The effectiveness of socially responsible investment: a review

REFERENCES

• AguileraR, WilliamsC, ConleyJ, RuppD. 2006. Corporate governance and social responsibility: a comparative analysis of the UK and the US. Corp Govern Int Rev. 14:147–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ArjalièsD-L. 2010. A social movement perspective on finance: how socially responsible investment mattered. J Bus Ethics. 92:57–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AslaksenI, SynnestvedtT. 2003. Ethical investment and the incentives for corporate environmental protection and social responsibility. Corporate Soc Responsib Environ Manag. 10:212–223.
   Google Scholar
• ASN. 2010. Available from: http://www.asnbank.nl/index.asp?nid = 9375 [Accessed Dec 9 2010].
   Google Scholar
• BeloeS. 2001. A responsible investment?—an overview of the socially responsible investment community. World Futures. 56:409–416.
   Google Scholar
• BengtssonE. 2008. A history of Scandinavian socially responsible investing. J Bus Ethics. 82:969–983.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BrownHS, de JongM, LevyDL. 2009. Building institutions based on information disclosure: lessons from GRI's sustainability reporting. J Clean Prod. 17:571–580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ButtelFH. 2000. Ecological modernization as social theory. Geoforum. 31:57–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capelle-BlancardG, MonjonS. 2012. Trends in the literature on socially responsible investment: looking for the keys under the lamppost. Bus Ethics Eur Rev. 21:239–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Card CharronD. 2007. Stockholders and stakeholders: the battle for control of the corporation. Cato J. 27:1–22.
   Google Scholar
• CarterN, HubyM. 2005. Ecological citizenship and ethical investment. Environ Polit. 14:255–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow SYC. 2010. Cross-country comparison of shareholder engagement for responsible investment [PhD thesis]. University of Melbourne.
   Google Scholar
• ClarkGL, HebbT. 2004. Pension fund corporate engagement: the fifth stage of capitalism. Ind Relat. 59:142–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ClarkGL, SaloJ, HebbT. 2008. Social and environmental shareholder activism in the public spotlight: US corporate annual meetings, campaign strategies, and environmental performance, 2001–04. Environ Plann. 40:1370–1390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ClarkeT. 2004. Theories of corporate governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• CowtonCJ. 1994. The development of ethical investment products. The ACT guide to ethical conflicts in finance. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• DavidP, BloomM, HillmanA. 2007. Investor activism, managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance. Strateg Manage J. 28:91–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DavisJH, SchoormanFD, DonaldsonL. 2004. Toward a stewardship theory of management. In: ClarkeC, editor. Theories of corporate governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• DerwallJ, GünsterN, BauerR, KoedijkK. 2004. The eco-efficiency premium puzzle. In: ERIM report series research in management. Rotterdam: Erasmus Research Institute of Management.
   Google Scholar
• DerwallJ, KoedijkK, ter HorstJ. 2011. A tale of values-driven and profit-seeking social investors. J Bank Financ. 35:2137–2147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DummettK. 2006. Drivers for corporate environmental responsibility (CER). Environ Dev Sustain. 8:375–389.
   Google Scholar
• EisenhardtK. 2004. Agency theory: an assessment and review. In: ClarkeC, editor. Theories of corporate governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Eurosif. 2012. European SRI Study 2012.
   Google Scholar
• FreemanRE. 1984. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
   Google Scholar
• GiffordJ. 2010. Effective shareholder engagement: the factors that contribute to shareholder salience. J Bus Ethics. 92:79–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-BenitoJ, LannelongueG, QueirugaD. 2011. Stakeholders and environmental management systems: a synergistic influence on environmental imbalance. J Clean Prod. 19:1622–1630.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [GRI] Global Reporting Initiative. 2011. [Online]. Available from: https://www.globalreporting.org [Accessed Dec 20 2011].
   Google Scholar
• GuayT, DohJP, SinclairG. 2004. Non-governmental organizations, shareholder activism, and socially responsible investments: ethical, strategic, and governance implications. J Bus Ethics. 52:125–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GuillénMF. 2004. Corporate governance and globalisation: is there convergence across countries? In: ClarkeC, editor. Theories of corporate governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• GuyattD. 2005. Meeting objectives and resisting conventions: a focus on institutional investors and long term responsible investing. Corp Govern. 5:139–150.
   Google Scholar
• HaighM, HazeltonJ. 2004. Financial markets: a tool for social responsibility?J Bus Ethics. 52:59–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HeinkelR, KrausA, ZechnerJ.2001. The effect of green investment on corporate behavior. J Financ Quant Anal.36:431–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HessD.2007. Pubic pensions and the promise of shareholder activism for the next frontier of corporate governance: sustainable economic development.Va. L. & Bus. Rev.2:221–263.
   Google Scholar
• [IIGCC] The Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change. 2011. [Online]. Available from: http://www.iigcc.org [Accessed Dec 20 2011].
   Google Scholar
• JuravleC, LewisA. 2008. Identifying impediments to SRI in Europe: a review of the practitioner and academic literature. Bus Ethics Eur Rev. 17:285–310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JuravleC, LewisA. 2009. The role of championship in the mainstreaming of sustainable investment (SI): what can we learn from SI pioneers in the United Kingdom?Organ Environ. 22:75–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpoff JM. 2001. The impact of shareholder activism on target companies: a survey of empirical findings. Corporate Governance i praksis: Internasjonalt Seminar.
