Skip to main content
Log in

Why Wine is not Glue? The Unresolved Problem of Negative Screening in Socially Responsible Investing

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of socially responsible investing (SRI) is to: (1) allow investors to reflect their personal values and ethics in their choices, and (2) encourage companies to improve their ethical, social, and environmental performance. In order to achieve these ends, the means SRI fund managers employ include the use of negative screening, or the exclusion of companies involved in “sinful” industries. We argue that there are problems with this methodology, both at a theoretical and at a practical level. As a consequence, current SRI offerings cannot accurately reflect the values and ethical beliefs they propose to represent. Moreover, the use of a␣priori criteria is potentially misleading, as we show by discussing examples of glue and wine making. Applying this flawed approach SRI funds fail to influence the direction of the firms they deem most in need of re-directing. Rather than engaging in the simple a␣priori assumption that some industries are “saints” while others are “sinners” (Freeman, 2007) we suggest a new framework upon which the SRI screening methodology could be grounded. Embracing the philosophical tradition of American pragmatism, we suggest that SRI methodology could be improved by engaging in an analysis based on (1) the actual impacts of the company’s products and services, (2) the company’s relationships with its specific, real stakeholders, and (3) the contingent environment (social, economic, political, legal, and cultural) in which the business operates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Dewey, J. (1927), The Public and Its Problems. Ohio University Press, Ohio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T, P. Werhane and M. Cording. 2002. Ethical Issues in Business. A Philosophical Approach, 7th edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E. R.: 2007. ‹Building an Ethical America’, Society for Business Ethics Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA

  • Gay, G. R. and J. A. Klaassen: 2005, ‹Retirement Investment, Fiduciary Obligations, and Socially Responsible Investing’, Journal of Deferred Compensation10(4) (summer 2005): 34–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawken, P.: 2004. Socially Responsible Investing: How the SRI Industry has Failed to Respond to People Who Want to Invest with Conscience and What can be Done to Change It (Natural Capital Institute)

  • Laufer, W. S. 2003. Social screening of investments: An introduction. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3): 163–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McVea, J. F. and R. E. Freeman: 2005, ‹A Names-and-Faces Approach to Stakeholder Management’, Journal of Management Inquiry 14(1), 57–69

    Google Scholar 

  • PaxWorld: 2007, http://www.paxworld.com/about/pax-history/

  • Putnam, H. 2004. The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajotte, P. 1992. Belgian Ale. Boulder, CO: Brewers Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R.: 1991, Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers, Vol. 1 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)

  • Schepers, D. H. and S. P. Sethi: 2003, ‹Do Socially Responsible Investing Funds Actually Deliver What They Promise?’, Business and Society Review 108(1), 11–32

  • Schwartz, M. S. 2003. The “ethics” of ethical investing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3): 195–00.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Social Investment Forum: 2004. Talking Points: Paul Hawken Article on Socially Responsible Investing (Social Investment Forum)

  • Social Investment Forum: 2007. Socially Responsible Investing Facts

  • Social Investment Forum Industry Research Program: 2006. 2005 Report on Socially Responsible Investing Trends in the United States: 10-Year Review

  • Willis, A. 2003. The role of the global reporting initiative’s sustainability reporting guidelines in the social screening of investments. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3): 233–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization: 2004, ‹Global Status Report on Alcohol 2004’, http://www.mondovinofilm.com, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/

  • www.newbelgium.com, 2007

  • www.sugarleaf.com, 2007

Download references

Acknowledgment

Both authors are grateful to Pat Werhane for her support and inspiration to originate this research, and to Andy Wicks, Harry Hummels, Davide Dal Maso and two anonymous SBE reviewers for their thoughtful comments on early drafts. Jeffrey G. York would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of the Batten Institute at the Darden Graduate School of Business in conducting this research. Simone de Colle would like to thank the Olsson Center for Applied Ethics at the Darden Graduate School of Business for supporting his research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey G. York.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Colle, S., York, J.G. Why Wine is not Glue? The Unresolved Problem of Negative Screening in Socially Responsible Investing. J Bus Ethics 85 (Suppl 1), 83–95 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9949-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9949-z

Keywords

Navigation