Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Does an Asset Owner’s Institutional Setting Influence Its Decision to Sign the Principles for Responsible Investment?Andreas G. F. Hoepner, Arleta A. A. Majoch & Xiao Y. Zhou - 2019 - Journal of Business Ethics 168 (2):389-414.
    From a simple idea to unite asset owners in their quest for responsible investment at its launch in April 2006, the United Nations supported Principles for Responsible Investment have grown in just one decade into an initiative with more than 1500 fee-paying signatories. Jointly, the PRI’s signatories hold assets worth more than $80 trillion, making it one of the more prevalent not-for-profit organizations worldwide. Furthermore, the PRI’s ambitious mission to transform the financial system at large into a more sustainable one (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Institutional investors as stewards of the corporation: Exploring the challenges to the monitoring hypothesis.Mila R. Ivanova - 2017 - Business Ethics: A European Review 26 (2):175-188.
    The study explores the challenges UK-based institutional investors face when trying to monitor investee companies and influence their social, environmental, and governance practices. Consistent with previous research, I find that misalignment of interests within the investment chain and dispersed ownership are factors which inhibit investor activism. However, other underexplored challenges include lack of investee company transparency and investor experience in activism, as well as low client demand for engagement and internal conflicts of interest. The results contribute to the literature on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Three questions about engagement and exclusion in responsible investment.Ivar Kolstad - 2015 - Business Ethics: A European Review 25 (1):45-58.
    There is a move towards more use of engagement strategies in responsible investment. This change in strategies is motivated by a number of claims about the effectiveness of engagement versus exclusion of companies from the investment universe. This paper examines the basis for three central claims: That engagement, in contrast to exclusion, does not reduce the investment universe; That exclusion reduces an investor's influence on a company; and That engagement with exclusion is necessarily a more effective means of influencing companies (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations