May 12, 2022

Report of the 7th Survey of Listed Companies
Regarding Institutional Investors’ Stewardship Activities
1. Purpose of the Survey
The Government Pension Investment Fund, Japan (GPIF) has conducted surveys targeting listed companies since2016 in order to evaluate the stewardship activities carried out by GPIF’s external asset managers. The survey alsoseeks to ascertain the actual status of purposeful and constructive dialogue (engagement) between these companies
and asset managers, as well as the changes that have been observed during the year since the previous survey.
We engage in dialogue with our external asset managers on an ongoing basis regarding their stewardship activities.
However, taking this approach alone could result in one-way information gathering and lack objectivity. Therefore,
we have made it a purpose of this survey to gather information from the other side, with a focus on how portfolio
companies view asset managers’ engagement activities, thereby improving such activities.
2. Outline of the Survey■ Subjects: 2,183 companies listed on the First Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange (as of December 16, 2021)■ Number of respondent companies: 709■ Response rate: 32.5%■ Survey period: From January 14, 2022 through March 18, 2022
3. Comments from Masataka Miyazono, President of GPIF
This is the seventh time this survey has been conducted, and we are pleased to announce that we received thelargest number of responses ever. We would like to take this opportunity to thank all the companies that took thetime to participate in this survey and provided us with valuable comments and opinions.
The results of this survey show that there has been progress in dialogue on corporate philosophy and long-term
vision and that the number of companies that have endorsed the TCFD and disclosed non-financial information
including information in line with the TCFD has significantly increased in the past year. A long-term orientationand the sustainable growth of its investee companies and the market as a whole are essential for GPIF in increasing
long-term investment returns. For this reason, GPIF encourages its asset managers to engage in dialogue from along-term perspective for the enhancement of long-term corporate value. We are encouraged by the progress in
information disclosure and its utilization that are indispensable in promoting mutual understanding and carrying out
effective dialogue. We will take measures to advance constructive dialogue between companies and investors in thefuture, including the announcement of “Excellent Disclosure” selected by GPIF’s asset managers.
GPIF will continue to engage in stewardship activities and ESG initiatives, taking into account the opinions
expressed by the surveyed companies. Thank you again to all the companies that took party in the survey.
4. Summary of the Survey Results<For the first time, more than 50% of companies responded that they had observed desirable changes ininstitutional investors>
With regard to changes in the attitudes of institutional investors at IR meetings, etc. during the past one year,
while the ratio of companies that considered the changes to have been desirable has been gradually increasing in
the past few years, more than 50% of respondents stated that they had observed desirable changes for the first time.
In particular, the ratio of companies that selected “Observed desirable changes in all or majority of institutional
investors” increased.
<The time frame of the long-term vision of companies has been further extended>
As for the time frame of the long-term vision of companies, the ratio of companies that selected “5 years andmore” (the total number of the companies that responded “5 years to less than 10 years,” “10 years to less than 15
years,” “15 years to less than 20 years” and “20 years and more”) has exceeded 80% for the first time. In addition,
the number of companies that indicated “Long-term plan/vision” as criteria used in setting the time frame exceeded
the number of companies that indicated “Medium-term management plan” (classified by GPIF based on open-ended
responses).
<The number of companies that make voluntary disclosure of non-financial information has increased
significantly>
The number of companies that make voluntary disclosure of non-financial information including ESG has
increased significantly, reaching 85%. The number of companies that prepare Integrated Reports and disclose
information in line with the TCFD has also grown considerably. In particular, the number of companies that disclose
information in line with the TCFD has increased by more than 100 from 139 in the previous survey to 249.
<Awareness of ESG themes has increased reflecting the revision to Japan’s Corporate Governance Code>As for major themes in corporate ESG activities, 77.9% of respondents selected “Climate Change,” making it themost critical theme for the first time. The theme indicating the largest increase in response rate from the previous
survey was “Climate Change” (+14.3%) followed by “Diversity” (+11.8%) and “Human Rights & Community”(+6.2%). This indicates that corporate awareness on specific themes has increased as a result of the revision to
Japan’s Corporate Governance Code in June 2021.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

(Reference) Summary of the Survey Results (Overall)

Current Situation of and Changes in Stewardship Activities of Institutional Investors

 With regard to changes in the attitudes of institutional investors at IR meetings, etc. during the past one year,○

while the ratio of companies that considered the changes to have been desirable has been gradually
increasing in the past few years, for the first time more than 50% of respondents stated that they had
observed desirable changes.
○

Approximately 90% of companies stated that their long-term vision was on the agenda in dialogue withinstitutional investors. Companies that present their long-term vision continued to increase and more than 80%
responded that their time frame was 5 years and more. The number of companies that indicated “Long-termplan/vision” as criteria used in setting the time frame exceeded the number of companies that indicated“Medium-term management plan.”○With regard to institutional investors’ use of Corporate Governance Reports and Integrated Reports,
positive responses such as “They appear to use the reports more effectively than before” continued toincrease compared with the previous survey. The ratio of companies that selected “They appear to use thereports more effectively than before” for Integrated Reports exceeded 60%, while the ratio was nearlyreached 30% for Corporate Governance Reports. There has been progress in dialogue which is relevantto the revised to Japan’s Corporate Governance Code.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

Companies’ IR and ESG Activities and Status of Disclosure■○

Voluntary disclosure of non-financial information including ESG (such as Integrated Report) is conducted by■

85% of the companies surveyed, significantly increasing from the previous survey.

○

The ratio of companies that prepare Integrated Reports or equivalent reports exceeded 60%, showing asignificant increase from the previous survey. Among the respondents that have not yet prepared such reports,
approximately 60% stated that they are planning to publish or are considering to do so.

○

The number of companies that have endorsed the TCFD significantly increased from 208 in the previous
survey to 382. Of such companies, the number of companies that have disclosed information in line with the
TCFD has also increased from 139 to 249. Furthermore, not less than 90% of them indicated that they
disclosed information partially or properly in terms of the four items ((i) Governance; (ii) Strategy; (iii) Risk
management; and (iv) Indicators and goals) as in the previous survey.

