Green Century Capital Management

Green Century Capital Management
Name	Green Century Capital Management
Type	Investment management firm
Founded	1990s
Headquarters	Boston, Massachusetts
Focus	Environmental, social, and corporate governance investing; shareholder advocacy
Key people	Christopher Hohn, Susan Baker, (example placeholders)
Assets	(see Financial Performance and Assets Under Management)

Green Century Capital Management is an American environmentally focused investment management firm and shareholder advocacy organization headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts. The firm specializes in fossil-fuel-free mutual funds and engages in corporate campaigns aimed at reducing pollution, enhancing climate disclosure, and improving corporate governance at large corporations. Green Century operates at the intersection of asset management, activist shareholder litigation, and nonprofit environmental advocacy, working with trustees, trustees of pension funds, and institutional investors.

History

Green Century traces its roots to the environmental movement and sustainable finance initiatives of the late 20th century, emerging amid debates involving World Commission on Environment and Development, United Nations Environment Programme, Brundtland Commission-era policy discussions. Early antecedents include collaborations among environmental advocacy groups such as Nader's Raiders-era consumer advocates, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and financial innovators inspired by John Maynard Keynes-era stewardship ideas and the rise of socially responsible investing tied to organizations like Domini Social Investments and Calvert Investments. During the 1990s and 2000s, Green Century engaged with regulators and policymakers including the Securities and Exchange Commission, participated in dialogues with corporate boards influenced by rulings such as those from the Delaware Court of Chancery, and coordinated campaigns echoing tactics used by activist investors like CalPERS and The Children's Investment Fund.

Investment Strategy and Products

Green Century offers mutual funds and shareholder services that exclude companies in sectors linked to fossil fuels, coal, and timber extraction, employing screens similar to those promulgated by United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment, Global Reporting Initiative, and guidelines referenced by International Organization for Standardization standards. Its strategies combine environmental, social, and governance analysis with engagement practices used by institutional asset managers such as BlackRock, Vanguard, and TIAA. Product offerings have included no-load mutual funds comparable in structure to funds managed by Fidelity Investments and T. Rowe Price, while integrating proxy-voting policies aligned with frameworks from Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures and shareholder resolutions modeled after cases prosecuted in venues like the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Shareholder Advocacy and Campaigns

Green Century is known for filing shareholder resolutions and mounting proxy fights targeting corporations in industries such as oil and gas, chemicals, plastics, and food production. Campaigns have targeted multinational corporations including ExxonMobil, Chevron Corporation, BP, Dow Chemical Company, DuPont, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., McDonald's Corporation, and PepsiCo to improve climate risk disclosure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The firm collaborates with environmental organizations such as Greenpeace, 350.org, Earthjustice, and Friends of the Earth and engages with institutional investors like CalPERS, New York State Common Retirement Fund, and Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global to build coalitions. Green Century’s advocacy has intersected with regulatory debates involving the Securities and Exchange Commission climate disclosure rules and litigation precedents such as shareholder derivative suits heard in Delaware Chancery Court.

Governance and Ownership

Green Century operates as a private investment manager with governance arrangements involving trustees, investment committees, and boards similar to structures in entities such as Vanguard Group and Fidelity Investments. Its ownership and nonprofit partnerships reflect alliances with environmental nonprofits and institutional trustees akin to arrangements seen at CalSTRS and City of Boston Pension Fund. The firm’s proxy-voting and stewardship policies reference corporate governance codes like the UK Corporate Governance Code and engage with stewardship advocacy networks such as Institutional Shareholder Services and Ceres. Senior leadership has interacted with university endowments including Harvard University, Yale University, and Stanford University on divestment and engagement strategies.

Financial Performance and Assets Under Management

Green Century’s assets under management have been disclosed in annual reports and regulatory filings similar to those by peers such as Domini, Trillium Asset Management, and Pax World Management. Performance reporting compares fund returns against benchmarks managed by MSCI, S&P Global, and Bloomberg. The firm measures risk-adjusted returns using methodologies referenced by Modern Portfolio Theory proponents and analytics vendors like Morningstar and Lipper. Its funds have been held in retirement plans administered by public pension funds including CalPERS and municipal plans in cities such as Boston and San Francisco, and are evaluated in the context of asset-allocation frameworks employed by sovereign wealth funds such as Norway Government Pension Fund.

Criticism and Controversies

Green Century has faced criticism and controversies common to activist asset managers, including disputes over proxy proposals, accusations from industry groups such as American Petroleum Institute and Chamber of Commerce about politicized investing, and legal challenges reminiscent of cases brought against activist investors like Elliott Management Corporation. Critics have questioned stewardship tactics and cost structures in the context of debates involving fiduciary duty under statutes like the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and regulatory scrutiny by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Controversies have also arisen in public campaigns where corporations like ExxonMobil and Chevron mobilized counter-campaigns, drawing comparisons to historical conflicts involving Tobacco industry litigation and public relations battles waged by Monsanto.

Category:Investment management firms Category:Environmental organizations in the United States