Financial Markets: A Tool for Social Responsibility?

Objectives of socially responsible investment (SRI) are discussed with reference to the two main mechanisms of the SRI ‘movement’: shareholder advocacy and managed investments. We argue that in their current forms, both mechanisms lack the power to create significant corporate change. Shareholder advocacy has been largely unsuccessful to date. Even if resolutions were successful, shareholder advocacy may still be ineffective if underlying economic opportunities remain. Marketing material and investment prospectuses issued by socially responsible mutual funds (SRI funds) commonly contain the claim that, by affecting corporations' access to capital funding, SRI funds can change corporate practices. This paper makes a contribution by presenting the market share of SRI funds in the regions where they are most developed, being Europe, the U.S. and Australia, to show that this claim is unlikely to eventuate. SRI funds also commonly claim that they will outperform conventional active mutual funds. That the economic performances of both are similar might be explained by their similar portfolio compositions. The paper makes an innovation in the SRI literature by adopting a legitimacy framework to explain the continued presence of SRI funds. To achieve desired social and environmental outcomes, SRI funds are urged to address issues at a more systemic level. A suggested mechanism is the collective lobbying of corporations and, especially, governments.     

Socially Responsible Investment and Fiduciary Duty: Putting the Freshfields Report into Perspective

A critical issue for the future growth and impact of socially responsible investment (SRI) is whether institutional investors are legally permitted to engage in it – in particular whether it is compatible with the fiduciary duties of trustees. An ambitious report from the United Nations Environment Programme’s Finance Initiative (UNEP FI), commonly referred to as the ‘Freshfields report’, has recently given rise to considerable optimism on this issue among proponents of SRI. The present article puts the arguments of the Freshfields report into some further both empirical and critical perspective, however, and suggests that its findings do not call for very much optimism. The general argument is that while the understanding of fiduciary duty outlined by the Freshfields report seems to allow institutional investors to at least sometimes take some social or environmental considerations into account, the support it gives for SRI is notably contingent and, furthermore, it rules out exactly the kind of SRI which proponents of social responsibility and environmental sustainability should hold in highest regard – proactive cases and socially effective investment strategies. If SRI is to become an important force for corporate social responsibility through its adoption by institutional investors, then, it is suggested that legal reform is needed.     

The Financial Performance of a Socially Responsible Investment Over Time and a Possible Link with Corporate Social Responsibility

This paper empirically examines the financial performance of a UK unit trust that was initially “conventional” and later adopted socially responsible investment (SRI) principles (ethical investment principles). Comparison is made with three similar conventional funds whose investment objectives remained unchanged. Analysis techniques employed in previous studies find similar results: mean risk-adjusted performance is unchanged by the switch to SRI, with no evidence of over-or under-performance relative to the benchmark market index by any of the four funds. More interestingly, changes in variability of returns over time are also modelled using generalised autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity models, not previously applied to SRI funds so far as is known. Results show a temporary increase in variability of returns, followed by a return to previous levels after around 4 years. Evidence shows the increased variability to be associated with the adoption of SRI rather than with a change in fund management. Possible explanations for the subsequent reduction in variability include the spread of corporate social responsibility activities by firms and learning by fund managers. In addition to reporting on a previously unobserved phenomenon, this paper raises questions for further research.     

How Can a Ratings-based Method for Assessing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Provide an Incentive to Firms Excluded from Socially Responsible Investment Indices to Invest in CSR?

Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) indices play a major role in the stock markets. A connection between doing good and doing well in business is implied. Leading indices, such as the Domini Social Index and others, exemplify the movement toward investing in socially responsible corporations. However, the question remains: Does the ratings-based methodology for assessing corporate social responsibility (CSR) provide an incentive to firms excluded from SRI indices to invest in CSR? Not in its current format. The ratings-based methodology employed by SRI indices in their selection processes excludes many corporations by creating limited-membership lists. This received ratings-based structure is yet to offer an incentive for most of the excluded corporations to invest in improving their levels of CSR. We, therefore, ask under what circumstances a ratings-based method for assessing CSR could provide an incentive to firms excluded from SRI indices to invest in CSR. In this article, we attempt to offer a theoretical reply to this question. We show that when all firms are publicly ranked according to SRI index parameters, such indices can indeed create a market incentive for increased investment by firms in improving their performance in the area of social responsibility. We further show that this incentive tapers off as the amount of investment required exceeds a certain point or if the amount of payback on that investment fails to reach a certain threshold.     

