Abstract

This paper investigates the motives, behavior, and characteristics shaping mutual fund managers’ willingness to incorporate Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) issues into investment decision making. Using survey evidence from fund managers from five different countries, we demonstrate that this predisposition is the stronger, the shorter their average forecasting horizon and the higher their level of reliance on business risk in portfolio management is. We also find that the propensity to incorporate ESG factors is positively related to an increasing level of risk aversion, an increasing importance of salary change and senior management approval/disapproval as motivating factors as well as length of professional experience in current fund and increasing significance of assessment by superiors in remuneration. Overall, our evidence suggests that ESG diligence among fund managers serves mainly as a method for mitigating risk and is typically motivated by herding; it is much less important as a tool for additional value creation. The prevalent use of ESG criteria in mitigating risk is in contrast with traditional approach, but it is in line with behavioral finance theory. Additionally, our results also show a strong difference in the length of the forecasting horizon between continental European and Anglo-Saxon fund managers.

Highlights

  • Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) investments have seen growing significance in the academic, business and political domains

  • We want to identify the key drivers of ESG investment among fund managers and answer the following questions: Is the predisposition to incorporate ESG issues in investment decision making influenced more by “objective” or “subjective” manager characteristics? Is the strength of the above tendency motivated more by risk aversion, herding or a desire to create additional value?

  • This paper presents empirical evidence from a survey of bank-affiliated mutual fund managers in five different countries to address the following questions: (1) Is the predisposition to incorporate ESG issues in investment decision making influenced more by “objective” or “subjective” manager characteristics? (2) Is the strength of the above tendency motivated more by risk aversion, a tendency to herd or a desire to create additional value?

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) investments have seen growing significance in the academic, business and political domains. The origin of the ESG notion is grounded in the field of Socially Responsible Investment (SRI), which are investment strategies that embrace economic aspects and environmental, social, and governance issues [1]. The ESG concept is called the three pillars of sustainability [2] and has many labels, such as Ethical, Green, Impact, Mission, Responsible, Socially Responsible, Sustainable and Values, which embrace strategies (including environmental, social and corporate governance criteria) to generate long-term competitive financial returns and positive societal impact [3]. The total amount of US-domiciled assets under management using strategies that actively incorporate social, environmental, and governmental issues in the investment decisions increased from $3.74 trillion at the beginning of 2012 to $6.57 trillion at the beginning of 2014 (an increase of 76 percent in two years). In Europe, they comprise approximately 41% (€7 trillion) of total professionally managed assets [1]

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call