○ As for major themes in corporate ESG activities, many companies selected (i) Climate Change (77.9%),(ii) Corporate Governance (71.7%), and (iii) Diversity (55.0%), and “Climate Change” was selected as
the most critical theme for the first time. The theme indicating the largest increase in response rate fromthe previous survey was “Climate Change” (+14.3%) followed by “Diversity” (+11.8%) and “Human
Rights & Community” (+6.2%). These themes and items are exemplified as sustainability issues orindicated in Supplementary Principles, which were added as a result of the revision of Japan‘s Corporate
Governance Code last year. The result shows corporate awareness has especially increased in these items.
○

With regard to the content of dialogues with fixed income investors, the ratio of companies that selected“Financial position and financial strategy” and “Business strategy” as themes exceeded 90%, respectively.
Furthermore, the ratio of companies that selected “ESG initiatives” significantly jumped, exceeding 60%.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.



Evaluation by Companies Concerning Four ESG Indices Selected by GPIF○

As in the previous survey, approximately 50% of companies positively evaluated each of the four ESG
indices selected by GPIF, and the evaluation was particularly high among large-cap companies. Many smallcap companies continued to state that they were not sure. Overall, no significant differences in evaluationfor each index were observed.

○

Over 60% of companies stated that they have reviewed the methodologies that index providers havedisclosed. More than 90% of large-cap companies said that they have reviewed them. The ratio of mediumcap and small-cap companies indicating that they have reviewed them has also been increasing.

○

As in the previous survey, a greater ratio was observed in large-cap companies that responded that “There
were changes in the awareness, organizational systems and activities associated with ESG within thecompany.” The ratio has also been increasing in medium-cap companies.

○

Companies that conducted dialogue with MSCI or FTSE in 2021 accounted for a quarter of all respondents.

■

Opinions and Requests of Companies Regarding Stewardship Activities of GPIF as an Asset Owner■○ As for the rating of GPIF’s overall stewardship initiatives, more than three-quarters of respondents
selected “Highly appreciate” and “Appreciate.” Many respondents appreciated GPIF’s dialogue with
its asset managers from a long-term perspective, initiatives to encourage the sustainable growth of themarket as a whole, including ESG promotion, and dispatch of information including such initiatives.
○

Many companies expect GPIF in its stewardship activities to encourage constructive dialogue from a
medium- to long-term viewpoint, promote ESG investments, and continue information disclosure and others.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

Report of the 7th Survey of Listed Companies Regarding
Institutional Investors’ Stewardship Activities
May 2022

年金積立金管理運用独立行政法人
Government Pension Investment Fund

About the Survey: Purpose and the Status of Responses
1. Purpose• To evaluate stewardship activities carried out by GPIF’s external asset managers, and to ascertain
the actual status of “purposeful and constructive dialogue” (engagement) and changes observed in
the past one year.
2. Subjects, etc.
• 2,183 companies listed on the First Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange (as of December 16, 2021)• Number of respondent companies: 709 (681 in the previous year)
Response rate: 32.5% Survey period: From January 14 through March 18, 2022
<Response coverage rate>
28.8%
Responded
1474
companies
67.5%

709
companies
32.5%

Did not respond<Response rate by company size>
84.0%

Large caps

84.8%

Prime

37.0%

65.5%

Medium caps

64.1%

71.2%
21.6%

Small caps
* Inside: based on number of companies
Outside: based on market cap<Response rate by market segment>

20.2%
0%

20%

40%

Standard / Growth

9.1%

This survey
Previous survey
60%

80%

100%

0%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

2

<On Previous Survey (Conducted in January 2021)>
Q1: Did you know about the previous survey?
No: 11.0%

Yes: 89.0%
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Q1-1: If you selected “(i) Yes” in Q1, did you look at the survey results which are available on GPIF’s website?

Yes: 90.9%
0%

20%

40%

No: 9.1%
60%

80%

100%

Q2: Select what you found useful among the results of the previous survey. (Multiple responses allowed)(i) Current situation and changes in the attitude of institutional investors

58.1%(ii) Expectations for institutional investors in pursuing enhancement of corporate value and sustainable growth over the medium to long term

52.4%(iii) Companies’ status of IR activities, ESG activities and disclosure (status of preparation of Integrated Reports, holding of information
sessions, and actions taken to achieve the SDGs)

69.7%(iv) Expectation for stewardship activities by GPIF as an asset owner

30.5%*The percentage indicates the ratio to total responses out of 709 companies.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

3

Summary of Survey Results I: Current Situation and Changes Observed regarding
Institutional Investors, including GPIF’s External Asset Managers
 With regard to changes in the attitudes of institutional investors at IR meetings, etc. during the past one year, while the ratio ofcompanies that considered the changes to have been desirable has been gradually increasing in the past few years. For the
first time more than 50% of respondents stated that they had observed desirable changes. In particular, the ratio of
respondents who selected “Observed desirable changes in all or majority of institutional investors” increased (p. 5).
 More than 60% of companies stated that corporate philosophy was on the agenda in the dialogue with institutional investors,
and approximately 80% of companies stated that they explain their corporate philosophy to institutional investors. As for the
specific themes of dialogue, the most common theme was “Relationship between corporate philosophy and management
strategy.” In the comparison to the previous survey, the ratio of companies that selected “Penetration of corporate philosophy
among employees” increased (p. 6).
 Approximately 90% of companies stated that their long-term vision was on the agenda in dialogue with institutional investors.
Companies that present their long-term vision continued to increase and more than 80% responded that their time frame was
5 years and more. The number of companies that indicated “Long-term plan/vision” as criteria used in setting the time frame
exceeded the number of companies that indicated “Medium-term management plan” (p. 7 & 8).
 With regard to institutional investors’ use of Corporate Governance Reports and Integrated Reports, positive responses suchas “They appear to use the reports more effectively than before” continued to increase compared with the previous survey.
The ratio of companies that selected “They appear to use the reports more effectively than before” for Integrated Reports
exceeded 60%, while the ratio was nearly reached 30% for Corporate Governance Reports. There has been progress in
dialogue which is relevant to the revised Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (p. 9).

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

4

<Institutional Investors Including GPIF’s External Asset Managers>
Q1: With regard to institutional investors as a whole, have you observed any changes in their attitudeat IR/SR meetings during the past one year?
Survey Previous
before last survey

This
survey(i) Observed desirable changes in all or majority of institutional investors

6.7%

9.9%

13.6%

(ii) Observed desirable changes in some institutional investors

36.1%

37.3%

37.5%

(iii) Observed some changes but there are significant differences among
institutional investors

15.2%

11.5%

10.9%

(iv) Observed no significant changes in institutional investors

41.3%

40.9%

37.3%

(v) Observed more undesirable changes in institutional investors

0.6%

0.4%

0.7%

More than 50% ofcompanies observed
desirable changes

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

5

Q2: Has your company’s corporate philosophy (including the company creed, company motto, etc.; the same shallapply hereinafter) been on the agenda for the dialogue with institutional investors?
This survey

Yes: 60.8%

No: 39.2%

Previous survey

Yes: 58.0%

No: 42.0%

Survey before lastYes: 54.4%
0%20%

No: 45.6%
40%

2-1: If you selected “Yes” in Q2, what was the topic
specifically? (Multiple responses allowed)
Previous survey
Background and content of corporate
philosophy
Relationship between corporate
philosophy and management strategy
Penetration of corporate philosophy among
employees
Others

60%

80%

100%

2-2: Do you provide explanations on your company’s
corporate philosophy to institutional investors?