SMEs and CSR Theory: Evidence and Implications from an Italian Perspective

This paper reviews the development of socially responsible investment (SRI) in the Spanish financial market. The year, 1997 saw the appearance in Spain of the first SRI mutual fund, but it was not until late 1999, that major Spanish fund managers offered SRI mutual funds on the retail market. The development of SRI in the Spanish financial market has not experienced the high levels of development seen in other European countries, such as France or Italy, where interest in SRI began during the same period. This paper presents an analysis of the impact of SRI mutual funds managed by Spanish fund managers comparing the evolution of managed assets and number of investors. We also analyse the investment strategies adopted by these funds, which mainly use negative screening criteria and the participation of non-governmental organisations as institutional investors. An analysis of the take up of socially responsible investment in the Spanish financial market shows majors deficits in this process. This is due to Spanish investors having limited sensitivity to social issues and knowledge of SRI, and a lack of development of SRI investment strategies, such as engagement or shareholder activism by fund managers. Furthermore, the take-up of SRI mutual funds in the Spanish financial market coincided with a fall in the stock market at the beginning of the 21st Century. We conclude with an analysis of the relationship between SRI and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).Josep M. Lozano is currently Professor in the Department of Social Sciences at ESADE, Universidad Ramon Llul-URL and Director of the school’s Institute for the Individual, Corporations and Society (IPES). Co-founder of ética, Economía y Dirección (Spanish branch of the European Business Ethics Network), member of the international Editorial Board of ‚Ethical Perspectives’ and member of the Business Ethics inter-faculty group of the Community of European Management Schools (CEMS). He has been a highly-commended runner-up in the European division of the Beyond Grey Pinstripes Faculty Pioneer Award. Author of Ethics and Organizations. Understanding Business Ethics as a Learning Process. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000.Laura Albareda is a Researcher at the Institute for the Individual, Corporations and Society (IPES), ESADE, Universidad Ramon Llull-URL. She is manager of the Observatory on Ethical, Ecological and Social Investment funds in Spain, an annual IPES publication on Socially Responsible Investment in Spain. Fields of research and academic interest are Corporate Social Responsibility, Business Ethics, Global Governance, Governments and Public Policies on CSR and Socially Responsible Investment.M. Rosario Balaguer is a Lecturer in the Department of Finance and Accounting at Universitat Jaume I. Research areas focus on finance-based analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility and Socially Responsible Investment, covering issues such as profitability, risk and performance. She has taken part in several national and international conferences and published a number of articles in this field.     

Why do countries combine the exemption system for the taxation of foreign profits with domestic double taxation relief?

Many European countries exempt foreign profits from domestic corporate taxation. At the shareholder level, however, all corporate profits are taxed, and double taxation relief is granted only for domestic corporate taxes. This paper attempts to rationalize this tax policy. In the presence of double taxation agreements which exempt foreign profits from domestic corporate taxation, countries may use shareholder taxes to tax these profits. The disadvantage of shareholder taxes is that they create incentives to sell domestic firms to foreigners. But double taxation relief for domestic profits may preserve domestic ownership. Our results imply that national dividend tax policies may be a factor contributing to the empirically observed home bias in investment.     

Improving Diversification Opportunities for Socially Responsible Investors

Socially responsible investment (SRI) has grown enormously and has expanded globally in recent years. It allows SRI investors to reduce their portfolio risk assumptions through international diversification. In this context, the aim of this paper is twofold (i) to examine price and volatility linkages among the most representative SRI indexes for North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific employing a multivariate approach and (ii) to provide the out-of-sample performance of an optimal portfolio constructed on the basis of time-varying return and volatility forecasts from this specification approach. Our overall results show that using this technique, it is possible to reduce risk and out-perform the naïve rule, which is usually employed in this type of investment. These findings are relevant not only for academics but also for practitioners, especially for professional managers of SRI portfolios.     

Socially Responsible Investment in Japan: Its Mechanism and Drivers

The paper explores the emergence and development of socially responsible investment (SRI) in Japan. SRI is a recent field in Japan. It is not clear which model it will follow: the European, American or its own model. Through the analysis of the historical roots of SRI, the key actors and motivations that have contributed to its diffusion, the paper provides explorative grounds to sketch the translation mechanisms of SRI in Japan and offers insight into its future path. Based on primary and secondary sources of information, the paper shows that although SRI in Japan holds some similarities with the U.S. and especially with the European model, it remains unique. It highlights the importance of translation and re-interpretation in adopting a practice in a new context. SRI in Japan is still in a dynamic construction process. Although we expect it to develop further, it is difficult to depict its future shape and form.     

