R&F Properties: Underwhelming Environmental Policies Weigh on ESG Progress

4.72
36 ratings

Guangzhou R&F Properties Co., Ltd. is engaged in the development and sale of properties, property investment, and hotel operations, along with the provision of other property development-related services. The company operates its business in both the domestic and overseas markets. An analysis of the company's environmental, social, and governance policies are as follows:


Environment


From an environmental perspective, the company scores unfavorably, underperforming on the Emissions Score and the Environmental Innovation Score front.


For instance, it has implemented a resource reduction policy, which compares to the presence of a clear policy in the prior year. The company has implemented a water efficiency policy, with an energy efficiency policy implemented as well. This compares to the presence of a similar policy in the prior year.


Environmental policy areas the company is currently lacking include Resource Reduction Targets, Water Efficiency Targets, Energy Efficiency Targets, the setup of an Environment Management Team, Environment Management Training, and Toxic Chemicals Reduction. Areas the company has addressed include Environmental Supply Chain Policy and Environmental Materials Sourcing.


The company has also not implemented renewable energy use, which compares to the lack of a clear policy in the prior year. The company has also notably not implemented green buildings as well, which compares to the lack of a defined policy in this regard in the prior year.


In terms of its carbon footprint, the company's Estimated CO2 Equivalents Emission Total stands at 629,355 in the latest fiscal year, which compares to 99,339 in the prior year and 46,594 in the year before based on Reported CO2 Estimates.


Social


From a social standpoint, the company scores reasonably, outperforming on the Workforce Score front, but underperforming on the Community Score front.


For instance, it has implemented a health and safety policy, which compares to the presence of a clear policy in the prior year. The company has also implemented an Employee Health & Safety Policy, with a Supply Chain Health & Safety Policy not implemented as well. This compares to the lack of a similar policy in the prior year.


The company has produced a rise in Net Employment Creation over the last few years. The Number of Employees from CSR reporting totals 60,235, relative to 60,325 in the prior year and 30,897 in the year before.


As of the latest fiscal year, there have not been Management Departures, while the prior year saw no departures. Meanwhile, the company experienced no strikes this year, which compares to no strikes in the prior year.


Governance


From a governance standpoint, the company scores favorably, particularly outperforming on the Management Score front, but underperforming on the CSR Strategy Score front.


The company does not have a Corporate Governance Board Committee, but has a Nomination Board Committee, has an Audit Board Committee, and has a Compensation Board Committee. The company does have a Board Structure Policy but does not have a Policy for Board Independence in place. The Board has held four meetings in the last fiscal year, which compares to 4 in the prior year. The Board size currently stands at nine members based on the latest annual/ESG report.


The Board has an average tenure of 12.5 years, which compares to 11.5 in the prior year. The Board diversity stands at 22.2% for gender diversity but lacks cultural diversity.


The company has implemented a Policy for Executive Compensation Performance but has not tied Executive Compensation to ESG Performance. The company has implemented a Policy for Executive Retention and has implemented a Succession Plan, along with an External Consultant policy.


The company has implemented CEO-Chairman Separation and does have its CEO as a Board member. Its chairman is an ex-CEO. Board member term duration stands at three years. In total, senior executives' compensation has declined in the latest fiscal year, along with Board member compensation. Notably, the CEO compensation is not linked to total shareholder return. Meanwhile, executive compensation is not linked to long-term objectives. Sustainability compensation incentives have been implemented. Thus far, there have not been any executive compensation controversies.


Sources:


https://www.rfchina.com/en/about.aspx?type=7


https://www.csrhub.com/CSR_and_sustainability_information/Guangzhou-RandF-Properties-CoLtd

Related Tags
Topics
Business FinanceNatureCorporate GovernanceInformation GovernanceManagementRecords ManagementExecutive CompensationUnited States Environmental Protection Agency