UNC clearly wants to be seen as a leading institution for sustainability and environmental stewardship, but apparently not when it comes to its money. Despite calls from nearly 2,000 students, an outside research group and the Sierra Club, UNC still refuses to address its endowment transparency issues and prove that it isn’t investing in the worst corporate polluters, claiming it could hurt investment returns. It’s time for UNC to see that its impact on the environment spreads beyond campus and realize that it has the potential to make the planet and its balance sheet greener.
Today, Chancellor Holden Thorp will be presented with the 2011 Campus Sustainability Report detailing the strides UNC has made in areas of sustainability. But Beyond Coal leader Stewart Boss said the report will once again not include information on the University’s endowment investment practices and holdings. With nearly $2 billion under-management, this is no small omission, and it’s keeping UNC from being recognized as a leader in sustainability.
Every year, the Sustainable Endowments Institute’s Green Report Card identifies “colleges and universities that are leading by example in their commitment to sustainability.” In calculating this measure, the institute grades universities on nine measures including administration, recycling, green building, student involvement and endowment transparency.
UNC receives the highest score in all of these measures, except the “F” it received this year for endowment transparency. Despite this Scarlet Letter on our sustainability record, UNC still managed to be named an “overall college sustainability leader” by the institute. This is a testament to the work of UNC’s Sustainability Office, which has overseen a variety of improvements during the past decade.
While the improvements made on campus are laudable, such as the commitment to become coal-free by 2020 and the recent decision to create a $500,000 green revolving loan fund, they are only part of the solution. It is time UNC removes any doubt that it isn’t putting its money where its mouth is on sustainability. By investing in companies such as coal manufactures, UNC would be promoting an unsustainable economic model that goes against both its academic research and its actions at home.
In the 2010-11 fiscal year, UNC saw its endowment increase 15.3 percent from 2009-10 levels. While that may sound like a hefty return, it’s less than impressive when compared to some of the schools named by the sustainability institute last year as “endowment sustainability leaders.”
Last year, Yale University saw its investments rise 22 percent while Columbia and Dartmouth saw growth of 23.6 percent and 18.4 percent, respectively. Outside the Ivy league, at a peer institution of UNC’s, the University of Minnesota saw a 18.7 percent increase. On average, these schools saw returns of 20.68 percent, or more than 25 percent higher UNC’s in 2011, with their green investment strategies.
As a public institution, transparency like this should be a requirement. But if principle alone is not enough to guide UNC’s investment practices, the Board of Trustees should urge them to follow the money and pursue a more sustainable and transparent investment strategy.
