According to economic literature, climate change is a financial factor: this is the logical premise of the European Directive N. 2014/95/EU requiring disclosure on the policies adopted by big corporations on climate change risks and opportunities. Through disclosure, climate change imprints the contents of directors’ duty of skill and care in Europe. On the contrary, in US there is no federal legislation or SEC regulations specifically on climate disclosure. Absent any binding decision yet, the current assessment of directors’ fiduciary duties under state law does not include consideration of climate change risks and opportunities according to American authors, even though fiduciary duties may evolve. The sole effective tool is the Martin Act. Levels of disclosure of US and EU corporations are therefore already significantly different both in terms of climate risks and opportunities. This situation can drive the financial sector to direct capital to Europe. Institutional investors in US have been trying to increase disclosure through shareholders’ proposals under Rule 14a-8 but these efforts have been recently undermined by the micro-management argument used by SEC. The conclusion is that the market cannot govern climate change by itself: because of regulation, European corporations are better positioned to mitigate the “carbon bubble”. What is at stake is the profitability of American corporations.

中文翻译：

---

气候公司治理：欧洲与美国？

根据经济文献，气候变化是一个财务因素：这是欧洲指令N. 2014/95 / EU的逻辑前提，要求披露大公司在气候变化风险和机遇方面所采取的政策。通过披露，气候变化印记了欧洲董事的技术和关怀职责的内容。相反，在美国，没有专门针对气候披露的联邦法规或SEC法规。尚无任何有约束力的决定，根据美国作者的说法，根据州法律对董事的信托义务的当前评估不包括对气候变化风险和机遇的考虑，即使信托义务可能会演变。唯一有效的工具是《马丁法案》。因此，就气候风险和机遇而言，美国和欧盟公司的披露水平已经存在很大差异。这种情况可能导致金融部门将资本引导到欧洲。美国的机构投资者一直在尝试根据《上市规则》第14a-8条通过股东的提议增加披露，但最近这些努力因SEC所采用的微观管理论点而受到损害。结论是，市场无法独自控制气候变化：由于监管，欧洲公司更容易缓解“碳泡沫”。危在旦夕的是美国公司的盈利能力。美国的机构投资者一直在尝试根据《上市规则》第14a-8条通过股东的提议增加披露，但最近这些努力因SEC所采用的微观管理论点而受到损害。结论是，市场无法独自控制气候变化：由于监管，欧洲公司更容易缓解“碳泡沫”。危在旦夕的是美国公司的盈利能力。美国的机构投资者一直在尝试根据《上市规则》第14a-8条通过股东的提议增加披露，但最近这些努力因SEC所采用的微观管理论点而受到损害。结论是，市场无法独自控制气候变化：由于监管，欧洲公司更容易缓解“碳泡沫”。危在旦夕的是美国公司的盈利能力。