开发者:上海品职教育科技有限公司 隐私政策详情

应用版本:4.2.11(IOS)｜3.2.5(安卓)APP下载

返回

139****0989 · 2024年05月21日

为什么B不对？

  1. ESG
  2. Engagement and stewardship

NO.PZ2024021802000020

问题如下：

Which of the following statements is most accurate with respect to infrastructure investments? Investors should:

选项：

A.screen investments for an ESG tilt as engagement is not possible. B.allow general partners to directly engage with the infrastructure company. C.make ESG information and expertise available to the project company to help it develop capacity.

解释：

A. Incorrect ESG tilts are preferred for sovereign debt, not for infrastructure investments, as engagement is possible in the latter case.

B. Incorrect because with private equity investments, direct ESG engagement will be undertaken by the general partner (GP, the private equity house) rather than the limited partner (LP, the asset owner), although individual LPs may wish to engage with their GPs on the ways in which they are monitoring and acting on ESG issues across their portfolios. Therefore, this argument applies to private equity investments, not for infrastructure investments.

C. Correct because PRI recommends that investors consider eight potential mechanisms to act as engaged owners in infrastructure, including (where possible) to make ESG information and expertise available to the asset or project company to help it develop capacity.

为什么B不对？为什么B是applies to private equity investments, not for infrastructure investments？

添加评论
2 个答案

Carol文_品职助教 · 2024年10月02日

嗨，努力学习的PZer你好：


LP（有限合伙人）和GP（普通合伙人）这两个专有名词并不只适用于私募股权（private equity）的情境，虽然它们在私募股权中最为常见。它们实际上是广泛适用于有限合伙制投资结构（limited partnership investment structures）的术语，以下是它们的适用范围：

私募股权（Private Equity）：

  • 在私募股权中，LP（有限合伙人）是那些出资但不参与日常管理的投资者，GP（普通合伙人）是管理基金并负责投资决策和运营的机构或个人。这个结构非常典型，是私募股权投资的基础。

风险投资（Venture Capital）：

  • 类似于私募股权，风险投资基金（VC基金）也通常采用有限合伙制。在这种情况下，GP管理基金并投资于初创企业，LP则提供资金但不参与日常管理。

基础设施投资（Infrastructure Investments）：

  • 在基础设施投资中，如果采用有限合伙结构，LP和GP的角色仍然存在。通常，LP是长期资金提供者，如养老金基金、主权财富基金等，GP则负责管理基础设施投资组合和进行具体的资产管理。因此，基础设施投资中也可以有LP和GP结构，只是投资者可能在ESG等问题上有更直接的互动和合作机会。

不动产基金（Real Estate Funds）：

  • 在不动产基金中，也广泛使用有限合伙制结构。GP管理不动产基金的投资组合，LP提供资本。投资于大型商业地产或开发项目时，GP负责管理和操作，LP负责提供资金。

能源、自然资源等其他另类投资（Energy, Natural Resources, Other Alternative Investments）：

  • 在能源或自然资源投资中，LP和GP结构同样常见。LP出资，GP进行资源的管理和运营。

因此，LP和GP并不专属于私募股权投资，它们适用于所有有限合伙制结构，涵盖私募股权、风险投资、基础设施投资、不动产基金、能源资源等多种类型的投资。


但针对这道题，在基础设施投资中，投资者有更大的机会直接与项目公司或资产所有者互动。投资者不仅可以提供资金，还可能通过与项目公司合作，提供他们的ESG信息和专业知识，帮助项目公司提高在这些领域的能力。

因此，B选项中提到的“允许普通合伙人直接与基础设施公司接触”的场景实际上更多的是私募股权投资中的典型做法，而不是基础设施投资中的首选方式。在基础设施投资中，投资者可以通过多种方式（如提供ESG支持和指导）与项目公司或资产进行更直接的合作。

----------------------------------------------
加油吧，让我们一起遇见更好的自己！

Carol文_品职助教 · 2024年05月21日

嗨，从没放弃的小努力你好：


选项B之所以不正确，是因为它描述的情形主要适用于私募股权投资，而不完全适用于基础设施投资。在私募股权投资中，GPs负责直接的ESG参与，而LPs通常是通过GPs进行间接监督。在基础设施投资中，投资者可以直接与项目公司互动，提供ESG支持和指导。因此，选项C是正确的，因为它符合PRI的建议，强调了投资者在基础设施投资中直接提供ESG信息和专业知识的重要性。



----------------------------------------------
努力的时光都是限量版，加油！

157****0450 · 2024年10月01日

是LP和GP这两个专有名词只适用于private equity的情景下吗？

  • 2

    回答

  • 0

    关注

  • 186

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2024021802000020问题如下Whiof the following statements is most accurate with respeto infrastructure investments? Investors shoulA.screen investments for ESG tilt engagement is not possible.B.allow generpartners to rectly engage with the infrastructure company.C.make ESG information anexpertise available to the projecompany to help it velop capacity. IncorreESG tilts are preferrefor sovereign bt, not for infrastructure investments, engagement is possible in the latter case.Incorrebecause with private equity investments, reESG engagement will unrtaken the generpartner (GP, the private equity house) rather ththe limitepartner (LP, the asset owner), although inviLPs mwish to engage with their GPs on the ways in whithey are monitoring anacting on ESG issues across their portfolios. Therefore, this argument applies to private equity investments, not for infrastructure investments.Correbecause PRI recommen thinvestors consir eight potentimechanisms to aengageowners in infrastructure, inclung (where possible) to make ESG information anexpertise available to the asset or projecompany to help it velop capacity. 为什么A不对呢？不是要做好尽职调查等吗？

2024-09-07 01:48 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2024021802000020 问题如下 Whiof the following statements is most accurate with respeto infrastructure investments? Investors shoul A.screen investments for ESG tilt engagement is not possible. B.allow generpartners to rectly engage with the infrastructure company. C.make ESG information anexpertise available to the projecompany to help it velop capacity. IncorreESG tilts are preferrefor sovereign bt, not for infrastructure investments, engagement is possible in the latter case.Incorrebecause with private equity investments, reESG engagement will unrtaken the generpartner (GP, the private equity house) rather ththe limitepartner (LP, the asset owner), although inviLPs mwish to engage with their GPs on the ways in whithey are monitoring anacting on ESG issues across their portfolios. Therefore, this argument applies to private equity investments, not for infrastructure investments.Correbecause PRI recommen thinvestors consir eight potentimechanisms to aengageowners in infrastructure, inclung (where possible) to make ESG information anexpertise available to the asset or projecompany to help it velop capacity. 为什么B不对？B讲的就是普通合伙人去做决策

2024-06-03 21:33 3 · 回答