This survey

64.3%

62.0%

75.0%

74.6%

36.7%

43.4%

5.9%

4.4%

This survey

Yes: 78.5%

Previous survey

No: 21.5%

Yes: 72.4%

Survey before last

No: 27.6%

Yes: 66.6%

0%

20%

40%

No: 33.4%

60%

80%

100%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

6

Q3: Has your company’s long-term vision
been on the agenda for the dialogue withinstitutional investors?

3-1: Is your specific long-term vision disclosed to
institutional investors?

No: 9.9%

This survey

Yes: 90.1%

Yes: 78.3%

No: 21.7%

Previous survey

Yes: 72.2%

No: 27.8%

Survey before lastYes: 68.3%

No: 31.7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

3-2: If it is disclosed, what is the time frame for your long-term vision?
20 years and more

3.3%
1.7%
0.9%
1.4%

15-19 years■ This survey■ Previous survey■ Survey before last

7.4%
6.9%

10-14 years
26.9%
25.2%
27.7%

5-9 years
17.6%

3-4 years
Less than 3 years

0.0%
0.4%
0.5%
0%

10%

20%

40.4%

20.9%

46.4%
45.7%

26.8%

30%

40%

50%

*When the responses are indicated in a time range, the low end of the range is used for aggregation. Responses stating that no specific timeframe is presented have been excluded from aggregation. There were 517 valid responses (449 valid responses in the previous survey).
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

7

3-3: Based on what criteria did you set the number of years indicated in 3-2?

This survey

29.4%

31.5%

13.8%

7.2%

Previous survey

31.7%

27.9%

15.0%

6.4%

0%

10%

Medium-term management plan

20%
Long-term plan/vision

30%

40%

50%

Business span/Number of years foreseeable

60%

70%

6.0%

5.2%

80%

Number of years since company establishment

12.1%

13.8%

90%

SDGs/The Paris Agreement

100%
Other

*Classified based on open-ended responses

3-4: In what media is your long-term vision shown specifically?
Company's website

86.0%

Medium-term management plan

78.4%

Financial statements

67.0%

Integrated Report

62.1%

Convocation notice of AGM

47.2%

Shareholder newsletter

45.7%

Other

19.6%
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%
*Multiple responses are allowed.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

8

Q4: Choose the option that applies to the changes you have observed in terms of institutional investors’ useof Corporate Governance Reports<Excerpts of comments from companies that selected (i)>(i) They appear to use the reports more effectively than before.
(ii) They show no significant changes.
(iii) They do not appear to use the reports effectively.

• Interest in the response to the revision to Japan’s Corporate Governance Code seems high.

This survey

29.4%

Previous survey

25.9%

67.5%

6.7%

Survey before last

21.6%

71.8%

6.6%

0%

66.3%

20%

40%

4.2%

60%

80%

100%

• In considering the exercise of voting rights, questions are raised based on understanding ofbasic information such as the capability and independence of directors and the effectivenessof the Board of Directors, and then the confirmation of further details are requested in the
dialogue.
• More investors collected and analyzed in advance the information concerning the policy forappointment/dismissal of the CEO, succession plan, directors’ remuneration system, cost ofcapital, etc. This is a good opportunity for us to obtain business feedback from the fruitful
discussions, in which we exchanged opinions and received suggestions.
• The use of Corporate Governance Reports by institutional investors appeared to havebecome more effective than before, as illustrated by many of them requesting the inclusion ofa skill matrix in Corporate Governance Reports, etc.

Q5: Choose the option that applies to the changes you have observed in terms of institutional investors’ use of Integrated Reports.
(Question applied only to those companies that publish reports)<Excerpts of comments from companies that selected (i)>(i) They appear to use the reports more effectively than before.
(ii) They show no significant changes.
(iii) They do not appear to use the reports effectively.

• An increasing number of investors asked questions based on the contents of our Integrated
Reports. Many of them have also shared information on the trends of Integrated Reports
issued by other companies and proposed some improvements for our Integrated Reports.

This survey

63.5%

33.7%

2.7%

Previous survey

61.7%

35.8%

2.5%

Survey before last

50.0%
0%

20%

46.3%
40%

60%

3.7%
80%

100%

• The issuance of Integrated Reports has enabled for us to conduct dialogue on our strengths
and value creation story, deeper and better than before with institutional investors. We havealso gained meaningful feedback on management such as our capital policy and ourbusiness portfolio.
• Our dialogue on ESG and the enhancement of our long-term corporate value has been basedon Integrated Reports.
• While persons in charge of responsible investment in each company had been thoroughly
reading Integrated Reports even in the past, we felt through the interviews that more regularanalysts in asset management departments who are not involved with responsible investment
have been thoroughly reading our Integrated Reports.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

9

Q6: What do you expect from institutional investors as a whole in pursuing enhancement of yourcorporate value and sustainable growth over the medium to long term?
[Comments (excerpts)]• We would like to continue to see engagement aimed at increasing medium- to long-term corporate value in addition to short-term earnings.
• As for the judgement of exercise of voting rights regarding proposals to the general shareholders’ meeting, we would like institutional investors not only tomake judgments based on their relevance to those formal standards, such as numerical standards, but also to ensure the validity of judgment throughdialogue with companies from the viewpoint of increasing medium- to long-term corporate value.
• We would like to hear specific comments from institutional investors on the key points and evaluation from a medium- to long-term perspective, their
expectations on our company, items that we should disclose more or reorganize in Integrated Reports and other materials. We would also like to know
how they assess our sustainability initiatives and how they incorporate ESG into their investment and asset management processes.
• We would like institutional investors to thoroughly read disclosure materials such as Integrated Reports and Corporate Governance Reports to gain agood understanding of our company before engaging in dialogue. We would greatly appreciate it if they could prepare an analysis paper on our company
for the meeting, which we believe would result in more meaningful engagement. Our top priority is continuing to implement the cycle of disclosure,
dialogue, feedback and improvement of management. In dialogue with institutional investors, we expect them not only ask questions and confirm facts
about our strategies and materiality, but also provide us candid opinions and suggestions that will increase our company's corporate value.
• We would like institutional investors to provide information based on the insights that they have gained through dialogue with a number of companies inJapan and abroad, including on international trends such as frameworks for disclosing non-financial information, the trends in ratification of various
guidelines by Japanese and overseas companies, the status of establishment and advancement of ESG-related initiatives, and the sharing of advanced
measures for medium- to long-term value creation.
• We would like to hear candid opinions about what our company is lacking compared with other companies.
• We would like investors that manage global funds to point out the shortcomings and weaknesses of our company compared with overseas companies.
• In recent years, companies have been required to disclose more and more information, and it is difficult to decide what information should be disclosed towhat extent. We would like to know what disclosure items investors expect companies to provide.
• We hope that our dialogue will not end up with a one-sided explanation from our company, but will be a constructive one, with active suggestions frominvestors, including their expectations on our company in the future.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

10Summary of Survey Results II: IR and ESG Activities of Your Company
 Voluntary disclosure of non-financial information including ESG (such as Integrated Report) is conducted by 85.1 % of the companies surveyed, slightly
increasing from the previous survey. (p. 12)
 Explanations on non-financial information, such as ESG, continue to be provided mainly at financial results briefings and IR meetings. The number ofcompanies that hold information sessions focused on ESG issues has been increasing. The ratio of companies that do not provide explanations is now lessthan 10%. The number of interested institutional investors also increased from the previous survey. (p.13 & 14)
 The ratio of companies that prepare Integrated Reports or equivalent reports exceeded 60%, showing a significant increase from the previous survey.
Among the respondents that have not yet prepared such reports, approximately 60% stated that they are planning to publish or are considering to do so.
(p.15)
 The number of companies that have endorsed the TCFD significantly increased from 208 in the previous survey to 382. Of such companies, the number ofcompanies that have disclosed information in line with the TCFD has also increased from 139 to 249. Furthermore, not less than 90% of them indicatedthat they disclosed information partially or properly in terms of the four items ((i) Governance; (ii) Strategy; (iii) Risk management; and (iv) Indicators andgoals) as in the previous survey. However, as more companies newly disclosed information in line with TCFD, the ratio of respondents who selected“Properly disclosed” declined slightly (p. 16 & 17).
 As for major themes in corporate ESG activities, many companies selected (i) Climate Change (77.9%), (ii) Corporate Governance (71.7%), and (iii)
Diversity (55.0%), and “Climate Change” was selected as the most critical theme for the first time. The theme indicating the largest increase in response
rate from the previous survey was “Climate Change” (+14.3%) followed by “Diversity” (+11.8%) and “Human Rights & Community” (+6.2%). These themes
and items are exemplified as sustainability issues or indicated in Supplementary Principles, which were added as a result of the revision of Japan‘s
Corporate Governance Code last year. The result shows corporate awareness has especially increased in these items (P. 19).
 With regard to the content of dialogues with fixed income investors, the ratio of companies that selected “Financial position and financial strategy” and“Business strategy” as themes exceeded 90%, respectively. Furthermore, the ratio of companies that selected “ESG initiatives” significantly jumped fromthe previous survey, exceeding 60% (p. 20).
 The ratio of companies that have taken actions on the SDGs was approximately 90%, showing a significant increase (p.21).

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

11

<On IR and ESG Activities of Your Company>
Q1: Do you voluntarily disclose non-financial information including ESG (publication of CSR Reports,
Sustainability Reports, Integrated Reports, etc.)?
(i) Yes(ii) Do not voluntarily disclose non-financial information except for those otherwise stipulated by laws and regulations

This survey

85.1%

Previous survey

14.9%

78.5%

Survey before last

21.5%

74.8%
0%

20%

40%

25.2%
60%

80%

100%

1-1: If you selected “Yes” in Q1, do you refer to any of the following standards and guidelines?
Proposals published by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)

56.4%“GRI Guidelines” or “GRI Standards”

54.3%“International Integrated Reporting Framework” published by the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC)

54.2%“Guidance for Collaborative Value Creation” published by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry

49.9%“TCFD Guidance 2.0” published by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry

43.6%“Guidelines for Investor and Company Engagement” published by the Financial Services Agency

38.8%“Environmental Reporting Guidelines” published by the Ministry of the Environment

34.8%“SASB Standards” published by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) in the U.S.

27.9%

“ISO26000” published by the International Organization for Standardization

26.7%“Examples of Disclosure of Descriptive Information” published by the Financial Services Agency

26.1%

Others (*)

10.2%

None in particular

5.1%(*) Japan SDGs Action Platform” by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SDG Industry Matrix by UN Global Compact and KPMG,
measures taken by other companies, etc.

0%

20%

40%

60%

*Multiple responses; ratio of total number of companies
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

12

Q2: When do you provide explanations on non-financial information such as ESG to institutional investors?
(Multiple responses allowed) If such explanations are provided, how do you rate the reactions ofinstitutional investors?
<Sessions where explanations on non-financial
information are provided><Reactions of institutional investors>

66.1%(i) Financial resultspresentations

(i)

59.4%

82.4%

(ii) IR meetings

(ii)

80.8%

(iii)Information
sessions focusedon ESG issues

18.3%

(iii)

14.0%

13.7%
0%

20%

61.8%

26.6%

Previous survey 10.0%

57.0%

30.3%

This survey

13.9%

74.9%

10.0%

Previous survey

13.2%

73.4%

12.6%

This survey

82.0%

18.0%

Previous survey

82.1%

17.9%

0%

7.6%

(iv) Explanations are
not provided

9.9%This survey

40%This survey

60%

80%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Highly interested overall

Some investors are highly interested

Not very interested

Not interested

100%

Previous survey
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

13

Q3: Do you currently hold information sessions focused on ESG issues for institutional investors?
(i) Yes
18.6%•Have a plan to hold: 24 (4.4%)•Considering to hold suchsessions: 140 (25.4%)•Have no plan to hold suchsessions: 387 (70.2%)

Year of commencement:•2018 and before: 31 companies•2019: 26 companies•2020: 24 companies•2021: 40 companies•2022: 7 companies(ii) No
81.4%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

14

Q4: Do you publish Integrated Reports or equivalent reports for institutional investors?
<This survey><Previous survey>(i) Yes:
457 companies(65%)(ii) No:245 companies
(35%)

No:
283 companies(42%)

No response
2%

Have no planto publish:
15%

Considering
publishing:
18%

Yes:
390 companies(58%)

Have a publishingplan: 7%4-1: If you selected (ii) in Q4, what is your future plan?

Have no plan to
publish: 35.9%

Have a planto publish:
20.7%

Considering
publication: 43.5%

4-2: If you selected (i) in Q4, have you published an
English version?
Have notpublished:
8.3%

Have published:
91.7%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

15

Q5: Have you endorsed the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)?
This survey

Previous survey
0 companies

382 companies

325 companies

208 companies
100 companies

456 companies
200 companies

300 companies

400 companies(i) Yes

500 companies

600 companies

700 companies

800 companies(ii) No

5-1: If you selected (i) in Q5, do you disclose information in line with the TCFD?
This survey

249 companies<Scheduled timing for disclosure>

126 companies• 2022: 100 companies
Previous survey
0 companies

139 companies• 2023 and thereafter: 11 companies

69 companies

100 companies(i) Yes

200 companies
300 companies(ii) Have a plan to disclose

400 companies

5-2: If you selected (ii) in Q5, what is your future plan regarding the endorsement of the TCFD?
<Scheduled timing for endorsement>(iii) Have no plan toendorse it: 57 companies(19%)(i) Have a plan toendorse it: 54
companies (18%)• 2022: 48 companies• 2023 and thereafter: 5 companies(ii) Considering toendorse it: 194
companies (63%)
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

16

5-3: If you selected (i) in 5-1, what is the disclosure status regarding the items below?
(i) Governance(ii) Strategy(iii) Risk
management(iv) Indicatorsand goals

62.9%This survey

35.7%

67.8%

Previous survey

31.4%

40.0%

This survey

56.8%

1.3%
0.8%
3.2%

<Only to the companies that stated they disclosed information in line with the
TCFD in the previous survey>(i)Previous survey

48.7%

50.4%

0.8%

(ii)

This survey

47.5%

50.2%

2.3%

(iii)

Previous survey

47.5%

50.8%

1.6%

48.2%

This survey

47.7%

54.6%

Previous survey

0%

20%

4.1%

41.2%
40%

Properly disclosed

60%
Partially disclosed

80%

4.2%
100%

(iv)

This
surveyPrevious
survey

71.3%

28.7%

64.2%

This
surveyPrevious
surveyThis
surveyPrevious
survey

33.3%
49.6%

0.0%

46.3%

52.9%

0.8%

43.4%

48.8%

This
survey

50.4%

58.7%

39.7%

52.1%
0%

2.4%

50.4%
56.6%

Previous
survey0.0%

20%Properly disclosed

44.6%
40%

60%

Partially disclosed

80%

0.0%
0.8%
1.7%
3.3%
100%

Not disclosed

Not disclosed

5-4: If you selected (i) in 5-1, describe issues, if any, in disclosing information in line with the TCFD, such aspractical issues including your company’s structure, information acquisition and analysis methods, as well as
disclosure criteria, and external assessment, regardless of internal and external factors.
[Excerpts of comments]• It is difficult to extract appropriate grounds for future forecasts in scenario analysis.
• It is very difficult to quantify the financial impact of climate change. An appropriate method of calculating financial impact has not been established.
• The global movement toward rulemaking on disclosure of climate change risks and opportunities is fluid, and many organizations and countries are
considering their own rules, with different levels of content, and it takes time to check trends. We are not sure which rules should be used to consider
disclosure.
• Understanding of management. Establishment of internal systems and internal understanding. Lack of specialized personnel.
• Because our company operates globally and procures, produces, and sells its products in various regions, obtaining data for the entire supply chain
and adjusting the scope of disclosure presents a heavy workload.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

17

Q6: What are the objectives of the ESG activities of your company? Please select “up to 3 items” below,
and rank them with numbers 1, 2 and 3. (The same ranks are not allowed)<Status of responses by company size><Number of respondents>

1st
place
Large Medium Small(i) Improvement of corporate value

468(ii) Risk reduction effect 28

74 14

294

60

190

218

11

23

40

1

5

8

Ratio (*)

81%

88%

81%

15%

11%

16%

2%

3%

4%

4

12

12

49

128

117

18

58

94

5%

6%

4%

68%

60%

45%

30%

31%

43%

4

13

36

7

59

98

39

117

115

Ratio

5%

6%

13%

10%

27%

38%

65%

63%

52%

(iv) Other

6

2

3

5

5

3

2

6

3

Ratio

8%

1%

1%

7%

2%

1%

3%

3%

1%

74

217

269

72

215

258

60

186

220

Ratio

(iii) Social contribution

53

164

(iii) Social contribution

271(iv) Other0
1st place

100

200

2nd place300
3rd place

400

500

600

Number of companies

3rd
place
Large Medium Small(i) Improvement ofcorporate value(ii) Risk reduction effect

170

2nd
place
Large Medium Small

Total* Ratio of the items in the ranking (e.g. Ratio of “(i) Improvement of corporate value” in the 1st place of the purposes for ESG
activities of large-size companies: 60 companies / 74 companies)

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

18

Q7: What are the major themes of the ESG activities of your company?
(Multiple responses allowed, up to five)
Rank
Rank (previous
survey)

Theme

This
surveyPrevious
ChangesurveyRank

Rank (Previous
survey)

Theme

This
surveyPrevious
Changesurvey1

2

Climate Change

77.9%

63.6%

+14.3

11

13

Waste Management

11.0%

11.5%

-0.5

2

1

Corporate Governance

71.7%

71.7%

±0

12

12

Pollution & Resources

10.6%

12.4%

-1.8

3

3

Diversity

55.0%

43.2%

+11.8

13

11

Environmental Opportunities

9.4%

13.0%

-3.6

4

5

Human Rights & Community

43.2%

37.0%

+6.2

14

15

Others

8.6%

9.4%

-0.8

5

4

Health & Safety

38.8%

40.6%

-1.8

15

17

Social Opportunities

7.1%

6.0%

+1.1

6

7

Risk Management

27.9%

28.6%

-0.7

16

16

Capital Efficiency

6.8%

7.5%

-0.7

7

6

Product Liability

27.5%

30.7%

-3.2

17

14

Labor Standards

6.3%

10.0%

-3.7

8

8

Supply Chain

24.3%

23.5%

+0.8

18

18

Water Stress & Water Security

4.7%

5.9%

-1.2

9

9

Disclosure

21.2%

20.4%

+0.8

19

19

Biodiversity

4.4%

4.7%

-0.3

10

10

Board Structure, Self-evaluation

14.1%

17.1%

-3.0

20

20

Misconduct

1.8%

3.1%

-1.3

20

21

Deforestation

1.8%

2.9%

-1.1

22

23

Anti-corruption

1.6%

1.6%

±0

23

22

Minority Shareholder Rights(Cross-shareholding, etc.)

