Morgan Stanley

InfluenceMap Score
C-
Performance Band
64%
Organisation Score
46%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Financials
Head​quarters:
New York, United States
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Sustainable Finance Lobbying Overview: Morgan Stanley appears to have had moderate engagement on sustainable finance policy, with some broadly positive engagement coming from its asset management subsidiary Calvert Research and Management.

Top-Line Messaging on Sustainable Finance Policy: Morgan Stanley has recognized the issue of short-termism but it is unclear whether it supports systemic reforms to address this. Morgan Stanley has stated support for action to keep global temperature rise to 1.5C and advocated for a role for finance in delivering the goals of the Paris Agreement. In testimony to the Senate Banking Committee in 2021, CEO James Gorman recognized the “urgent need to address the climate challenge.” Reports across Morgan Stanley’s website describe ongoing sustainable finance regulation but it is often unclear whether Morgan Stanley supports this regulation.

Position on Regulated Corporate ESG Disclosure: In 2021, Morgan Stanley Investment Management signed onto a statement of support for the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), advocating for policymakers to increase the ambition of regulated corporate ESG disclosure. However, a September 2022 memo regarding a meeting between banks and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) suggests that Morgan Stanley does not support aspects of the SEC’s proposed climate disclosure rule, outlining concerns with implementation and cost. Calvert Research and Management has also engaged on the SEC’s climate rule, supporting the proposal including its financial statement and Scope 3 disclosure requirements. Calvert took a more mixed position on the International Sustainability Standards Board’s proposed climate disclosure standards, not supporting mandatory scenario analysis disclosure.

Position on Taxonomies and ESG Standards/Labels/Benchmarks: While Morgan Stanley has taken a somewhat unclear position on the EU Taxonomy on its corporate website, a 2020 case study and a 2021 news article suggest support for the Taxonomy. In the same 2021 news article, Morgan Stanley appears to support the EU Green Bond Standard. In comments to the SEC in 2022, Calvert Research and Management stated support for the Commission’s efforts to classify ESG-related funds but did not support an extension of the Commission’s ‘Names Rule’ and its 80% investment policy to ESG-related funds.

Position on Incorporating ESG Factors Into Investor Duties: In 2022, Calvert Research and Management took a mixed position on the SEC’s proposal to enhance disclosures by investors about their ESG investment practices, supporting qualitative disclosure about a fund’s approach to proxy voting and engagement but asserting that quantitative reporting should be voluntary, and advocating for Scope 3 disclosure requirements to be delayed.

Position on Incorporating ESG Factors Into Risk Management/Prudential Regulation: In a 2021 insights article Morgan Stanley appeared to support efforts to incorporate climate into central banks’ operational frameworks, and in its 2021 CDP response Morgan Stanley stated support for the UK Prudential Regulation Authority’s efforts to incorporate climate risks into banks’ and insurers’ governance and risk management.

Industry Association Governance: Morgan Stanley has disclosed memberships to some US trade associations but has not given a comprehensive disclosure on the sustainable finance policy positions of these organizations or actions taken to address misalignments. Memberships to, for example, EU trade associations are not disclosed.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
00NSNS0NSNS
111NS-11NS
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
12NS0NSNSNS
0NSNSNS1NSNS
1NSNS01NSNS
NSNSNS01NSNS
1NS1NSNSNSNS
-1NANANANANANA
0NANANANANANA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
53%
 
53%
 
48%
 
48%
 
43%
 
43%
 
41%
 
41%
 
53%
 
53%
 
37%
 
37%
 
70%
 
70%
 
40%
 
40%
 
11%
 
11%
 
49%
 
49%
 
39%
 
39%
 
56%
 
56%
 
56%
 
56%
 
42%
 
42%
 
46%
 
46%

How to Read our Relationship Score Map

In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party. In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.