Financial performance of socially responsible investments: international evidence from alternative perspectives
- Autores: Guillermo Badía Fraile
- Directores de la Tesis: Lourdes Torres Pradas (dir. tes.), Luis Ferruz Agudo (dir. tes.)
- Lectura: En la Universidad de Zaragoza ( España ) en 2019
- Idioma: inglés
- Tribunal Calificador de la Tesis: Vicente Pina Martínez (presid.), Manuel José Rocha Armada (secret.), Fernando Gómez-Bezares Pascual (voc.)
- Programa de doctorado: Programa de Doctorado en Contabilidad y Finanzas por la Universidad de Zaragoza
- Materias:
- Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
- Resumen
The main objective of this Doctoral Thesis is to evaluate the financial performance of socially responsible investments (SRI).
In recent decades, investment management has undergone a progressive adaption process in which conventional financial objectives are increasingly being complemented by non-financial attributes such as environment, social and governance (ESG) criteria. This trend reflects an increasing awareness of environmental, social, and ethical issues that is strongly influencing the purchase decisions of investors (Mollet and Ziegler, 2014). SRI appeals to investors who wish to go beyond the financial utility of their investments and also derive non-financial utility from holding securities that reflect their social values (Auer, 2016; Auer and Schuhmacher, 2016). Additionally, ESG issues are becoming an important part of investors’ decision-making process by helping them to identify firms’ long-term opportunities and risks. According to the 2016 Global Sustainable Investment Review, in 2016 there were $22.89 trillion of assets being professionally managed under responsible investment strategies globally, representing an increase of 25% since 2014. In 2016, 53% of managers in Europe used responsible investment strategies, this proportion being 22% in the US and 51% in Australia/New Zealand. This tendency has been ratified recently for the last two years. US asset managers considered ESG criteria across $11.6 trillion in assets, up 44 percent from $8.1 trillion in 2016 (USSIF, 2018). The EUROSIF (2018) report discloses sustained growth for most sustainable and responsible investment strategies. The past two years (2016-2018) show manifest signs of SRI becoming integral to European fund management.
The basic idea of SRI is to apply a set of screens to the available investment universe, in order to select or exclude assets based on ESG criteria (Auer, 2016). In practice, there is a range of SRI strategies, such as integration, positive/best-in-class screening, ethical/negative screening, governance and engagement, etc. All of these aim to drive funds towards socially responsible firms with constructive sustainable projects and policies. From an investors’ perspective, the critical issue is whether socially responsible stock selection leads to gains or losses in terms of financial performance. On the firms’ side, the question is whether spending resources on corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices will render benefits for the firm and increase its value. If doing good is indeed linked to doing well, firms may be led to behave in a more sustainable way. A positive relationship between social and financial performance would even legitimize CSR on economic grounds (Margolis et al. 2009).
The growth of SRI and its consequences has stimulated empirical studies assessing financial behaviours. An important stream of the literature has focused on the financial performance of SRI mutual funds. In general, these studies find that there are no significant differences between the performance of SRI mutual funds and conventional funds (Leite et al. 2018). However, assessing the financial impact of SRI by evaluating the performance of actively managed SRI mutual funds has some shortcomings. For instance, as Brammer et al. (2006), and Kempf and Osthoff (2007) point out, there are confounding effects - such as fund manager skills and management fees - that may make it difficult to identify the performance that is due to the social characteristics of the underlying holdings. Furthermore, the evidence of Utz and Wimmer (2014), Humphrey et al. (2016), and Statman and Glushkov (2016) suggests that the ‘socially responsible’ label may be more akin to a marketing strategy, thus raising doubts among investors that an SRI fund is really socially responsible. As a consequence, investors may find it difficult to know the extent to which an SRI fund is really considering social criteria in its selection process. To overcome the limitations associated to studies on actively managed SRI mutual funds, an alternative approach to evaluate the financial effects of SRI involves evaluating the performance of synthetic portfolios formed on assets’ social characteristics. In this Doctoral Thesis, we follow this approach to evaluating socially responsible investments.
