作為投資的一種經(jīng)濟(jì)理由,ESG(環(huán)境、社會(huì)和治理)原則正在被廣為接受。我認(rèn)為這項(xiàng)雙重任務(wù)的下一個(gè)前沿領(lǐng)域是健康。是的,我指的是企業(yè)通過深耕健康事務(wù)來推動(dòng)更好的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)成果。
即使在新冠疫情爆發(fā)之前,健康狀況不佳的代價(jià)也是巨大的,無論是對(duì)人的生命還是對(duì)生產(chǎn)力而言。安格斯?迪頓和安妮?凱斯撰寫的《絕望之死與資本主義的未來》(Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism)一書表明,富人和窮人的預(yù)期壽命差距正在擴(kuò)大,而窮人更容易患上“大D”疾?。禾悄虿?、抑郁癥和癡呆癥。新冠疫情毫無疑問地表明,經(jīng)濟(jì)表現(xiàn)取決于整體人口的健康狀況。現(xiàn)在的挑戰(zhàn)是要縮小健康方面的不平等。
對(duì)大多數(shù)公司來說,公共衛(wèi)生滯后于ESG倡議中的氣候部分。但這種情況正在開始改變。就在企業(yè)努力改善ESG中的“S”(社會(huì)影響)之際,我認(rèn)為應(yīng)該將“H”(健康)加到這個(gè)首字母縮寫詞中。正如企業(yè)能夠通過其選擇、產(chǎn)品和外展服務(wù)來影響環(huán)境一樣,它們也可以影響健康結(jié)果。
這要從企業(yè)認(rèn)識(shí)到員工健康的重要性開始。它們能夠通過提供更健康的自助餐廳食物、健身房會(huì)員或康樂服務(wù)來改善這種狀況。如果企業(yè)可以預(yù)防身體和心理健康問題,而不是控制這些問題引發(fā)的缺勤和醫(yī)療保健成本,其境遇就會(huì)好得多。令人鼓舞的是,最近的研究表明,企業(yè)的最高層正在意識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)。
此外,企業(yè)還應(yīng)該衡量其產(chǎn)品或服務(wù)對(duì)客戶健康的影響。在政府監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)以產(chǎn)品禁令或懲罰性稅收等方式強(qiáng)勢介入之前,各組織應(yīng)該進(jìn)行自我監(jiān)管。它們應(yīng)該重新考慮如何采購原材料,并確定其供應(yīng)鏈中的任何合作伙伴是否參與了那些可能損害消費(fèi)者健康的活動(dòng)。
對(duì)家具制造商來說,這可能意味著尋找產(chǎn)品中有毒化學(xué)物質(zhì)的替代品。加工食品公司能夠重新設(shè)計(jì)其產(chǎn)品,以扭轉(zhuǎn)西方飲食中常見的腸道細(xì)菌失衡現(xiàn)象。對(duì)酒類經(jīng)銷商來說,這可能包括提供條形碼讓消費(fèi)者掃描,以了解過量飲酒對(duì)健康的危害。
各組織應(yīng)該跳出思維定式,不落窠臼地尋找改善健康之道。企業(yè)甚至可以讓員工參與這個(gè)過程,通過一個(gè)數(shù)字化的意見箱眾包解決方案。大型企業(yè)應(yīng)該考慮任命首席醫(yī)療官,以彰顯它們對(duì)消費(fèi)者健康的重視程度,就像Hy-Vee連鎖超市和Dollar General所做的那樣。
與氣候問題一樣,ESHG投資不僅是為了規(guī)避風(fēng)險(xiǎn),也是為了獲得投資新技術(shù)的好處。許多健康食品初創(chuàng)公司正在獲得精明投資者的青睞,并且已經(jīng)開始顛覆大型快消品(CPG)公司。早期風(fēng)投基金能夠發(fā)揮重要作用,著力培育涉足護(hù)理和健康領(lǐng)域的初創(chuàng)企業(yè)。
ESHG的概念正在興起。健康挑戰(zhàn)和環(huán)境危機(jī)一樣緊迫——而政府所能做的也就這么多了。一旦投資者的資金發(fā)揮威力,真正用于解決社會(huì)問題,那就會(huì)迅速催生有意義的變革。但愿我們早日在健康領(lǐng)域見證這一幕。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
本文作者奈杰爾?威爾遜是跨國金融服務(wù)公司法通保險(xiǎn)(Legal&General)的首席執(zhí)行官。
譯者:任文科
作為投資的一種經(jīng)濟(jì)理由,ESG(環(huán)境、社會(huì)和治理)原則正在被廣為接受。我認(rèn)為這項(xiàng)雙重任務(wù)的下一個(gè)前沿領(lǐng)域是健康。是的,我指的是企業(yè)通過深耕健康事務(wù)來推動(dòng)更好的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)成果。
即使在新冠疫情爆發(fā)之前,健康狀況不佳的代價(jià)也是巨大的,無論是對(duì)人的生命還是對(duì)生產(chǎn)力而言。安格斯?迪頓和安妮?凱斯撰寫的《絕望之死與資本主義的未來》(Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism)一書表明,富人和窮人的預(yù)期壽命差距正在擴(kuò)大,而窮人更容易患上“大D”疾病:糖尿病、抑郁癥和癡呆癥。新冠疫情毫無疑問地表明,經(jīng)濟(jì)表現(xiàn)取決于整體人口的健康狀況?,F(xiàn)在的挑戰(zhàn)是要縮小健康方面的不平等。
對(duì)大多數(shù)公司來說,公共衛(wèi)生滯后于ESG倡議中的氣候部分。但這種情況正在開始改變。就在企業(yè)努力改善ESG中的“S”(社會(huì)影響)之際,我認(rèn)為應(yīng)該將“H”(健康)加到這個(gè)首字母縮寫詞中。正如企業(yè)能夠通過其選擇、產(chǎn)品和外展服務(wù)來影響環(huán)境一樣,它們也可以影響健康結(jié)果。
這要從企業(yè)認(rèn)識(shí)到員工健康的重要性開始。它們能夠通過提供更健康的自助餐廳食物、健身房會(huì)員或康樂服務(wù)來改善這種狀況。如果企業(yè)可以預(yù)防身體和心理健康問題,而不是控制這些問題引發(fā)的缺勤和醫(yī)療保健成本,其境遇就會(huì)好得多。令人鼓舞的是,最近的研究表明,企業(yè)的最高層正在意識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)。
此外,企業(yè)還應(yīng)該衡量其產(chǎn)品或服務(wù)對(duì)客戶健康的影響。在政府監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)以產(chǎn)品禁令或懲罰性稅收等方式強(qiáng)勢介入之前,各組織應(yīng)該進(jìn)行自我監(jiān)管。它們應(yīng)該重新考慮如何采購原材料,并確定其供應(yīng)鏈中的任何合作伙伴是否參與了那些可能損害消費(fèi)者健康的活動(dòng)。
對(duì)家具制造商來說,這可能意味著尋找產(chǎn)品中有毒化學(xué)物質(zhì)的替代品。加工食品公司能夠重新設(shè)計(jì)其產(chǎn)品,以扭轉(zhuǎn)西方飲食中常見的腸道細(xì)菌失衡現(xiàn)象。對(duì)酒類經(jīng)銷商來說,這可能包括提供條形碼讓消費(fèi)者掃描,以了解過量飲酒對(duì)健康的危害。
各組織應(yīng)該跳出思維定式,不落窠臼地尋找改善健康之道。企業(yè)甚至可以讓員工參與這個(gè)過程,通過一個(gè)數(shù)字化的意見箱眾包解決方案。大型企業(yè)應(yīng)該考慮任命首席醫(yī)療官,以彰顯它們對(duì)消費(fèi)者健康的重視程度,就像Hy-Vee連鎖超市和Dollar General所做的那樣。
與氣候問題一樣,ESHG投資不僅是為了規(guī)避風(fēng)險(xiǎn),也是為了獲得投資新技術(shù)的好處。許多健康食品初創(chuàng)公司正在獲得精明投資者的青睞,并且已經(jīng)開始顛覆大型快消品(CPG)公司。早期風(fēng)投基金能夠發(fā)揮重要作用,著力培育涉足護(hù)理和健康領(lǐng)域的初創(chuàng)企業(yè)。
