***Apologies for cross-postings***

This is a reminder of the upcoming deadline for a special issue in Business & Society

Regards, Timo

Call for Papers

Special Issue

"Sustainable Development and Financial Markets"

in Business & Society

Guest Editors:

Timo Busch, Department of Management, Economics, and Technology, ETH Zurich, Switzerland, tobusch@ethz.ch

Rob Bauer, Maastricht School of Business and Economics, and European Centre for Corporate Engagement (ECCE), Maastricht, The Netherlands, r.bauer@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Marc Orlitzky, The Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, USA, moo3@psu.edu

Parallel Announcement 

"Sustainable Development and Financial Markets
– Connections, Opportunities, and Theories"

Sub-theme for the 29th EGOS Colloquium 2013

July 4–6, 2013, HEC Montréal, Montréal / Canada

The Convenors of this sub-theme will be the Guest Editors

We strongly would like to encourage authors, who submit a paper to the Business & Society special issue, to also attend the EGOS Colloquium. This will be an excellent opportunity to present revised versions of the paper and obtain further feedback. However, attending the EGOS Colloquium is not a requirement for submitting manuscripts to the Business & Society special issue and vice versa.

Background

To what extent and how can market processes and institutions foster, encourage, or facilitate business environmental responsibility? This question is a vigorously debated issue with a long history, particularly given the increasing influence of, and research on, sustainable investment. Sustainable investment practices sometimes are called social, ethical, responsible, or socially responsible investing (Eurosif, 2010). In this Call for Papers, sustainable investment is used as generic term to describe investment strategies centered on long-term environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) criteria; thus seeking to contribute to sustainable development by integrating investors' financial objectives with restrictions on ecological and social issues or concerns (Eurosif, 2011; Hoffmann, Scherhorn & Busch, 2004; Juravle & Lewis, 2009; WEF, 2011). The most well-known and widely used definition of sustainable development is "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (WCED, 1987).

In recent years, sustainable investment practices have increasingly gained importance in capital markets (e.g., Bauer, Koedijk, & Otten, 2005; Galema, Plantinga, & Scholtens, 2008). In fact, stock market data show that sustainable investments have reached US$10.6 trillion globally; for European investments alone, there was an increase from US$3.8 trillion in 2007 to US$7 trillion at the end of 2009, which corresponds to a compound annual growth rate of 36 percent (Eurosif, 2010).[i]  In addition, according to some industry surveys (e.g., Allianz, 2010), the market is expected to grow further. The signatories of the Principles for Responsible Investment increased from 557 organizations, worth US$18.5 trillion, in 2009 to over 900, worth US$30 trillion, in 2011 (PRI, 2010, 2011). Empirical studies suggest that sustainable investments may either outperform the market (e.g., Derwall, Guenster, Bauer, & Koedijk, 2005), underperform the market (e.g., Chong, Her, & Phillips, 2006), or make no difference in terms of their risk-adjusted financial returns (e.g., Bauer, Derwall, & Otten, 2007). Epistemological concerns with previous research (see, e.g., Orlitzky, 2011; Vogel, 2005) notwithstanding, the results indicate that, at a minimum, there seems to be no clear indication for a negative relationship between share price performance and corporate environmental or social performance (Kurtz, 1997; Kurtz, 2008; Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003). Presumably, these trends in financial markets and results of empirical studies lead to a greater focus on sustainable development in business practices.

In reality, however, we can observe a somewhat paradoxical situation. On the one hand, many reasons can be identified as to why equity market participants have shown increasing interest in issues of ecological sustainability. In cases where the biophysical environment imposes new constraints and offers new opportunities for businesses, firms must respond to sustainability challenges effectively (Hart & Milstein, 1999; Russo & Fouts, 1997; Shrivastava, 1995). One of the most prominent examples of the business sphere being impacted by the biophysical environment is the limited availability of crude oil coupled with steadily increasing energy demand. This presents both a clear constraint on all carbon-dependent industries and a unique opportunity for the entire renewable energy sector. Furthermore, in some areas, policy makers have started to put pressure on business to internalize negative externalities through environmental regulations. An example of this is the European emissions trading scheme. Such changing conditions in the business landscape affect business risk, profitability, and ultimately competitive advantage (e.g., Busch & Hoffmann, 2011; Orlitzky, 2005; Orlitzky & Swanson, 2008; Porter & Kramer, 2006; Porter & van der Linde, 1995). As such, sustainability has become a central issue in many industries and firms, and it appears plausible that ESG criteria are increasingly integrated into investment decisions (Mercer, 2009; Mercer & UNEP FI, 2007).

