About Emily Holbrook

Emily Holbrook is a former editor of the Risk Management Monitor and Risk Management magazine. You can read more of her writing at EmilyHolbrook.com.
Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

Geoengineering the Climate

geoengineering

I was lucky enough to attend a lecture Friday afternoon at Columbia University on the topic of geoengineering. Speaking on the issue were Eli Kintisch, author of Hack the Planet — Science’s Best Hope — or Worst Nightmare — for Averting Climate Catastrophe and Scott Barrett, Lenfest-Earth Institute Professor of Natural Resource Economics, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University.

Geoengineering, if you are unaware, is the the term used to describe methods, or proposed methods, to deliberately alter the Earth’s climate to counteract the effect of global warming from greenhouse gas emissions.

online pharmacy synthroid with best prices today in the USA

It has become a much-debated topic among scientists, environmentalists and politicians. The fact that 2009 marked the end of the warmest 10 years ever measured, only gives more credibility to global warming as a serious, worldwide problem. It also places a focus on geoengineering.

Eli Kintisch talked about the different types of potential geoengineering methods:

  1. Carbon removal: this method calls for the mixing of iron into the ocean to encourage algae growth. As algae blooms, dies or is eaten, it uses up carbon dioxide.
    online pharmacy spiriva inhaler with best prices today in the USA

  2. Air capture machines: just like the name says, these enormous machines would capture air inside cylinders lined with a special substance to absorb carbon dioxide.
  3. Aerosol spraying: this method entails the spraying of sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the earth’s surface.

Of course, there are several risks that could arise from such scientific experiments. Kintisch touched on a few, including:

  • Side effects (potentially disastrous ones)
  • The difficulty of connecting experiments to effects
  • Assigning blame
  • Could alienate the public
  • Could lead to a ban

But, as Scott Barrett stated, “the whole point of geoengineering is to reduce risk, but these things we would also carry risk. We’re in a world, unfortunately, where there is always a risk/risk tradeoff.

online pharmacy zydena with best prices today in the USA

Barrett also stressed that the key issue in geoengineering is governance — the question of who gets to decide if and when geoengineering should be tried. Barrett also voiced his concerns over the lack of a geoengineering protocol, reiterating that, currently, there are no rules regarding any aspect of these potential experiments, or the idea of geoengineering in general.

Clearly, there is much to be done.

But if full-scale geoengineering is too drastic or unfeasible to pull off, there are some other tech-related solutions that could help mitigate some of the world’s more dire problems.

NYSE Commission: Boards’ Focus Should be Long-term

Following the financial crisis, the New York Stock Exchange’s Commission on Corporate Governance has found that corporate boards should focus more on long-term growth, instead of short-term gains.

The year-long examination also found that managers should be more involved in corporate governance and boards should not rely too heavily on legislation and agency rule-making in establishing corporate governance strategies.

“We think this is really important today because, more than ever before, boards are confronted with pressure to act to increase shareholder prices in the short-term — including facing pressure to take actions that may lead to a short-term increase in shareholder value at the expense of long-term, sustainable growth.”

The panel, chaired by Larry Sonsini, chairman of law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, recommended the following 10 core principles to improve corporate governance and the proxy voting process:

  1. The board’s fundamental objective should be to build long­-term sustainable growth in shareholder value for the corporation, and the board is accountable to shareholders for its performance in achieving this objective.
  2. While the board’s responsibility for corporate governance has long been established, the critical role of management in establishing proper corporate governance has not been sufficiently recognized. The Commission believes that a key aspect of successful governance depends upon successful management of the company, as management has primary responsibility for creating an environment in which a culture of performance with integrity can flourish.
  3. Shareholders have the right, a responsibility and a long-­term economic interest to vote their shares in a thoughtful manner, in recognition of the fact that voting decisions influence director behavior, corporate governance and conduct, and that voting decisions are one of the primary means of communicating with companies on issues of concern.
  4. Good corporate governance should be integrated with the company’s business strategy and objectives and should not be viewed simply as a compliance obligation separate from the company’s long-­term business prospects.
  5. Legislation and agency rule­-making are important to establish the basic tenets of corporate governance and ensure the efficiency of our markets. Beyond these fundamental principles, however, the Commission has a preference for market­-based governance solutions whenever possible.
  6. Good corporate governance includes transparency for corporations and investors, sound disclosure policies and communication beyond disclosure through dialogue and engagement as necessary and appropriate.
  7. While independence and objectivity are necessary attributes of board members, companies must also strike the right balance between the appointment of independent and non­independent directors to ensure that there is an appropriate range and mix of expertise, diversity and knowledge on the board.
  8. The Commission recognizes the influence that proxy advisory firms have on the market, and believes that such firms should be held to appropriate standards of transparency and accountability. The Commission commends the SEC for its issuance of the Concept Release on the U.S. Proxy System, which includes inviting comments on how such firms should be regulated.
  9. The SEC should work with the NYSE and other exchanges to ease the burden of proxy voting and communication while encouraging greater participation by individual investors in the proxy voting process.
  10. The SEC and/or the NYSE should consider a wide range of views to determine the impact of major corporate governance reforms on corporate performance over the last decade. The SEC and/or the NYSE should also periodically assess the impact of major corporate governance reforms on the promotion of sustainable, long-­term corporate growth and sustained profitability.

