InvestMacro

By Eleftheria Kontou, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 

More than 3.6 million electric cars are driving around the U.S., but if you live in an apartment, finding an available charger isn’t always easy. Grocery stores and shopping centers might have a few, but charging takes time and the spaces may be taken or inconvenient.

Several states and cities, aiming to expand EV use, are now trying to lift that barrier to ownership with “right to charge” laws.

Illinois’ governor signed the latest right-to-charge law in June 2023, requiring that all parking spots at new homes and multiunit dwellings be wired so they’re ready for EV chargers to be installed. Colorado, Florida, New York and other states have passed similar laws in recent years.

But having wiring in place for charging is only the first step to expanding EV use. Apartment building managers, condo associations and residents are now trying to figure out how to make charging efficient, affordable and available to everyone who needs it when they need it.

Electric cars can benefit urban dwellers

As a civil engineer who focuses on transportation, I study ways to make the shift to electric vehicles equitable, and I believe that planning for multiunit dwelling charging and accessibility is smart policy for cities.

Transitioning away from fossil-fueled vehicles to electric vehicles has benefits for the environment and the health of urban residents. It reduces tailpipe emissions, which can cause respiratory problems and warm the climate; it mitigates noise; and it improves urban air quality and quality of life.

Surveys show most EV drivers charge at home, where electricity rates are lower than at public chargers and there is less competition for charging spots. In California, the leading state for EVs, 88% of early adopters of battery electric cars said they were able to charge at home, and workplace and public charging represented just 24% and 17% of their charging sessions, respectively. Nationwide, about 50% to 80% of all battery electric car charging sessions take place at home.

Yet almost a quarter of all U.S. housing structures have more than one dwelling unit, according to the 2019 American Housing Survey. In California, 32.5% of urban dwellings have multiple units, and only a third of those units include access to a personal garage where a charger could be installed.

Even if installing a personal charger is an option, it can be expensive in a multiunit dwelling if wiring isn’t already in place. And it often comes with other obstacles, including the potential need for electrical upgrades or challenges from homeowner association rules and restrictions. Installing chargers can involve numerous stakeholders who can impede the process – lot owners, tenants, homeowners associations, property managers, electric utilities and local governments.

However, if a 240-volt outlet is already available, basic charger installation drops to a few hundred dollars.

Right-to-charge laws aims for ubiquitous home charging

Right-to-charge laws aim to streamline home charging access as new buildings go up.

Illinois’ new Electric Vehicle Charging Act requires that 100% of parking spaces at new homes and multiunit dwellings be ready for electric car charging, with a conduit and reserved capacity to easily install charging infrastructure. The new law also gives renters and condominium owners in new buildings a right to install chargers without unreasonable restriction from landlords and homeowner associations.

California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Virginia also have right-to-charge laws designed to make residential community charging deployment easier, as do several U.S. cities including Seattle and Washington, D.C. Most apply only to owner-occupied buildings, but a few, including California’s and Colorado’s, also apply to rental buildings.

Chicago officials have considered an ordinance that would include existing buildings, too.

Sharing chargers can reduce the cost

There are several steps communities can take to increase access to chargers and reduce the cost to residents.

In a new study, colleagues and I looked at how to design shared charging for an apartment building with scheduling that works for everyone. By sharing chargers, residential communities can reduce the costs associated with charger installation and use.

The biggest challenge to shared charging is often scheduling. We found that a centralized charging management system that suggests charging times for each electric car owner that aligns with the owner’s travel schedule and the amount of charge needed can work – with enough chargers.

In a typical multiunit dwelling in Chicago – with an average of 14 cars in the parking lot – a small community charging hub with two level 2 chargers, the type common in homes and office buildings, can cover daily residential recharging demand at a cost of about 15 cents per kilowatt-hour. But having only two chargers means residents are waiting on average 2.2 hours to charge.

A larger charging hub with eight level 2 chargers in the same city avoids the delay but increases the cost of charging to 21 cents per kWh because of upfront cost of purchasing and installing the chargers. To put that into context, the average electricity cost for Chicago residents is 16 cents per kWh.

