来源：《华尔街日报》
原文见刊日期：2022年7月6日
With inflation running at a four-decade high, it’s time to reconsider the idea that the economy will benefit if corporations sacrifice their bottom lines in favor of environmental, social and governance considerations. The truth is that diverting corporate attention away from long-term profitability depresses output and raises prices.
随着通货膨胀率达到40年来的最高点，现在是时候重新考虑这样的想法了：如果企业为了环境、社会和治理方面的考虑而牺牲自己的利润，那么经济将会受益。事实是，将企业的注意力从长期盈利能力上转移开，会压低产量，提高价格。
In 2019 the Business Roundtable, an association of large companies’ CEOs, abandoned its longstanding dedication to the idea that the “purpose of a corporation” is to maximize shareholder value. Instead, the group argued, businesses should follow a “multistakeholder” model. If corporate management gave a set of ESG concerns priority over long-term profit maximization, the roundtable believed, firms could create “an economy that serves all Americans.”
2019年，大公司首席执行官协会商业圆桌会议放弃了其长期以来的理念，即“公司的目的”是实现股东价值最大化。相反，该组织认为，企业应该遵循“多方利益相关者”模式。圆桌会议认为，如果企业管理层将一系列ESG问题置于长期利润最大化之上，那么企业就可以创造“为所有美国人服务的经济”。
It hasn’t panned out that way. When companies focus solely on maximizing profits, their principal aim is to produce more at lower cost. Admittedly, some profitability strategies—such as constraining supply—are at odds with maximizing output. But that’s impossible without an organized and powerful monopoly. Even companies with great monopoly power lose that power over time as competitors arise. In a competitive market, corporations serve themselves and consumers by making more for less.
但事实并非如此。当公司只专注于利润最大化时，他们的主要目标是以更低的成本生产更多产品。诚然，一些盈利策略——比如限制供应——与产量最大化是不一致的。但如果没有一个有组织且强大的垄断，这是不可能的。随着时间的推移，竞争对手的出现，即使是拥有巨大垄断权力的公司也会失去这种权力。在竞争激烈的市场中，企业通过以更少的成本创造更多的产品来服务自己和消费者。
ESG investing and the management practices it promotes, however, usually increase production costs and constrain capacity. If a company diverts resources into a formal diversity, equity and inclusion program, with all its attending human-resource hires and bureaucracy, it will have less resources available to conduct product research and development. Similarly, if a company whose core competence is oil and gas production chooses to move into wind and solar despite having limited expertise in these modes, its output will suffer.
然而，ESG投资及其提倡的管理实践通常会增加生产成本并限制产能。如果一家公司将资源转移到一个正式的多样性、公平和包容项目上，所有的人力资源招聘人员和官僚机构都参与其中，那幺用于进行产品研发的资源就会减少。同样，如果一家公司的核心竞争力是石油和天然气生产，但却选择进入专业知识有限的风能和太阳能领域，其产能将受到影响。
Milton Friedman showed that raising the money supply’s growth rate increases the rate of inflation. But it’s also true that slowing the growth of overall output can increase inflation. If we think of the economy as one giant market in which we trade dollars for anything that dollars can buy, reducing the supply of available goods increases the price level, all else being equal. If enough companies focus on ESG priorities, then, they risk higher inflation and slower growth or stagflation.
米尔顿·弗里德曼表明，提高货币供应增长率会增加通货膨胀率。但减缓整体产出的增长也会加剧通货膨胀，这也是事实。如果我们将经济视为一个巨大的市场，在这个市场中，我们用美元购买任何可以用美元购买的东西，那么在其他条件相同的情况下，减少可用商品的供应会提高价格水平。如果有足够多的公司专注于ESG优先，那么它们就面临着通胀上升、增长放缓或滞胀的风险。
That isn’t to say that the general principles ESG emphasizes are undesirable, but that it’s more important to do good than to be labeled good. A company can be profitable with a diverse workforce without having a formal DEI policy. And such a company will ultimately serve a diverse group of Americans better by providing them more goods at lower cost.
这并不是说ESG强调的一般原则是不可取的，而是说做善事比被贴上“善事”的标签更重要。即使没有正式的DEI政策，公司也可以通过多元化的员工队伍实现盈利。这样的公司最终将以更低的价格提供更多的商品，更好地服务于多样化的美国群体。
To get the U.S. economy back on a path to sustainable growth and low inflation, the Fed must rein in excess liquidity, as it is now doing. But that alone won’t be enough. Businesses, investors and those advising them must push back on ideas such as ESG that undermine corporate productivity.
为了让美国经济重回可持续增长和低通胀的轨道，美联储必须像现在这样控制流动性过剩。但光是这一点还不够。企业、投资者和为他们提供建议的人必须抵制ESG等破坏企业生产力的观念。