This Doctoral Thesis is organized in two sections. The first includes chapters 1 and 2 in which we evaluate some methodological aspects related to a financial performance measure which is used to assess the financial performance of SRI in Section two. The second Section includes Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 6 in which we evaluate the financial performance of SRI from different perspectives.
First Section.
In Chapter 1 we assess the usefulness of a sector investment strategy based on the three-factor Fama and French (1992) model. We develop an investment process that is, as far as we know, new by including stocks that are undervalued with respect to their sector indices in a portfolio. We take as the relevant market factor the sector index to which firms belong. We base the strategy on the difficulty entailed in effectively choosing the appropriate market portfolio (Roll, 1977).Our main objective in this chapter is to test whether it is possible to consistently achieve extra-financial returns by means of a sector strategy using the Fama and French model (1992) as a basis for decision-making.
In Chapter 2 we evaluate whether the Fama and French (1992) model may be adapted to become a more versatile and flexible tool, capable of incorporating variations of firms characteristics in a more dynamic form. We pay attention to the procedure that Fama and French (1992) follow to form the risk factors. They take annual data, and the value and size portfolios are assessed once a year, maintaining invariability during the whole period. However, we note that firms’ characteristics can change during any given 12-month period. We argue that, over time, firms’ valuation may change as a result of variations in its market price, size or book price, and we are aware that the Fama and French (1992) model does not accurately reflect these dynamics. Our main objective in this chapter is to test the effectiveness of the model by taking month-to-month data and reforming the value and size portfolios at the end of each month, aiming to develop a more dynamic and adaptable tool.
Second Section.
In Chapter 3 we evaluate the financial performance of portfolios that can be formed by socially conscious retail investors compared to conventional investments. We note that most previous studies evaluating the financial performance of SRI are conducted from the perspective of institutional investors’ investment decisions and not from the perspective of retail investors who wish to hold SRI portfolios. Nonetheless, there has been a considerable increase in the popularity of SRI among retail investors (Benijts, 2010). Nilsson (2015) highlights that retail investors choose to devote at least part of their funds to investments that include some kind of social or environmental concerns, thereby having become an important factor in shaping SRI. According to the 2016 Global Sustainable Investment Review, although the SRI market in most of the regions is dominated by professional institutional investors, retail investors’ interest in SRI is gaining relevance. Indeed, the relative proportion of retail SRI investments in Canada, Europe and the United States increased from 13 percent in 2014 to 26 percent at the start of 2016 (GSIA, 2016). Furthermore, over one third of SRI assets in the United States come from retail investors. The objective of this chapter is to assess the performance of portfolios that can be formed by socially responsible retail investors compared to conventional investments. We use several financial performance measures. Among others, that developed in chapter 2 of this Doctoral Thesis. As a relevant point to retail investors, we use stocks listed on a source freely available to the public that any retail investor may access. Additionally, we analyse the impact of different market states on the financial performance of SRI portfolios. Recent research shows that the performance of SRI equity funds (Nofsinger and Varma, 2014; Becchetti et al., 2015, Leite and Cortez, 2015), SRI fixed-income funds (Henke, 2016), and socially responsible stocks (Brzeszczyński and McIntosh, 2014; Carvalho and Areal, 2016) is sensitive to different market states (e.g., expansion and recession periods).
In Chapter 4 we evaluate the financial performance of international stock portfolios based on CSR criteria. We note that previous studies that address the performance of socially screened synthetic portfolios suffer from some limitations and inconsistencies, namely, (1) the majority of prior evidence only refers to the US and European stock markets; (2) with the exception of Badía et al. (2017), previous studies do not compare the performance of SRI portfolios of different regions worldwide; (3) there are studies that measure CSR through one of its individual dimension only, whereas others consider an aggregate construct of CSR; (4) most studies do not evaluate the influence of specific industries on the financial performance of SRI stock portfolios; (5) in several studies assessing European firms, undersized samples are used; (6) up-to-date evidence is lacking; and (7) some researchers who split sample periods merely into sub-periods to evaluate a ‘time effect’, i.e., whether SRI returns were better in earlier years and yet declined in more recent periods, may have neglected an important effect, specifically, the impact of different market states. Our main objective in this chapter is to evaluate the financial performance of international stock portfolios based on CSR criteria aiming to overcome previous limitations in the evaluation of SRI stock portfolio performance. We form portfolios of stocks with high and low sustainability scores and investigate the performance of such portfolios using multi-factor models. In this chapter, we extend the analysis on the impact of including socially responsible screens on investment portfolios performance to additional geographical areas (North America, Europe, Japan, and Asia Pacific); we compare the financial performance of SRI portfolios of these regions to each other; we form portfolios based on an aggregate measure of CSR as well as on three of its specific ESG dimensions; we evaluate the influence of specific industries on the financial performance of SRI stock portfolios; and finally, we assess the financial performance of SRI stock portfolios over different market states: bear, bull and mixed market periods.