The future of charging management at multiunit dwellings will be automated for efficiency, with a computer or artificial intelligence determining the most efficient schedule for charging. Optimized scheduling can be responsive to the times renewable electricity generation sources are producing the most power – midday for solar energy, for example – and to dynamic electricity pricing. Automation can also eliminate delays for drivers while saving money and reducing the burden on the electric grid.

The current limited access to home charging in many cities constrains electric vehicle adoption, slows down the decarbonization of U.S. transportation and exacerbates inequities in electric vehicle ownership. I believe efforts to expand charging in multidwelling buildings can help lift some of the biggest barriers and help reduce noise and pollution in urban cores at the same time.

About the Author:

Eleftheria Kontou, Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

By George Prior 

As global temperatures hit a record high, every investor now has a responsibility to consider environmental, social and governance (ESG) investments, says the CEO of one of the world’s largest independent financial advisory, asset management and fintech organizations.

The comments from Nigel Green of deVere Group come as it is revealed that Monday was the world’s hottest day on record, exceeding an average of 17 degrees Celsius (62.6 degrees Fahrenheit) for the first time, according to official measurements taken on Tuesday by US meteorologists.

“This is not a milestone we should be celebrating, it’s a death sentence for people and ecosystems,” said Friederike Otto, a senior lecturer at the Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment.

The deVere CEO says: “The new record high shines a spotlight on the extreme temperatures engulfing the northern hemisphere this summer, and underscores the lack of global progress on tackling climate change – which is the biggest critical issue of our time.

“Monday, 3 July 2023, the hottest day ever recorded globally, must act as a wake-up call that more must urgently be done to battle the worst effect of human-driven environmental issues.

“As such, I believe that every investor now has a responsibility to consider ESG investments.”

But the enormously positive environmental and social impact you can have with ESG investments is not the only reason why you should consider them as part of your portfolio.

“Numerous studies have demonstrated that companies with strong ESG practices tend to outperform their peers over the long term.

“By incorporating ESG investments, investors have the opportunity to participate in the growth of companies that are well-positioned to navigate risks, capitalise on emerging opportunities, and drive sustainable innovation,” notes Nigel Green.

ESG factors provide valuable insights into a company’s resilience and risk management practices.

He continues: “By considering environmental risks, such as climate change and resource scarcity, social risks related to labor practices and community engagement, and governance risks such as board diversity and transparency, you can better assess the long-term viability of investments and reduce exposure to potential risks.”

The deVere CEO goes on to add: “The global regulatory landscape is evolving. Investors who proactively integrate ESG investments into their portfolios can navigate regulatory changes more effectively and position themselves for future market shifts.

“Plus, as ESG considerations become mainstream, investments in companies with strong ESG profiles are likely to attract more attention from institutional and individual investors.

“All of the reasons and all the evidence suggest that ESG-focused investors can achieve both profitability and positive impact.”

deVere Group practices what it preaches. In 2021, it became one of 18 founding signatories of the UN-backed Net Zero initiative, the international alliance of finance powerhouses that will help accelerate the transition to a net-zero financial system.

As a global organisation, it recognises the transformative potential of ESG investments and is committed to helping investors integrate these strategies into their portfolios.

With a team of experienced professionals and a comprehensive suite of ESG-focused investment solutions, deVere provides clients with tailored advice and cutting-edge research to optimise their financial goals while aligning their investments with their values.

“The hottest day ever recorded globally tells investors now is the time to consider putting your money to work for both profits and positive change. If not now, when?” concludes the deVere Group CEO.

About:

deVere Group is one of the world’s largest independent advisors of specialist global financial solutions to international, local mass affluent, and high-net-worth clients.  It has a network of more than 70 offices across the world, over 80,000 clients and $12bn under advisement.

By Dudley L. Poston Jr., Texas A&M University 

Around the world, nations are looking at the prospect of shrinking, aging populations – but none more so than South Korea.

Over the last 60 years, South Korea has undergone the most rapid fertility decline in recorded human history. In 1960, the nation’s total fertility rate – the number of children, on average, that a woman has during her reproductive years – stood at just under six children per woman. In 2022, that figure was 0.78. South Korea is the only country in the world to register a fertility rate of less than one child per woman, although others – Ukraine, China and Spain – are close.

As a demographer who over the past four decades has conducted extensive research on Asian populations, I know that this prolonged and steep decline will have huge impacts on South Korea. It may slow down economic growth, contributing to a shift that will see the country end up less rich and with a smaller population.

Older, poorer, more dependent

Countries need a total fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman to replace their population, when the effects of immigration and emigration aren’t considered. And South Korea’s fertility rate has been consistently below that number since 1984, when it dropped to 1.93, from 2.17 the year before.

What makes the South Korean fertility rate decline more astonishing is the relatively short period in which it has occurred.

Back in 1800, the U.S. total fertility rate was well over 6.0. But it took the U.S. around 170 years to consistently drop below the replacement level. Moreover, in the little over 60 years in which South Korea’s fertility rate fell from 6.0 to 0.8, the U.S. saw a more gradual decline from 3.0 to 1.7.

Fertility decline can have a positive effect in certain circumstances, via something demographers refer to as “the demographic dividend.” This dividend refers to accelerated increases in a country’s economy that follow a decline in birth rates and subsequent changes in its age composition that result in more working-age people and fewer dependent young children and elderly people.

And that is what happened in South Korea – a decline in fertility helped convert South Korea from a very poor country to a very rich one.

Behind the economic miracle

South Korea’s fertility decline began in the early 1960s when the government adopted an economic planning program and a population and family planning program.

By that time, South Korea was languishing, having seen its economy and society destroyed by the Korean War of 1950 to 1953. Indeed by the late-1950s, South Korea was one of the poorest countries in the world. In 1961, its annual per capita income was only about US$82.

But dramatic increases in economic growth began in 1962, when the South Korean government introduced a five-year economic development plan.

Crucially, the government also introduced a population planning program in a bid to bring down the nation’s fertility rate. This included a goal of getting 45% of married couples to use contraception – until then, very few Koreans used contraception.

This further contributed to the fertility reduction, as many couples realized that having fewer children would often lead to improvements in family living standards.

Both the economic and family planning programs were instrumental in moving South Korea from one with a high fertility rate to one with a low fertility rate.

As a result, the country’s dependent population – the young and the elderly – grew smaller in relation to its working-age population.

The demographic change kick-started economic growth that continued well into the mid-1990s. Increases in productivity, combined with an increasing labor force and a gradual reduction of unemployment, produced average annual growth rates in gross domestic product of between 6% and 10% for many years.

South Korea today is one of the richest countries
in the world with a per capita income of $35,000.

Losing people every year

Much of this transformation of South Korea from a poor country to a rich country has been due to the demographic dividend realized during the country’s fertility decline. But the demographic dividend only works in the short term. Long-term fertility declines are often disastrous for a nation’s economy.

With an extremely low fertility rate of 0.78, South Korea is losing population each year and experiencing more deaths than births. The once-vibrant nation is on the way to becoming a country with lots of elderly people and fewer workers.

The Korean Statistical Office reported recently that the country lost population in the past three years: It was down by 32,611 people in 2020, 57,118 in 2021 and 123,800 in 2022.

If this trend continues, and if the country doesn’t welcome millions of immigrants, South Korea’s present population of 51 million will drop to under 38 million in the next four or five decades.

And a growing proportion of the society will be over the age of 65.

South Korea’s population aged 65 and over comprised under 7% of the population in 2000. Today, nearly 17% of South Koreans are older people.

The older people population is projected to be 20% of the country by 2025 and could reach an unprecedented and astoundingly high 46% in 2067. South Korea’s working-age population will then be smaller in size than its population of people over the age of 65.

In a bid to avert a demographic nightmare, the South Korean government is providing financial incentives for couples to have children and is boosting the monthly allowance already in place for parents. President Yoon Suk Yeol has also established a new government team to establish policies to increase the birth rate.

But to date, programs to increase the low fertility rate have had little effect. Since 2006, the South Korean government has already spent over $200 billion in programs to increase the birth rate, with virtually no impact.

Opening the trapdoor

The South Korean fertility rate has not increased in the past 16 years. Rather, it has continued to decrease. This is due to what demographers refer to as the “low-fertility trap.” The principle, set forth by demographers in the early 2000s, states that once a country’s fertility rate drops below 1.5 or 1.4, it is difficult – if not impossible – to increase it significantly.

South Korea, along with many other countries – including France, Australia and Russia – have developed policies to encourage fertility rate increases, but with little to no success.

The only real way for South Korea to turn this around would be to rely heavily on immigration.

Migrants are typically young and productive and usually have more children than the native-born population. But South Korea has a very restrictive immigration policy with no path for immigrants to become citizens or permanent residents unless they marry South Koreans.

Indeed, the foreign-born population in 2022 was just over 1.6 million, which is around 3.1% of the population. In contrast, the U.S. has always relied on immigration to bolster its working population, with foreign-born residents now comprising over 14% of the population.

For immigration to offset South Korea’s declining fertility rate, the number of foreign workers would likely need to rise almost tenfold.

Without that, South Korea’s demographic destiny will have the nation continuing to lose population every year and becoming one of the oldest – if not the oldest – country in the world.

About the Author:

Dudley L. Poston Jr., Professor of Sociology, Texas A&M University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

By Misheck Mutize, University of Cape Town 

The credit rating industry in Africa is dominated by the three international agencies: Moody’s, S&P and Fitch. Together they control an estimated 95% of the credit rating business globally.

Credit rating agencies are institutions that assess a borrower’s creditworthiness in general terms, or with respect to a particular debt or financial obligation. A credit rating can be assigned to any entity that seeks to borrow money – an individual, a corporation, a state or provincial authority, or a sovereign government. Investors use a credit rating to make decisions about risk and return. So the rating is required if an institution wants to raise funds on financial markets.

South Africa was the first African country to receive a sovereign rating, in 1994. To date, 32 African countries have received a sovereign rating from at least one of the “big three” agencies.

But policy makers are increasingly dissatisfied with their approach and methodology. Some of the criticisms are that agencies are quick to downgrade African countries but slow when upgrades are due; that they fail to accurately account for risk perception; that they don’t consult adequately with stakeholders; and that they lack independence and objectivity.

A recent study by the UN showed that subjective biases in credit ratings had cost African countries a combined US$74.5 billion. This was through funding opportunities lost and excess interest paid on public debt.

Conditions are therefore ripe to advance the idea of establishing an African credit rating agency as a partial solution. China has its own state-owned rating agency, Dagong Global Credit Rating Company. The Arab countries are also calling for their own rating agency.

As a lead expert with the African Union on ratings agencies, I can explain the framework this agency would operate in and why it makes business sense.

African Union official decisions

In March 2019, African Union (AU) ministers of finance and economy officially adopted a declaration that such an institution was needed. The AU also developed a proposal for the legal, financial and structural aspects of the rating agency. What’s not yet agreed is how the sustainability, credibility and independence of the agency will be achieved. But there is a way this could be achieved as I set out below.

The need for an African Rating agency has been reiterated by the current Chair of the AU, President Macky Sall of Senegal, and the Champion of the AU financial institutions, President Nana Akufo-Addo of Ghana. They highlighted it as an important step towards intra-continental integration. It would also enable AU member states to access capital and integrate the continent with global financial markets.

Institutional model

When the AU establishes a new institution, it can be either:

• an organ of the union funded by its member states’ contributions, or
• a self-funded autonomous specialised agency of the union.

Because the credit rating business requires credibility and independence, the best option is the specialised agency. Examples already in operation are the African Export-Import Bank and Africa Risk Capacity agency.

As an independent specialised agency of the AU, the agency would have diverse classes of shareholders. African governments could own it either directly or through their designated public institutions. Shareholding could include other smaller African-owned rating agencies, multilateral finance institutions and African national financial institutions.

As a financing structure, the agency would adopt the “issuer-pay” business model. The issuers of debt will pay the agency for rating its entity and products.

It would be fully funded by its shareholders and through loans from pan-African financial institutions. Multilateral development banks would either encourage or make it mandatory for their clients to have a rating from the African rating agency. Once this is done it should be able to sustain itself through revenue generated from its services.

As is the process in the AU, the African rating agency would be established through an agreement, signed by at least 10 member states.

The business case

There are still 22 African countries that have no credit ratings from the “big three” agencies. This will be a clear niche for the AU rating agency.

There is also tremendous value in the alternative rating sector, which cannot afford the cost of maintaining a rating from the “big three”. This includes small to medium enterprises, initial bond offerings and initial public offerings. The agency could also provide environmental, social and governance scores and foreign direct investment ratings. These rating services are urgently needed on the continent to complement governments’ efforts to support the development of domestic financial markets.

With the backing that comes from affiliation to the AU, the rating agency could secure substantial business in the ratings of domestic instruments that are aligned with the continent’s goals.

It would have the advantage of understanding the domestic context of Africa. So it could issue more informative and detailed ratings than those issued by the “big three”.

Way forward

The African Union is forging ahead with its plans to establish an African rating agency to complement the three dominant international agencies, and support the development of domestic financial markets in Africa. Although it will have to overcome challenges to gain investors’ support, there is a huge appetite for an alternative and complementary credit rating institution in Africa. Its success will be in developing a comprehensive methodology adapted to the African context, and resident analysts that understand the continent’s dynamics.

About the Author:

Misheck Mutize, Post Doctoral Researcher, Graduate School of Business (GSB), University of Cape Town

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

By George Prior

The US Treasury Secretary’s trip to China this week will be a hit with investors around the world, affirms the CEO and founder of one of the world’s largest independent financial advisory, asset management and fintech organizations.

The comments from Nigel Green of deVere Group come as Janet Yellen heads to Beijing between July 3 and 6 as part of continuing efforts by the Biden administration to strengthen communication between the US and China after a series of spates and instability between the two nations.

He says: “Yellen’s trip to Beijing this week is important to global markets for two main reasons.

“First, she is the top US economic policymaker, meaning that the US government appears serious about rebuilding economic ties between the world’s two largest economies.

“Also, Yellen’s visit to meet counterparts in China comes just three weeks after Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited the country, highlighting the attempts by the Biden administration to revive a more cordial relationship with the emerging superpower.”

The deVere CEO continues: “Second – and perhaps more importantly – it shows a commitment to globalisation.

“Investors are looking for global leaders to dismiss the prevailing protectionist narrative of the last few years as many countries have looked increasingly inwards, becoming more and more nationalistic.

“Globalization opens-up a wider array of investment opportunities beyond domestic markets. Investors can access a diverse range of industries, sectors, and geographies, allowing them to build well-diversified portfolios.

“History teaches us that by investing globally, investors can gain exposure to companies at the forefront of technological advancements, disruptive business models, and emerging trends. This exposure to innovation can drive portfolio growth and potentially generate above-average returns.”

Yellen’s forthcoming trip also comes a week after China’s premier Li Qiang condemned recent Western efforts to limit trade and business ties with the country, and encouraged international economic co-operation.

In the keynote address at a World Economic Forum event in which he criticised “the politicization of economic issues”, Li said: “Governments should not over-reach themselves, still less stretch the concept of risk or turn it into an ideological tool.”

This denouncing of economic “politicization” and defence of globalization in his speech at the so-called ‘Summer Davos’ address, was, says Nigel Green, “music to the ears of investors around the world.”

Yellen is expected to meet with senior Chinese officials as well as leading US firms with operations in China.

The Treasury says she will discuss “areas of concern” to cool tensions between the two largest economies in the world, ways to work competition between the two powers, as well as subjects where they can cooperate on international issues, such as climate change.

“Financial markets around the world will be cheered by the efforts being made by the superpower economies to foster policies of globalization,” concludes Nigel Green.

About:

deVere Group is one of the world’s largest independent advisors of specialist global financial solutions to international, local mass affluent, and high-net-worth clients.  It has a network of more than 70 offices across the world, over 80,000 clients and $12bn under advisement.