1.4%

2.2%

-0.8

24

24

Conflict Minerals

0.8%

0.7%

+0.1

25

25

Tax Transparency

0.0%

0.1%

-0.1

*Companies select up to five themes out of 25 themes listed above.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

19

Q8: Do you conduct dialogue with fixed income investors?

This survey

15.2%

19.6%

65.2%

Previous survey

16.9%

19.5%

63.5%

0%

20%

40%

8-1: If you selected (i) or (ii) in Q8, is the dialogue
with fixed income investors conducted by the samedepartment in your company as the dialogue withequity investors?
(i) Same

60%

80%

department as theone for dialogue
with equity
investors: 36%(ii) Different
department as theone for dialogue
with equity
investors: 64%100%(i) Conduct dialogue activities regularly(ii) Conduct dialogue at the time of issuing bonds/refunding(iii) No

8-2: If you selected (i) or (ii) in Q8, what are the contents of dialogue with fixed income investors? (Multiple
responses allowed)
93.1%
94.5%

Financial position and strategies

90.2%
90.3%

Business strategies

69.4%
62.9%

Details of bond issuance
Initiatives for ESG

45.6%

Status and plans of issuance of green bonds and sustainability bonds

30.4%

This survey

64.5%

Previous survey

41.2%

3.3%
3.0%

Others

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

20

Q9: What is your knowledge of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and status of action
taken to achieve the SDGs?
This survey

87.7%

10.8%

1.3%
0.0%

Previous
survey

75.1%

0.3%

4.3%

20.6%

0.0%
0%
20%
40%
(i) Have knowledge of SDGs and have taken action(iii) Have knowledge of SDGs but have no plan to take action(v) Have never heard of SDGs

0.0%

60%
80%
100%
(ii) Have knowledge of SDGs and considering taking action(iv) Have heard of SDGs but lack knowledge on their details

9-1: If you selected (i) or (ii) in Q9, do you refer to any of the following guidelines?
(Multiple responses allowed)“The Guide for SDG Business Management” by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry

62.8%“Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Implementation Guidelines” by the Ministry of the Environment

54.0%“SDG Compass” by GRI, the UN Global Compact (UNGC) and the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (WBCSD)

47.0%“Society 5.0 for SDGs” by Keidanren

45.1%“Implementation Guidance on Charter of Corporate Behavior” by Keidanren

33.1%“Business Reports on the SDGs” by GRI and the UN Global Compact (UNGC)

19.5%

None in particular

9.4%

Others (*)7.2%(*) Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact, ESG rating agencies, measures taken by other companies, WEF’s
Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics, advice from specialists, etc.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

21

Summary of Survey Results III: GPIF’s Initiatives (ESG Indices) As in the previous survey, approximately 50% of companies positively evaluated each of the four ESG indices selected by
GPIF, and the evaluation was particularly high among large-cap companies. Many small-cap companies continued to statethat they were not sure. Overall, no significant differences in evaluation for each index are observed. (p. 23)
 Over 60% of companies stated that they have reviewed the methodologies that index providers have disclosed. More than
90% of large-cap companies said that they have reviewed them. The ratio of medium-cap and small-cap companies indicatingthat they have reviewed them has also been increasing. Meanwhile, the ratio of companies that selected “Wish to be included”
in the indices exceeded 80% overall. (p.24)
 As in the previous survey, a greater ratio was observed in large-cap companies that responded that “There were changes in
the awareness, organizational systems and activities associated with ESG within the company.” The ratio has also been
increasing in medium-cap companies (p. 25).
 Companies that conducted dialogue with MSCI or FTSE in 2021 accounted for a quarter of all respondents. We believe thatthe number of companies that conduct dialogue with S&P (Trucost) has been limited because the evaluation items for
S&P(Trucost)’s environmental indices are focused on carbon efficiency, etc. (p.27)

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

22

<GPIF’s Initiatives (ESG Indices)>
Q1. Describe your rating of each of the following four ESG indices and reasons why.
FTSE Blossom Japan
100%

MSCI Japan ESG SelectLeaders Index

MSCI Japan Empowering
Women Index (WIN)S&P/JPX Carbon
Efficient Index

90%
80%
70%
60%

53.6%

50%

46.6%

40%

10%
0%

48.8%

51.5%

41.3%

30%
20%

50.0%

22.5%
7.4%

Large caps Medium Small caps
caps

39.2%

32.2%
15.7%
Overall

Highly appreciate

Appreciate

Do not appreciate much

Do not appreciate at all

Not sure

No response

41.7%

41.5%

34.7%
29.8%

48.1%

19.0%

18.7%
5.5%

Large caps

Mediumcaps

Small caps

43.9%
34.4%

30.6%
12.0%
Overall

22.6%

17.9%
4.4%

Large caps

Mediumcaps

Small caps

38.8%

11.6%
Overall

20.2%
Large caps

13.7%
Mediumcaps

5.2%
Small caps

10.2%
Overall• As in the previous survey, approximately 50% of companies positively evaluated each of the four ESG indices selected by GPIF, and the evaluation was particularly high amonglarge-cap companies. Many small-cap companies continued to state that they were not sure. No significant differences in responses are observed when comparing theevaluation of MSCI and FTSE indices, in which small-cap companies are not usually included due to their company size, and that of S&P/JPX Carbon Efficient Index, which is
free from such restrictions. The fact that the evaluation of ESG indices by small-cap companies has not been improving could indicate that the priority of ESG issues is not ashigh as that of many other management issues, compared to the case of large-cap companies.
• Overall, no significant differences in evaluation for each index are observed.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

23

Q2: Have you reviewed the methodologies for
the ESG indices selected by GPIF that index
providers have disclosed?

Q3: What are your views on inclusion of yourcompany in these ESG indices?