On the other hand, when considering ecological reality, current global production and consumption patterns seem to have become even more unsustainable, according to several analyses and projections. For example, global CO₂ emissions increased by 4.4 percent between 2008 and 2010 (from 29.3 to 30.6 gigatons), while at the same time global GDP increased by only 3.9 percent (from US$71.7 trillion to US$74.4 trillion).[ii]  This implies that carbon intensity (defined as CO₂ emissions / GDP) increased by .5 percent in the last three years, a trend that raises fundamental questions about the ecological sustainability of current business practice. This dangerous trend is also reflected by the ecological footprint of human activities. In 2007, humanity used the equivalent of 1.5 planets to support its activities; by 2030 humanity is projected to require the capacity of two Earths (WWF, Zoological Society of London & Global Footprint Network, 2010). Given the current population growth, the world's population is projected to grow to about 9.3 billion by 2050 (in 2011, it reached the inglorious milestone of seven billion) – despite an assumed declining growth rate.[iii] In the words of Jeffrey D. Sachs, director of Columbia University's Earth Institute, "This is a crowded planet. This is trouble, frankly."[iv]

As such, many examples can be found which illustrate that, in spite of increasing concerns about environmental and related social and governance issues, there has not been a significant global shift towards greater sustainability. This Special Issue will address this paradoxical situation related to the market demand for and "supply" of sustainable development. Contributions to the Special Issue may cover (but are not limited to) the following research questions:

·         What are the contemporary sustainable investment practices, and how effective are they in terms of their contribution to sustainable development? How are these sustainable investing practices affected by other events and upheavals in financial markets, such as the 2008/2009 financial crisis or the current Euro crisis?

·         How can different (economic, sociological, psychological, etc.) theories of equity market participants' decision making, business cycles, and aggregate market dynamics inform the debate on sustainable development and financial markets?

·         How do individual market participants react to sustainable investment products? Do the characteristics of these "sustainable" investors differ from those of regular investors?

·         Is the filing of shareholder proposals on environmental and social issues an effective mechanism for investors? And, if so, which investors are most likely to have an impact?

·         How do ESG signals affect financial markets? What is the impact of institutional entrepreneurs on the viability of ESG investing?

·         How, if at all, do sustainability-oriented institutional logics influence investor choices and corporate finance decisions? In general, what is the impact of sustainable investing?

·         To what extent do the trends in sustainable investing call for changes in corporate governance structures?

·         What are effective (or ineffective) corporate strategies to attract capital from sustainability-oriented investors? How can we use theory to derive best practices for business-particularly environmental entrepreneurs?

·         What are some firm-internal preconditions for more successful business positioning vis-à-vis with sustainability-oriented investors?

·         What is the role of sustainability-related investment recommendations from security analysts and rating agencies for firms and investors (see, e.g., Ioannou & Serafeim, 2010)?

·         What theoretical perspectives or typologies can be identified for different investment styles, and what do they imply for efforts seeking to foster sustainable business practices? For example, what is the role of "impact investments"? This investment style critically reflects on the outcomes (e.g., the environmental improvement) of an investment strategy before an investment in an asset or construction of a portfolio occurs (Eurosif, 2010).

·         What are individual and/or institutional investors' expectations about sustainable development, and how do these expectations affect their investor behaviors? To which extent do (should) investors reflect on sustainability trends in investment decisions from a real-options point of view (e.g., Busch & Hoffmann, 2009)?

·         What are the myths and realities of sustainable investing? What are the validity challenges inherent in ESG data (Chatterji, Levine & Toffel, 2009; Entine, 2003; Waddock, 2003)? In other words, do ESG criteria and data really measure what they purport to measure?

·         How can ESG criteria best be applied to other asset classes beyond publicly traded securities (e.g., corporate bonds), and how may possible barriers be overcome?

Process and timeline for the Business & Society call for papers

·         Deadline for submissions call for papers for the Special Issue "Sustainable Development and Financial Markets": October 15^th, 2012

·         Manuscripts must be submitted electronically via email to Timo Busch: tobusch@ethz.ch  

·         The submission should consist of two separate Word documents: (i) a manuscript without title page and without author identification information of any kind, containing an abstract (about 100-150 words) and keywords (3 – 5); (ii) a title page with full author contact information

·         Further information regarding the formatting of Business & Society can be found on the web page (do not submit the paper through the online submission system):
http://www.uk.sagepub.com/journalsProdDesc.nav?ct_p=manuscriptSubmission&prodId=Journal200878&crossRegion=eur

Process and timeline for the EGOS Colloquium 2013

·         Deadline for the submission of short papers for the EGOS Colloquium in Montreal will be in January 14^th, 2013.