   Google Scholar
• LazonickW, O'sullivanM. 2004. Maximizing shareholder value: a new Ideology for corporate governance. In: ClarkeC, editor. Theories of corporate governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• LiuX, AnbumozhiV. 2009. Determinant factors of corporate environmental information disclosure: an empirical study of Chinese listed companies. J Clean Prod. 17:593–600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louche C. 2004. Ethical investment: processes and mechanisms of institutionalisation in the Netherlands, 1990–2002 [PhD thesis]. Erasmus University.
   Google Scholar
• MagnessV. 2008. Who are the stakeholders now? An empirical examination of the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood theory of stakeholder salience. J Bus Ethics. 82:177–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MarinettoM. 1999. The historical development of business philanthropy: social responsibility in the new corporate economy. Bus Hist. 41:1–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MichelsonG, WailesN, van der LaanS, FrostG. 2004. Ethical investment processes and outcomes. J Bus Ethics. 52:1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MolA. 1995. The refinement of production. Ecological modernization theory and the chemical industry. Utrecht: International Books.
   Google Scholar
• MolAPJ, SpaargarenG. 1993. Environment, modernity and the risk-society: the apocalyptic horizon of environmental reform. Int Sociol. 8:431–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MonksR, MillerA, CookJ. 2004. Shareholder activism on environmental issues: a study of proposals at large US corporations (2000–2003). Nat Resour Forum. 28:317–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NeubaumDO, ZahraSA. 2006. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: the moderating effects of investment horizon, activism and coordination. J Manage. 32:108–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NRC. 2010. BP boort tweede put ter bestrijding olielek [Online]. NRC. Available from: http://www.nrc.nl/economie/article2538010.ece/BP_boort_tweede_put_ter_bestrijding_olielek/ [Accessed Jan 21 2010].
   Google Scholar
• O'RourkeA. 2003a. The message and methods of ethical investment. J Clean Prod. 11:683–693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'RourkeA. 2003b. A new politics of engagement: shareholder activism for corporate social responsibility. Bus Strat Environ. 12:227–239.
   Google Scholar
• PasewarkWR, RileyME. 2010. It's a matter of principle: the role of personal values in investment decisions. J Bus Ethics. 93:237–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PearceB, RocheP, ChaterN, PIRC. 2002. Sustainability pays. London: Co-operative Insurance Society.
   Google Scholar
• RehbeinK. 2004. Understanding shareholder activism: which corporations are targeted?Bus Soc. 43:239–267.
   Google Scholar
• RenneboogL, Ter HorstJ, ZhangC. 2008. Socially responsible investments: institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. J Bank Financ. 32:1723–1742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RhodesM, van ApeldoornB. 2004. Capital unbound? The transformation of European corporate governance. In: ThomasC, editor. Theories of corporate governance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• SchalteggerS, FiggeF. 2000. Environmental shareholder value: economic success with corporate environmental management. Eco-Manag Audit. 7:29–42.
   Google Scholar
• SchepersJH, SethiSP. 2003. Do socially responsible funds actually deliver what they promise? Bridging the gap between the promise and performance of socially responsible funds. Bus Soc Rev. 108:11–32.
   Google Scholar
• SIF. 2010. Report on socially responsible investing trends in the United States. Social investments forum.
   Google Scholar
• SjöströmE. 2008. Shareholder activism for corporate social responsibility: what do we know?Sustain Dev. 16:141–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SmithP. 1996. Shareholder activism by institutional investors: evidence from CalPERS. J Financ. 51:227–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SpaargarenG, MolAPJ. 1992. Sociology, environment and modernity: ecological modernization as a theory of social change. Soc Natur Resour. 5:323–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SparkesR. 2001. Ethical investment: whose ethics, which investment?Bus Ethics Eur Rev. 10:194–205.
   Google Scholar
• SparkesR. 2002. Socially responsible investment. Sussex: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• SparkesR, CowtonCJ. 2004. The maturing of socially responsible investment: a review of the developing link with corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics. 52:45–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ThompsonTA, DavisGF. 1997. The politics of corporate control and the future of shareholder activism in the United States. Corp Govern Int Rev. 5:152–159.
   Google Scholar
• TkacP. 2006. One proxy at a time: pursuing social change through shareholder proposals, economic review, third quarter 2006, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. In: Economic Review. Atlanta: Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
   Google Scholar
• UNEP. 2009. Fiduciary responsibility. Genève: UNEP Finance Initiative.
   Google Scholar
• UNPRI. 2011. Principles for responsible investment [Online]. Available from: http://www.unpri.org/ [Accessed Dec 20 2011].
   Google Scholar
• van HuijsteeM, GlasbergenP. 2008. The practice of stakeholder dialogue between multinationals and NGOs. Corporate Soc Responsib Environ Manag. 15:298–310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VandekerckhoveW, LeysJ, van BraeckelD. 2007. That's not what happened and it's not my fault anyway! An exploration of management attitudes towards SRI-shareholder engagement. Bus Ethics Eur Rev. 16:403–418.
   Google Scholar
• VBDO. 2011. Benchmark responsible investment by pension funds in the Netherlands 2011. Culemborg: VBDO.
   Google Scholar
• VogelD. 2006. The market for virtue. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• WalesA. 2006. Exerting influence: engagement or best-in-class? In: SullivanR, MackenzieC, editors. Responsible investment. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• WaygoodS, WehrmeyerW. 2003. A critical assessment of how non-governmental organizations use the capital markets to achieve their aims: a UK study. Bus Strat Environ. 12:372–385.
   Google Scholar
• WenS. 2009. Institutional investor activism on socially responsible investment: effects and expectations. Bus Ethics Eur Rev. 18:308–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar