Home / ESG
Stewardship is an owner's job
We hold buildings for years and lend to businesses for the length of a cycle. Over that horizon, energy intensity, tenant welfare and governance quality stop being disclosure categories and become inputs to the valuation.
Our position
No separate ESG portfolio
We do not operate a distinct sustainable fund alongside a conventional one. We think that structure implies the conventional book is underwritten to a lower standard, which would be an odd thing to tell an investor.
Instead, the same factors are assessed on every asset in every strategy, and they are assessed because they affect price. A building that cannot meet the minimum energy standard in its jurisdiction is not an asset with a disclosure problem; it is a development project with a legal deadline. A borrower with governance failures is not a reputational risk; it is a credit risk that has not yet appeared in the numbers.
If a factor is material, it belongs in the underwriting. If it is not, it does not belong in the marketing either.
Reporting
Where the portfolio actually stands
Reported annually and assured by an independent third party. Prior-year figures are restated when methodology changes.
| Metric | 2023 | 2025 | 2026 | Target 2030 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy intensity (kWh/m²/yr, indexed to 2019) | 74 | 66 | 62 | 45 |
| Assets with funded transition plan | 61% | 84% | 92% | 100% |
| Portfolio covered by monthly energy data | 70% | 88% | 95% | 100% |
| Loans with ESG covenants at origination | 88% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
| Managed services paying living wage | 76% | 94% | 100% | 100% |
| Assets with accessibility audit | 52% | 79% | 88% | 100% |
Figures are portfolio-weighted across assets under direct management and exclude the listed markets sleeve, where we are not the controlling owner. Metrics are illustrative of the firm's reporting framework.
Engagement
We vote, and we say how
In the listed sleeve we exercise every vote we hold and publish the record annually, including where we voted against management and why.
In private positions the equivalent mechanism is the covenant and the board seat. Engagement without leverage is correspondence; we prefer to hold the instrument that makes the conversation binding.
Request the voting recordResolutions voted last year
Voted against management
Formal engagements opened
Escalated to board level
Policies
Documentation
Responsible Investment Policy
How ESG factors enter underwriting, monitoring and exit across all four strategies.
Request documentStewardship & Voting Policy
Our approach to voting, engagement and escalation, including the published voting record.
Request documentClimate Transition Plan
Portfolio decarbonisation pathway, capital allocation to retrofit, and physical risk methodology.
Request documentConflicts of Interest Policy
Partner co-investment terms, allocation between mandates, and the conflicts register.
Request documentExclusion Framework
Sectors and activities outside our mandate, and the process for reviewing them.
Request documentModern Slavery Statement
Supply chain diligence across managed services and construction contractors.
Request document