Efforts to support education in the communities where the company is located.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


68Community education4

Links:

Surveys to monitor employee satisfaction.Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


67Employee satisfaction surveys5

Links:

Efforts to participate in social activities that improve the quality of life of communities including that of indigenous people, where the organization operates.

Discussio

Initiatives/Actio

Context


66Community development6

Links:

SR


Annual employee turnover rate.Discussio

Context




3Employee turnover rate1


Links:

Amount of money spent on community outreach, including education grants, donations, and relief effort funds.

Discussio

Context




81Social community investment2


Links:

Fines levied against a company for health and safety violations.

Discussio

Context




77Health and safety fines3


Links:


Number of health and safety citations or notices of violation. If it is stated that there were none, check lines 1,2,3, 4, and 6.

Discussio

Context




76Health and safety citations4


Links:

Number of employee injuries or illnesses that resulted in one or more lost workdays.

Discussio

Context




75Lost workday case rate5


Links:

Number of employee incidents or accidents, such as: “total case incident rate,” “incident rate,” or "accident rate."

Discussio

Context




74Recordable incident/accident rate6


Links:


SI

Compliance with applicable lawas and industry standards on anti-money laundering policy

Adoption of PolicyAction to Reinforce PolicMonitoringQuantiative Indication of Compliance

380Anti-Money Laundering Policy1

Links:

SR

Rejection of any form of sexual harassment.Adoption of PolicyAction to Reinforce PolicMonitoringQuantiative Indication of Compliance

1Sexual harassment1

Links:

Rejection of illegal child labor by the company or its affiliates.


65Effective abolition of child labor2

Links:

Compliance with applicable laws and industry standards on working hours, including overtime.


64Reasonable working hours3

Links:

Assurance that all employees enter employment with the company of their own free will, not by compulsion.

Adoption of PolicyAction to Reinforce Polic

MonitoringQuantiative Indication of Compliance

63Elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labor

4

Links:

Assurance that wages paid meet or exceed legal or industry minimum standard.


62Fair compensation of employees5

Links:


Efforts to respect the right of employees to form and join trade unions of their choice and to bargain collectively.



61Free association and collective bargaining of employees

6

Links:

Commitment not to engage in any kind of discrimination based on ethnicity, caste, religion, disability, sex, age, sexual orientation, union membership, or political affiliation in hiring practices or employee treatment.



60Elimination of discrimination in respect to employment and occupation

7

Links:

Commitment to oppose any corporal/hard labor punishment, mental/physical coercion, or verbal abuse.



59Degrading treatment or punishment of employees

8

Links:

Policy about political contributions.Adoption of PolicyAction to Reinforce PolicMonitoringQuantiative Indication of Compliance

7Political contributions9

Links:

Rejection of briberyAdoption of PolicyAction to Reinforce PolicMonitoringQuantiative Indication of Compliance

8Bribery10

Links:

Efforts to uphold the highest standards of business ethics and integrity. May be found under a Code of Conduct.


58Anti-corruption practices11

Links:


América Móvil, AT&T, BCE, BhartiAirtel, BT Group, CenturyLink, ChinaM o b i l e , C h i n a T e l e c o m , C h i n aUnicom, Deutsche Telekom, Etisalat,France Telecom, KDDI, KPN, MTNGroup, Nippon Telegraph & Tel,R o g e r s C o m m u n i c a t i o n s , S a u d iTelecom, SingTel , Sistema JSFC,Softbank, Telecom Italia, Telefónica,Telenor, TeliaSonera, Telstra, Telus,V e r i z o n C o m m u n i c a t i o n s ,V i m p e l C o m , a n d V o d a f o n e .

Contact InformationContact Information

Roberts Environmental CenterRoberts Environmental Center

The Roberts Environmental Center is a research institute at Claremont McKenna College, endowed by George R. Roberts, Founding Partner, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. The Center is managed by faculty and staff, and its research, including the material in this report, is done by students at the Claremont Colleges.

Dr. J. Emil Morhardt, Director, Phone: 909-621-8190, email: [email protected] Adidjaja, Research Fellow, Phone: 909-621-8698, email: [email protected] Environmental Center, Claremont McKenna College, 925 N. Mills Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711-5916, USA.

Claremont McKenna College, a member of the Claremont Colleges, is a highly selective, independent, coeducational, residential, undergraduate liberal arts college with a curricular emphasis on economics, government, and public affairs.

Claremont McKenna CollegeClaremont McKenna College

The Claremont CollegesThe Claremont CollegesThe Claremont Colleges form a consortium of five undergraduate liberal arts colleges and two graduate institutions based on the Oxford/Cambridge model. The consortium offers students diverse opportunities and resources typically found only at much larger universities. The consortium members include Claremont McKenna College, Harvey Mudd College, Pitzer College, Pomona College, Scripps College, Keck Graduate Institute of Applied Life Sciences, and the Clremont Graduate University which—includes the Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate School of Management.

airtel, bt group, centurylink, china mobile, china telecom, china … · 2019-04-02 · appendix:...

Documents