ESHG的概念正在興起。健康挑戰(zhàn)和環(huán)境危機(jī)一樣緊迫——而政府所能做的也就這么多了。一旦投資者的資金發(fā)揮威力,真正用于解決社會(huì)問題,那就會(huì)迅速催生有意義的變革。但愿我們早日在健康領(lǐng)域見證這一幕。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
本文作者奈杰爾?威爾遜是跨國金融服務(wù)公司法通保險(xiǎn)(Legal&General)的首席執(zhí)行官。
譯者:任文科
ESG principles—environmental, social, and governance—are taking hold as an economic rationale for investment. I suggest that the next frontier for that dual mandate is health. Literally, I mean business doing health to drive better economic and social outcomes.
Even pre-pandemic, the costs of poor health were huge, both on human life and productivity. Angus Deaton and Anne Case’s Deaths of Despair highlighted a widening gap in life expectancies between rich and poor, with poorer people spending more of their lives vulnerable to “Big D” conditions: diabetes, depression, and dementia. The coronavirus pandemic has demonstrated beyond doubt that economic performance depends on overall population health. The challenge now is to narrow health inequalities.
For most companies, public health lags behind the climate component of ESG initiatives. But it’s beginning to change. As they grapple to improve the “S” of ESG, I posit that “H,” for health, should be added to the acronym. As companies can influence the environment with their choices, products, and outreach, so too can they influence health outcomes.
This starts with businesses recognizing the importance of their own employees’ health. They can improve this by offering healthier cafeteria food, gym memberships, or well-being services. Companies are better off when they prevent physical and mental health issues from occurring, rather than controlling the costs of absenteeism and health care later on. Encouragingly, recent research suggests that companies are becoming aware of this at the highest levels of leadership.
Companies should also measure the impact of their goods or services on customers’ health. Organizations should self-regulate before government regulators step in with product bans or punitive taxes. They should rethink how they source their materials, determining whether any partners in their supply chains are involved in activities that might harm consumers’ health.
For furniture makers, this could mean finding alternatives to the toxic chemicals used in their products. Processed food companies could redesign their products to reverse gut bacteria imbalances common in Western diets. For alcohol distributors, this could involve offering barcodes for consumers to scan to learn about the health dangers of alcohol overuse.
Organizations should look outside the box for ways to improve health. Companies can even incorporate employees into the process, crowdsourcing solutions through a digitized suggestion box. And large entities should consider appointing chief medical officers to reinforce their emphasis on consumer health, as Hy-Vee and Dollar General have done.
As with climate, ESHG investing is not only about avoiding risks, but also the upside of investing in new technologies. Many health food startups are gaining traction with savvy investors and disrupting massive CPG companies. Early investment VC funds can play an important role, nurturing startups involved in the care and well-being spaces.
The concept of ESHG is gaining momentum. The health challenge is just as urgent as the environmental crisis—and governments can only do so much. When the real weight of investors’ money is deployed to solve a social problem, meaningful change can happen rapidly, and that could happen with health.
Nigel Wilson is group chief executive of?Legal & General.