Doing right,investing right: Socially responsible investing and shareholder activism in the financial sector

In this article, we present an overview of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the financial sector. We focus on how socially responsible investment and shareholder activism have been integral parts of corporate social responsibility in the financial sector. We examine how the financial sector and its firms are evaluated and rated via a sustainability index, the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index, and show that even leading financial institutions do not employ proactive practices regarding socially responsible investment and shareholder activism. Finally, we provide examples of two companies, UBS AG and the Co-operative Banking Group, that do utilize proactive practices.     

How new is socially responsible investment?

Much recent comment has been concerned with a perceived distinction between socially responsible investment (SRI) and the older style of ethical investment, which operates on the basis of exclusion criteria. However, the distinction between SRI and ethical investment is not as clear‐cut as some reports have implied, in that some of the longer‐established funds have SRI characteristics. An example is the CIS's Environ Trust, established in 1990, the operation of which has recently assisted the CIS in the adoption of SRI schemes for all its funds. The application of SRI introduces to mainstream funds the principle of engagement with companies. Investment is then based on the selection of 'best practice' companies rather than on criteria of exclusion. This suggests that there is scope for applying the experience of specialised ethical funds to the encouragement of greater social awareness by large shareholders in general.     

Institutional Ownership and Corporate Investment Performance

This paper examines the role of institutional investors in improving firm performance through the channel of corporate investment decisions. We find that the interaction effect between institutional ownership and capital expenditures is significantly related to firm performance. We examine this relationship for different types of institutional investors, and find that investment advisors are most effective monitors in improving firm performance through corporate investment. Moreover, we find that the monitoring role of institutional investors becomes more important when internal governance is weak. Institutional ownership and other forms of corporate governance mechanisms (including CEO incentive compensation and control, shareholder right provisions, and board of director monitoring) operate as substitutes, rather than complements, in improving capital expenditure decisions. Copyright © 2012 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Socially Responsible Investing in the United States

Socially responsible investing (SRI) has emerged in recent years as a dynamic and quickly growing segment of the U.S. financial services industry involving over $2 trillion in professionally managed assets. Its conceptual origins can be found in the early history of civilization, with it's modern roots in the 1960s. This paper provides an overview of the breadth and depth of the concept and practice of socially and environmentally responsible investing, describes the investment strategies that together define SRI as currently practiced in the U.S., offers several observations about some of the factors fueling its dramatic growth, and presents data showing that investors who choose to invest in a socially and environmentally responsible manner can do so without giving up investment returns. SRI has matured to a point where virtually any investment need can be met through portfolio design that integrates an investor's personal values, institutional mission, and/or social priorities.The socially responsible investment industry in the UnitedStates is a young phenomenon. Even referring to it as an "industry" ten years ago may have been a bit of a stretch. While it has grown dramatically in recent years, it is an area of work, of study and of practical application that continues to evolve in many significant ways.One intriguing example of the ongoing development of the field can be found in the analysis of the language used to describe it. The terms social investing, socially responsible investing, ethical investing, socially aware investing, socially conscious investing, green investing, values-based investing, and mission-based or mission-related investing all refer to the same general process and are often used interchangeably.     

The Politics of Shareholder Activism in Nigeria

Shareholder activism has become a force for good in the extant corporate governance literature. In this article, we present a case study of Nigeria to show how shareholder activism, as a corporate governance mechanism, can constitute a space for unhealthy politics and turbulent politicking, which is a reflection of the country’s brand of politics. As a result, we point out some translational challenges, and suggest more caution, in the diffusion of corporate governance practices across different institutional environments. We contribute to the literature on corporate governance in Africa, whilst creating an understanding of the political embeddedness of shareholder activism in different institutional contexts—i.e. a step closer to a political theorising of shareholder activism.     

Corporate Governance Reforms in India

In recent years India has been moving further in the direction of adopting an Anglo-American model of corporate governance. This decision, the result more of international economic and political pressures than public debate, in effect represents a new development strategy for the world's most populous democracy. In light of this situation, it is important to ask two basic questions: 1) why has the Anglo-American model of corporate governance been adopted? and; 2) can it be justified? This paper addresses the first of these questions by distinguish and examining three historical models of governance in India: 1) the managing agency model in the colonial period; 2) the business house model that emerged after independence, and; 3) the Anglo-American model which has recently been adopted (and is still emerging). The second question is approached through an examination of the "development impact" of the new model, as indicated by such measures as growth, employment and respect for shareholder rights.     

