Princeton University
PA-9: Committee on Investor Responsibility

The Resources Committee of the Council of the Princeton University Community was established in 1970 to “consider questions of general policy concerning the procurement and management of the University’s financial resources.” The Resources Committee is responsible for recommendations to the University Trustees as to when the Trustees should take a position regarding issues of broader social concern. The key criteria used in making this determination include the presence of “considerable, thoughtful, and sustained campus interest,” determination that a core University value is at stake, and the ability of the University community to reach consensus on a response.

Committee Membership

Faculty Members

• Jay Groves, Hugh Stott Taylor Chair of Chemistry (Chair, Resources Committee)
• Christina Lee, Professor of Spanish and Portuguese
• Kristopher Ramsay, Professor of Politics

Graduate Student Member

• David Shlivko, Physics

Undergraduate Student Members

• Arika Hassan, Class of 2026
• William Oh, Class of 2027

Staff Members

• Janet Finnie, Director, University Health Services
• Jim Matteo, Vice President for Finance and Treasurer, Office of Finance and Treasury

Sits with the Committee

• Jennifer Birmingham, Managing Director, PRINCO
• Brandon Gaines, Director, Office of Finance and Treasury

The board used recommendations from the Resources Committee of the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) to deliberate and ultimately adopt a more aggressive set of policies grounded in Princeton’s history as a world leader in conservation and climate science research. 

Princeton dissociated from segments of the fossil fuel industry in 2022. CPUC helped bring about this change by issuing the following recommendation:

"Based on our deliberations and findings, the Resources Committee recommends the following actions to the Committee on Finance of the Board of Trustees: (1) Princeton University should dissociate from fossil fuel companies that deny climate change and/or spread climate disinformation. (2) Princeton University should dissociate from the highest greenhouse gas-emitting sectors of the fossil fuel industry (e.g., thermal coal) as quickly as possible. (3) For sectors of the fossil fuel industry not fitting into recommendation #2, Princeton University should establish criteria for conditional dissociation from fossil fuel companies that have not undertaken an acceptable path to achieve carbon neutrality, as guided by scientific recommendations. (4) Princeton University should create an administrative process and determine what expert input is needed to establish, implement, and sustain actionable criteria for dissociation that is consistent with the three recommendations above. These criteria should not be based on past behavior of companies, but instead on their current and prospective actions."

Princeton University’s primary mechanism for consideration of investment-driven social responsibility issues is the Resources Committee of the Council of the Princeton University Community. The Resources Committee was created in 1970 and includes members of the faculty, undergraduate students, graduate students, and staff. The key criteria for consideration of issues, including matters of environmental or social concern, are the presence of “considerable, thoughtful, and sustained campus interest,” determination that a core University value is at stake, and the ability of the University community to reach consensus on a response. The Resources Committee has a broad mandate to help identify issues of concern to the University community, provide opportunities for discussion and education, research and review alternatives, and recommend a course of action that shares broad support across campus constituencies. When appropriate, the Resources Committee makes investment recommendations to the Trustees regarding issues of broad social concern.

At a time when the University’s portfolio included substantial investment in traditional stocks and was managed directly by the Trustee Committee on Finance, the Resources Committee made proxy voting recommendations to the Trustees. However, as investment instruments changed and the Princeton University Investment Company (PRINCO) assumed day-to-day management of the Endowment, the number of opportunities to vote proxies decreased significantly. PRINCO, an internal unit of the University responsible for investing the Endowment, allocates all but a very small fraction of the portfolio to commingled funds and partnerships in which proxy votes cannot be controlled directly. As a result, the Resources Committee stopped evaluating proxy ballots and instead devoted its energies to creating a venue to discuss investment-related issues of significant interest more broadly. This venue allows the Committee to contemplate and implement change on a larger and more systemic basis than the very narrow, indeed negligible, basis provided by proxy voting. Princeton believes this approach is more likely to create opportunities for individual and institutional change and is more effective and efficient than a narrow focus on proxy voting and investment restrictions.