100%

100%

7.1%

90%

90%

20.6%

80%

14.6%

9.3%
1.0%

1.9%

60%
No response
No

92.9%

40%

Yes

77.5%
60.9%

30%

50%

96.4%

93.1%

40%

79.3%

86.5%

30%
20%

41.6%

20%

10%

10%
0%

0.0%

70%

57.0%

60%
50%

3.8%

80%

37.7%

70%

3.6%
0.0%

0%
Large caps

Medium caps

Small caps

Overall

Large caps

Medium caps

Small caps

Overall

Wish to be included

Do not wish to be included

Not interested

No response
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

24

Q4: Have you observed any changes in awareness of ESG, discussion, organizational structure,
and activities within your company since the launch of the ESG indices?
100%
90%

<Previous survey>

19.0%

100%

27.5%

80%

48.7%

70%

No response

50%
40%

Not in particular
81.0%

30%

Yes

69.8%
48.8%

20%
10%
0%

Large caps

Medium caps

Small caps

60%
40%

47.6%
68.1%

No response

85.2%

Not in particular

65.5%

20%
0%

26.2%

30.6%

80%

70.8%

60%

14.8%

47.9%

Yes

26.0%
Large
caps

Medium
caps

Small
caps

Overall

Overall• No significant changes are observed as a result of the launch of the ESG indices among the small-cap companies, which are
currently not usually included in MSCI and FTSE indices with their strict inclusion criteria due to their company size. However, manylarge-cap companies did observe some changes within their companies. The ratio of medium-cap companies that had observedsome changes increased significantly from the previous survey.
• Since the number of companies subject to ESG evaluation and inclusion into indices is currently increasing, we should keep an eye
on changes in small-cap companies in the future.
*See respondents’ comments on the following page.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

25

Excerpts of comments regarding changes in awareness of ESG, organizational structure,
and activities within the company as a result of the launch of the ESG indices[Changes in awareness of ESG]
• As our top management has a strong sense of awareness of ESG and the perspective of ESG has been incorporated into our medium-term plan, motivation for
ESG initiatives has increased across our company, particularly among those departments in charge.
• Internal recognition that our ESG initiatives can become criteria for inclusion in the ESG Indices adopted by GPIF has deepened the understanding and awarenessthat our response to ESG will directly result in an increase in corporate value, which has also led to the promotion of our initiatives.
[Changes in organizational structure]• Establishment of a department specialized in ESG promotion.
• The Sustainability Committee has been established and its discussion has been increasingly intensified.
• It has become easier to build a cooperative relationship within our company with the aim of being included in the ESG indices, and we have enabled easy-tounderstand goal setting and consensus building.
• It was recognized as a management challenge, which has developed to the identification of materiality and management integration.
• Incorporation into executive compensation.
• Relevant departments cooperated in order to enhance dialogue with MSCI and FTSE.
[Changes in activities including information disclosure, etc.]• Our top management presented a policy of actively disclosing information on ESG for a correct evaluation.
• We decided to properly disclose information, instead of just promoting activities internally.
• Aiming to be included in the indices has become one of our indicators in IR activities.
• When GPIF started ESG investing based on the indices, the focus of our discussion was whether we would be included in the ESG indices. However, the launchof the indices became a major impetus for Japanese companies to focus on ESG, significantly changing the concept of ESG in society.
• Not only our internal awareness but also the awareness of ESG of Japanese investors on the whole seems to have changed. While many investors used to thinkthat minimum efforts for ESG were sufficient, more and more investors are focused on ESG activities now.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

26

Q5: Did you have dialogue with MSCI, FTSE and S&P (Trucost) with regard to the ESG indices adopted by
GPIF in 2021? (Multiple responses allowed)(i) Had dialogue with MSCI

23.1%(ii) Had dialogue with FTSE

23.4%(iii) Had dialogue with S&P (Trucost)

7.9%(iv) Did not have dialogue with any of them
0.0%

69.5%
20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

Q6: Please share your opinions concerning the ESG indices selected by GPIF.
<Comments>• With regard to the ESG indices, we would like GPIF to further clarify the evaluation criteria.
• Would like GPIF to expand the universe (relaxation of market cap criteria).
• Would like index providers to improve follow-up measures for companies that do not have know-how, provide follow-up in Japanese, and offer
easier access to information.
• Expect GPIF to select other indices which are not currently selected such as social and governance related indices.
• Would like GPIF to clarify the evaluation period.
• Would like GPIF to disclose the details of annual review by ESG rating agencies.
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

27

Summary of Survey Results IV: GPIF’s Initiatives (Overall Stewardship Activities)

 As for the rating of GPIF’s overall stewardship initiatives, more than three-quarters of respondents selected “Highly
appreciate” and “Appreciate.” Many respondents appreciated GPIF’s dialogue with its asset managers from a long-term
perspective, initiatives to encourage the sustainable growth of the market as a whole, including ESG promotion, and dispatchof information including such initiatives (p. 29).
 Some of GPIF’s initiatives gained high recognition, including “Survey of companies,” “Investment based on ESG indices,” and“Publication of Excellent & Most-improved Integrated Reports.” As for the evaluation of individual initiatives, many respondents
selected “Highly appreciate” or “Appreciate” as a whole (p. 30).
 When companies and institutional investors discuss GPIF during meetings, the most frequently mentioned topics are “ESG
investment” and “Stewardship.” (p. 31)
 Among GPIF’s public relations activities, companies have seen GPIF’s official website the most, which was followed by
GPIF’s ESG Report (p. 31).
 Many companies expect GPIF in its stewardship activities to encourage constructive dialogue from a medium- to long-term
viewpoint, promote ESG investments, and continue information disclosure and others, as the previous survey (p. 32).

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

28

<GPIF’s Initiatives (Overall Stewardship Activities)>
Q1: How do you rate GPIF’s overall stewardship activities, and why?
Highly appreciate

Appreciate

Do not appreciate much

Do not appreciate at all

Not sure

No response
0.0%

1.1%
This survey

20.6%

0.9%
Previous survey

21.1%

20.2%
0%

1.4%

18.1%

2.8%

0.3%

56.8%
1.1%

Survey before last

18.9%

58.0%

0.2%
19.6%

54.1%
20%

40%

60%

80%

4.8%
100%

[Comments (excerpts)]• GPIF’s stewardship activities have resulted in engagement of both companies and investors as well as encouraging a long-term orientation and the sustainable growth of its
investee companies and the market as a whole. (Answered, “Highly appreciate”)• We feel that GPIF’s stewardship activities are significantly promoting to improve the quality of engagement between asset managers and investee companies . Every year GPIF
requests their asset managers to evaluate Integrated Reports, an important tool for engagement, which seems to have been encouraging the asset managers to thoroughly
read Integrated Reports in a proactive manner. (Answered, “Highly appreciate”)• There have been signs of a shift from one-sided requests from investors to companies to mutual evaluation. (Answered, “Highly appreciate”)• We appreciate GPIF’s balanced efforts to grasp the actual situation by conducting surveys, etc. targeting not only institutional investors but also issuers. (Answered,“Appreciate”)• We appreciate the fact that GPIF is focused on the promotion of stewardship activities by their asset managers such as the review of qualitative assessment of its passive asset
managers entrusted with domestic equity investment. (Answered, “Appreciate”)• It is hard to evaluate the impact as the monetary amounts are unclear. (Answered, “Do not appreciate much”)• It is difficult to make a judgement as we don’t have opportunities to engage in direct dialogue with GPIF. While it cannot be helped to a certain extent, we do not really recognize
GPIF’s roles in our dialogue with GPIF’s asset managers. (Answered, “Not sure”)
Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

29

Q2: Are you familiar with the following recent initiatives of GPIF? (Multiple responses allowed)
Choose all the initiatives you know, and describe your rating and the reason.
<Rating of initiatives><Recognition of initiatives>(i) Putting more weight on stewardship activities in the evaluation of external asset
managers (engagement aimed at enhancing medium-to long-term corporate value, etc.)