·         Further information can be obtained through http://www.egosnet.org

References

BAS formatting for references generally follows APA standards. Book and journal titles are italicized, together with journal volume numbers. Book, chapter, and journal article titles are lower case as shown below.

Allianz. (2010). Doing good by investing well? Pension funds and socially responsible investment: Results of an expert survey. Munich, Germany (www.allianzglobalinvestors.com).

Bauer, R., Derwall, J., & Otten, R. (2007). The ethical mutual fund performance debate: New evidence from Canada. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 111-124.

Bauer, R., Koedijk, K., & Otten, R. (2005). International evidence on ethical mutual fund performance and investment style. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29(7), 1751-1767.

Busch, T., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2009). Ecology-driven real options: an investment framework for incorporating uncertainties in the context of the natural environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(2), 295-310.

Busch, T., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2011). How hot is your bottom-line? Linking carbon and financial performance. Business & Society, 50(2), 233-265.

Chatterji, A. K., Levine, D. I., & Toffel, M. W. (2009). How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(1), 125-169.

Chong, J., Her, M., & Phillips, G. M. (2006). To sin or not to sin? Now that's the question. Journal of Asset Management, 6(6), 406-417.

Derwall, J., Guenster, N., Bauer, R., & Koedijk, K. (2005). The eco-efficiency premium puzzle. Financial Analysts Journal, 61(2), 51-63.

Entine, J. (2003). The myth of social investing - A critique of its practice and consequences for corporate social performance research. Organization & Environment, 16(3), 352-368.

Eurosif. (2010). European SRI study 2010. Paris, France: European Sustainable Investment Forum.

Eurosif. (2011). Corporate pension funds & sustainable investment study. Paris, France: European Sustainable Investment Forum.

Galema, R., Plantinga, A., & Scholtens, B. (2008). The stocks at stake: Return and risk in socially responsible investment. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(12), 2646-2654.

Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M. B. (1999). Global sustainability and the creative destruction of industries. Sloan Management Review, 41(1), 23-33.

Hoffmann, J., Scherhorn, G., & Busch, T. (2004). Darmstadt definition of sustainable investments. Wuppertal, Germany: Corporate Responsibility Interface Center / Wuppertal Institute.

Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2010). The impact of corporate social responsibility on investment recommendations. Working Paper 11-017. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.

Juravle, C., & Lewis, A. (2009). The role of championship in the mainstreaming of sustainable investment (SI) - What can we learn from SI pioneers in the United Kingdom? Organization & Environment, 22(1), 75-98.

Kurtz, L. (1997). No effect, or no net effect? Studies on socially responsible investing. Journal of Investing, 6(4), 37-49.

Kurtz, L. (2008). Socially responsible investment and shareholder activism. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 249-280). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Mercer. (2009). Shedding light on responsible investment: Approaches, return and impacts. London, UK: Mercer LLC.

Mercer, & UNEP FI. (2007). Demystifying responsible investment performance. Geneva, Switzerland: Mercer, UNEP Finance Initiative.

Orlitzky, M. (2005). Payoffs to social and environmental performance. Journal of Investing, 14(3), 48-51.

Orlitzky, M. (2011). Institutional logics in the study of organizations: The social construction of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(3), 409-444.

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441.

Orlitzky, M., & Swanson, D. L. (2008). Toward integrative corporate citizenship: Research advances in corporate social performance. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.

Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 120-134.

PRI. (2010). Annual report of the PRI initiative 2010. London, UK: Principles for Responsible Investment

PRI. (2011). Annual report of the PRI initiative 2011. London, UK: Principles for Responsible Investment

Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534-559.

Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936-960.

Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Waddock, S. (2003). Myths and realities of social investing. Organization & Environment, 16(3), 369-380.

WCED. (1987). Our common future. Oxford, UK: World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press.

WEF. (2011). Accelerating the transition towards sustainable investing - strategic options for investors, corporations and other key stakeholders. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.

WWF, Zoological Society of London, & Global Footprint Network. (2010). Living planet report 2010 - biodiversity, biocapacity and development. Gland, London, Oakland: Worldwide Fund For Nature.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Timo Busch

Dept. of Management, Technology, and Economics

ETH Zurich

Weinbergstrasse 56/58, WEV J 422
8092 Zurich, Switzerland

Phone: +41 44 632 0553

Secr.:   +41 44 632 0541

Mobile: +41 78 670 8289

Fax:     +41 44 632 1045

Email:  tobusch@ethz.ch 

Web:   www.sustec.ethz.ch