Sonsini stressed that the commission can only recommend these principles. The success of them depends on a company’s willingness to implement and maintain such initiatives.

Does Obama’s 3rd Year Mean Lower D&O Prices?

Yesterday, Aon released its quarterly D&O pricing index, finding that the average price for $1 million in coverage limits increased 4.9% from the first quarter of 2010 and, more importantly, that D&O pricing decreased 16.4% in the second quarter as compared with the same quarter in 2009. According to the report, this is the largest decrease since the fourth quarter of 2007 and the second consecutive double-digit decrease.

As for D&O securities class action claims activity, Aon found that, for the second quarter of 2010, the average D&O securities class action settlement was $39.87 million (excluding settlements of $1 billion or greater). This is an increase of almost 28% from the preceding three-year average settlement value of $31.18 million.

The report makes an interesting point in terms of mitigating factors for D&O pricing.

We all know that D&O pricing and the stock market are inversely correlated. Meaning, when the stock market goes up, securities class action litigation tends to decrease, and D&O prices go down.

But have you heard of the presidential election year cycle and its effect on the stock market (and thus, D&O pricing)?

The report cites Mark Hulbert, founder of the Hulbert Financial Digest, as saying that, on average, the third year of a presidency is the most bullish of a president’s term. Hulbert researched yearly returns for the Dow back to 1896 (the year the Dow Jones Industrial Average for founded).

Here’s a snapshot of his findings:

Screen shot 2010-09-23 at 1.21.16 PM
Clearly, there is a big spike in the third year versus the others. If this theory holds true, then there may very well be continued downward pressure on D&O rates for at least the next 12 to 24 months, the report states.

In addition, Aon’s D&O Peer Benchmarking report, which was conducted jointly with NASDAQ, outlined six best practices for organizations to follow when looking to purchase or analyze their coverage:

  1. Examine the D&O policy to determine corporate executive indemnification provisions
  2. Question any generic worldwide coverage language in the D&O policy; it may be inadequate
  3. Recognize what triggers a claim under the D&O policy
  4. Scrutinize the limits of the excess policies
  5. Understand how coverage under the D&O policy is affected by the wrongful acts of others
  6. Know how the organization and the directors and officers are protected during a financial crisis

All in all, the information in the report bodes well for buyers of D&O insurance through the remainder of 2010, as the current soft cycle for D&O underwriting is expected to continue.

The Most Influential People in Corporate Governance

Each year, the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) publishes the Directorship 100 — a “combination of leading corporate directors, corporate governance practitioners and public policy leaders who are recognized as the most influential people in the boardroom and the corporate governance arena.”

The NACD Directorship surveyed 15,000 public company directors and executives to form the final 100 honorees.

“The esteemed boardroom leaders on the Directorship 100 share a common characteristic as proactive agents of change in the boardroom community, shaping the future of corporate governance at a time when American business looks to restore investor confidence and restore economic growth,” said NACD CEO and President Ken Daly.

Among the top 100 honored are a select group of D&O insurers and governance advisors, including:

  • Robert C. Cox, Chubb Group
  • Mark Lamendola, Travelers
  • Timothy J. O’Donnell, ACE USA
  • Daniel W. Riordan, Zurich Financial Services
  • Michael W. Smith, Chartis
  • Richard A. Bennett, The Corporate Library
  • Gavin Anderson, GovernanceMetrics International
  • Steve Harvey, Martha Carter, Carol Bowie, Patrick S. McGurn, ISS Governance Services
  • Robert McCormick, Glass Lewis & Co.

The association noted that it has seen a shift in the type of leader exerting the most influence on corporate governance. For the first time, professionals in the “regulators and rule makers” category received the most nominations.