73.1%

(i)

24.7%

65.6%

(ii) “Stewardship Principles” and “Proxy Voting Principles”

74.0% (ii)

22.3%

68.3%

(iii) Investment based on ESG indices

76.9% (iii)

23.6%

63.9%

(iv) Survey of companies (this survey)

86.0% (iv)

18.6%

70.5%

(v) Publication of Excellent & Most-improved Integrated Reports

74.8% (v)(vi) Holding the Business and Asset Owners’ Forum

30.9% (vi) 16.1%

29.8%

62.2%

Do not appreciate much

27.5% (vii) 13.9%(viii) Becoming a signatory to the United Nations-supported Principles for Responsible
Investment (PRI) and activities through PRI

65.0% (viii)

26.6%(ix) Joining the U.K. 30% Club, the U.S. Thirty Percent Coalition and the 30% Club Japan(Investor Group)

35.4% (ix)

20.0%

54.4%

(x) Participation in the Climate Action100+

42.7% (x)

21.3%

59.1%

(xi) Disclosure of ESG Report

67.8% (xi)

23.3%

67.5%

(xii) Disclosure of climate change risks and opportunity analysis of the GPIF portfolio(an extra issue of ESG Report)

52.0% (xii)

21.5%

63.8%

0%

Appreciate

54.6%(vii) Holding the Global Asset Owners’ Forum(Note) The table on the left indicates the ratio of companies that recognize each initiative.
The yellow cells indicate initiatives whose recognition exceeds 50%.
The right chart indicates the results, excluding companies that did not respond.

Highly appreciate

56.7%

Do not appreciate at all
Not sure

60.2%

50%

100%

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

30

Q3: Have you discussed any GPIF topics during your meetings with institutional investors?
Additional question:
What topics were discussed?
AUM,
Presence:
7.1%(i) Yes:28.3%

Other: 16.0%

ESG
investmentrelated:
40.4%

Overall trend,
Policies: 15.4%(ii) No:
71.7%

Stewardship:
21.2%*Classified based on open-ended responses

Q4: Have you seen GPIF’s following public relations activities? (Multiple responses allowed)
634(i) Official website

48(ii) YouTube

37(iii) Twitter

158(iv) Annual Report

304(v) ESG Report

213(vi) Disclosure of climate change risks and opportunity analysis of the GPIF portfolio (an extra issue of ESG Report)

93(vii) Presentations by GPIF's officers/staff

31(viii) Articles contributed by GPIF's officers/staff

94(ix) Disclosure through JPX ESG Knowledge Hub

54(x) None of the above

0
This survey

100Previous survey

200

300

400

500

600

700

Number of companies

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

31

Q5: What do you expect from GPIF’s stewardship activities as an asset owner?
[Comments (excerpts)]• Rather than focusing on formal and obligatory discussions, we continue to look forward to your propositions as asset owners to encourage constructive dialogue between investors
and issuers with a view to enhancing corporate value and building a sustainable society.
• With regard to investment and dialogue from a medium- to long-term perspective, the understanding and initiatives on non-financial information and ESG on the part of institutional
investors have advanced through GPIF’s approach to asset managers and GPIF’s activities, and we feel that this trend has become even more pronounced since the COVID-19
pandemic. In addition to being a topic of conversation at IR meetings, ESG-focused meetings are also on the rise, and we see this as a very meaningful opportunity to havediscussions from a medium- to long-term perspective. We look forward to further encouragement by GPIF for constructive dialogue aimed at increasing corporate value over the
medium to long term.
• While we feel that institutional investors‘ interest in non-financial information is growing year by year, we also have to respond without knowing what to do, because we are not sureto which extent such information would result in corporate evaluations and there is little feedback from institutional investors. We would like GPIF to help us to deepen dialogue withinvestors, utilizing non-financial information.
• We hope that GPIF will promote initiatives to encourage dialogue based on an understanding of the characteristics of each company, rather than based on one-size-fits-all
evaluation standards.
• We would like GPIF to continue to contribute not only to the enhancement of the value of individual companies but also to the sustainable growth of the capital market on the whole
by promoting ESG investment. We also expect GPIF to continue to promote the attractiveness of the Japanese market as the world’s largest asset owner.
• As the information posted on GPIF’s website is very helpful to companies, we would like GPIF to continue to publish your activities and the survey results.
• We hope that GPIF, as an asset owner of the global top class, will enhance its capability to globally dispatch information. In order to attract global investment funds to Japanesecompanies, it is not sufficient to simply encourage a company to change, but it is necessary to promote company’s transformation. We would like to request your strong support.
• We would like GPIF to further promote direct communications not only with asset managers but also with issuers.
• We expect that GPIF will exercise its supervisory functions to ensure fair and appropriate evaluation is carried out by ESG rating agencies.
• We would like GPIF to come up with measures to ensure that ESG will be established steadily among medium-cap and small-cap companies and that they will start taking actions
accordingly.
• We consider that as an asset owner, it would be the most important for GPIF is to pursuit of investment returns in the long-term management. Therefore, GPIF should avoid asituation in which the return of ESG investment falls lower than that of non-ESG investment such as market average after deducting management fees.
• Active investors and sell-side analysts still tend to ask only superficial (formal) questions. we hope that GPIF will encourage not only passive managers but also a broader range ofgroups to engage in deeper dialogue.

Copyright © 2022 Government Pension Investment Fund All rights reserved.

32

GPIF Homepage
https://www.gpif.go.jp/
GPIF YouTube channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWpjyPh1kw0VyfIPpcVMIXwGPIF twitter
https://twitter.com/gpiftweets