In Chapter 5 we evaluate the financial performance of government bond portfolios formed according to ESG criteria. We note that although the concept of SRI was originally related to stock selection, the proportion of portfolio investors applying SRI criteria to bonds has grown significantly in recent years. According to the European Sustainable Investment Forum (EUROSIF, 2016), equities represented over 30% of SRI assets in December 2015, a significant decrease from the previous year’s 50%. Meanwhile, there was a strong increase in bonds from the 40% registered in December 2013 to 64%. Both corporate bonds and government bonds underwent a remarkable growth. The former rose from 21.3% to 51.17% of the bond allocation, while the latter increased from 16.6% to 41.26%.In this regard, the financial implications of ESG screening processes on corporate bonds may be closely related to stock selections since corporate bonds are associated with firms. Indeed, previous studies (e.g., Derwall and Koedijk, 2009; Leite and Cortez, 2016) which evaluate the financial performance of mutual funds that invest in socially responsible fixed-income stocks, find that the average SRI bond funds performed similarly to conventional funds. These results are in line with most empirical studies about the performance of SRI funds, which show that they tend to have a similar performance to their conventional peers (Revelly and Viviani, 2015). However, ESG screening processes on government bonds, since they are not related to firms, can help gain an in-depth understanding of SRI consequences for alternative assets. Despite the SRI government bond market growth and the development of country ratings based on ESG factors in recent years, the link between government bond returns and country performance in terms of ESG concerns has been overlooked. In fact, to the best of our knowledge, no previous research has evaluated the financial performance of responsible government bond investments. The main objective of this chapter is to fill this gap. We assess the financial performance of government bond portfolios formed according to ESG criteria. We thus open a discussion on the financial performance of SRI for an alternative asset to firms.In contrast to previous studies, which apply firm sustainability ratings, we use sustainability ratings related to countries.
In Chapter 6 we ascertain a less assessed aspect in CSR: distinguishing between investments in material versus immaterial sustainability issues. We note that only firms focused on material sustainability issues associated with their main operations should achieve a competitive advantage and obtain a higher social and financial performance. CSR activities and innovations should be performed on material aspects since otherwise a positive effect on financial performance is not expected. Indeed, investments on immaterial issues may involve additional corporate costs without a social and financial performance associated return. Focusing on material issues is important for firms since they do investments in social aspects that truly affect their operations. Despite issues as prod¬uct safety, climate change, and resource intensity have impacts across several industries, as Hertz et al. (2016) note, those effects often vary to a great extent from one industry to the next. Risks may be everywhere, although they are indeed also particular. As a consequence, firms of specific industries have their particular sustainability profiles. Thus, a firm investing and reporting on material sustainability issues is likely achieved positive financial performance. Meanwhile, a firm investing on material but also on immaterial sustainability issues is likely not achieved superior financial performance. In this chapter, the main objective is to assess the financial performance of stock portfolios formed according to material and immaterial CSR issues. Khan et al. (2016) show that US firms with strong performance on material aspects outperform firms with poor performance on material topics. Our dataset includes companies from US and Europe. We thus extend the previous evidence of Khan et al. (2016) to European firms. Evaluating firms from US and Europe is particularly interesting given the heterogeneity in the patterns of development of SRI across countries (Neher and Hebb, 2015). Furthermore, we use firm’ scores from an original dataset that integrates the SASB Materiality Map standards which, to our knowledge, has not been used before.
