Hello Community,
I was chatting to one of the community members yesterday who alerted me to the Church of England Ethical Investment Advisory Group (EIAG) Defence Advice 2025. During my chats this year so many of you mentioned that defence and physical risks are becoming dominant. So I thought I'd share this here: - see attached document.
Context: The EIAG provides non-binding ethical guidance to the Church of England's three National Investing Bodies (NIBs) on how to invest in a way that is distinctly Christian and rooted in Anglican tradition.The advice addresses ethical considerations in defence-related investments, balancing Christian commitments to peace with practical realities of security and defence.
The paper outlines the structure and nature of the defence industry, distinguishing between:
- Indiscriminate weapons (e.g., nuclear, chemical, biological weapons, cluster munitions, anti-personnel mines)
- Conventional weapons and related strategic parts/services
- It also addresses non-military firearms and their ethical implications
Key recommendations include:
Exclude investments in companies involved in indiscriminate weapons:
- Nuclear weapons, anti-personnel mines, cluster munitions, chemical or biological weapons
- No turnover threshold applies-any involvement is excluded
Exclude companies producing or supplying weapons-grade nuclear materials.
Exclude companies providing strategic parts/services for indiscriminate weapons.
For conventional weapons, apply a de minimis threshold and exclude companies deriving significant turnover from strategic military sales (platforms, systems, weaponry)
How should ethical screens on defence investments influence portfolio construction-are exclusions a risk to returns or a long-term value driver?
------------------------------
Aya Pariy
------------------------------