Shareholder Primacy,Corporate Social Responsibility,and the Role of Business Schools

This paper examines the shareholder primacy norm (SPN) as a widely acknowledged impediment to corporate social responsibility and explores the role of business schools in promoting the SPN but also potentially as an avenue for change by addressing misconceptions about shareholder primacy and the purpose of business. We start by explaining the SPN and then review its status under US and UK laws and show that it is not a likely legal requirement, at least under the guise of shareholder value maximization. This is in contrast to the common assertion that managers are legally constrained from addressing CSR issues if doing so is inconsistent with the economic interests of shareholders. Nonetheless, while the SPN might be muted as a legal norm, we show that it is certainly evident as a social norm among managers and in business schools—reflective, in part, of the sole voting rights of shareholders on corporate boards and of the dominance of shareholder theory—and justifiably so in the view of many managers and business academics. We argue that this view is misguided, not least when associated with claims of a purported legally enforceable requirement to maximize shareholder value. We propose two ways by which the influence of the SPN among managers might be attenuated: extending fiduciary duties of executives to non-shareholder stakeholders and changes in business school teaching such that it covers a plurality of conceptions of the purpose of the corporation.     

Identifying impediments to SRI in Europe: a review of the practitioner and academic literature

For more than 15 years, the investment community and the academic community have written extensively on socially responsible investment (SRI). Despite the abundance of SRI thought, the adoption of SRI practices among institutional investors is a comparative rarity. This paper endeavours to achieve two goals. First, by integrating the practitioner and academic literature on the topic, the paper attempts to identify the many impediments to SRI in Europe from an institutional investor's perspective. Second, the paper proposes a unitary framework to conceptually organize the impediments to SRI by using insights from different relevant research perspectives: behavioural finance, organizational behaviour, institutional theory, economic sociology, management science and finance. The paper concludes by presenting the main shortcomings within both the academic and the practitioner literature on SRI and by providing conceptual and methodological recommendations for further research.     

Industry Specific Sustainability Benchmarks: An ECSF Pilot Bridging Corporate Sustainability with Social Responsible Investments

This paper investigates the state of the art with respect to sustainability reporting, its linkages with the corporations, internal measurement and monitoring systems and their combined impact on the quality of contemporary sustainability benchmarks, developed by SRI analysts and so-called rating and screening agencies. This research originated from the EU-funded research initiative to create a new generation management framework for corporate sustainability and responsibility (CS-R). The aim of it is to develop a coherent set of assessment –, measurement – and monitoring tools. The sustainability benchmark tool should align the interests of corporations implementing CS-R and various organizations supporting SRI, such as fund managers, analysts and screening agencies. This paper show the essentials features of an actual sustainability benchmark which is currently under construction. This approach will have significance impact on the further development of SRI and CS-R practices, as well as support the development of sustainability reporting standards.     

Keeping Ethical Investment Ethical: Regulatory Issues for Investing for Sustainability

Regulation must target the financial sector, which often funds and profits from environmentally unsustainable development. In an era of global financial markets, the financial sector has a crucial impact on the state of the environment. The long-standing movement for ethically and socially responsible investment (SRI) has recently begun to advocate environmental standards for financiers. While this movement is gaining more adherents, it has increasingly justified responsible financing as a path to be prosperous, rather than virtuous. This trend partly owes to how financial institutions view their legal responsibilities. The business case motivations that now predominantly drive SRI are not sufficient to make the financial sector a means to sustainable development. Some modest legal reforms to improve the quality and extent of SRI have yet to make a tangible difference. A more ambitious strategy to promote SRI for environmental sustainability is possible, based on reforming the fiduciary duties of financial institutions. Such duties, tied to concrete performance standards, could make financiers invest in more ethically responsible ways. Other collateral reforms to financial markets, including improved corporate environmental reporting, are required to promote sustainability.     

Institutional investor activism on socially responsible investment: effects and expectations

Concentrated attention on institutional investors' activism has been perceived in the last few decades and further intensified in the post-Enron era. A new area of particular significance that has emerged is institutional investors' growing awareness and practice of socially responsible investment (SRI). This article starts by reviewing the importance of institutional investor activism and the historical implication of SRI. Significantly, various elements that give rise to the growth of SRI in the modern business world are considered in detail. It is recognized that, although current empirical evidence suggests ambiguous effects of SRI, the positive impact of institutional investors' activism on SRI is likely to have been undermined due to the underdevelopment of evaluation systems, and SRI should stand out as a good investment option for its joint financial and societal concerns. Nevertheless, obstructions still exist in the exercise of investor activism and the pursuit of SRI strategy, which implies that, at least in the near future, SRI strategy will remain as a minor investment trend for institutional investors in Anglo-American countries. Additional regulatory methods and awarding schemes are, therefore, expected to motivate institutional investors' activism on SRI, and subsequently to promote global sustainability.