Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are an increasing number of individual or corporate investors who demand social responsibility (SR) to a financial asset. Social responsibility is a multi-dimensional concept that requires identifying a number of criteria and their weights to be assessed in a financial asset. Currently a varied discussion is held among practitioners and academics with respect to this question. The common practice is to equally weight all the SR criteria. However, investors may wish to prioritize a particular dimension depending on their preferences. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to tackle this issue, e.g. to provide different weights for the different SR criteria according to the opinion of different stakeholders. These weights are later used in order to build a composite measure of SR and to rank mutual funds. To that end, Vigeo’s list of SR criteria is taken as the starting point for discussion. The Equitics\(^{\circledR }\) database gives the information for the companies’ SR performance according to those criteria. Stakeholders are selected according to various proposals and the Analytic Hierarchy Process is applied to weighting the Vigeo’s criteria according to the stakeholders’ preferences. The methodology allows not only assessing the financial assets but also tracking their evolution with the periodic Equitics\(^{\circledR }\) database updates. To prove the feasibility and utility of the methodology, a case study analysing Spanish equity mutual funds has been carried out. Among other results, the method shows that the so-called “responsible” funds do not perform particularly well in the SR assessment. Besides, we have found that there are few mutual funds with a good balance between financial and SR behaviour.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ballestero, E., Bravo, M., Perez-Gladish, B., Arenas-Parra, M., & Pla-Santamaria, D. (2012). Socially responsible investment: A multicriteria approach to portfolio selection combining ethical and financial objectives. European Journal of Operational Research, 216(2), 487–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beal, D., & Goyen, M. (1998). Putting your money where your mouth Is. A profile of ethical investors. Financial Services Review, 7(2), 129–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilbao-Terol, A., Arenas-Parra, M., & Cañal-Fernández, V. (2012). Selection of socially responsible portfolios using goal programming and fuzzy technology. Information Science, 189, 110–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilbao-Terol, A., Arenas-Parra, M., Cañal-Fernández, V., & Bilbao-Terol, C. (2013). Selection of socially responsible portfolios using hedonic prices. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(3), 515–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilbao-Terol, A., Arenas-Parra, M., Cañal-Fernández, V., & Bilbao-Terol, C. (2015). Multi-criteria decision making for choosing socially responsible investment within a behavioral portfolio theory framework: a new way of investing into a crisis environment. Annals of Operations Research, published online 31 July 2015, doi:10.1007/s10479-015-1947-9.

  • Cabello, J. M., Ruiz, F., Pérez-Gladish, B., & Méndez-Rodríguez, P. (2014). Synthetic indicators of mutual funds’ environmental responsibility: An application of the Reference Point Method. European Journal of Operational Research, 236(1), 313–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvo, C., Ivorra, C., & Liern, V. (2014). Fuzzy portfolio selection with non-financial goals: exploring the efficient frontier. Annals of Operations Research, 1–16.published online 16 February 2014, doi:10.1007/s10479-014-1561-2.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., & Fan, J. (2011). Measuring corporate social responsibility based on a fuzzy analytical hierarchy process. International Journal of Computer Network and Information Security, 5, 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, B. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academic Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortez, M. C., Silva, F., & Areal, N. (2009). The performance of European socially responsible funds. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 573–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Felice, F., & Petillo, A. (2013). Absolute measurement with analytic hierarchy process: A case study for Italian racecourse. International Journal of Applied Decision Sciences., 6(3), 209–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorfleitner, G., Leidl, M., & Reeder, J. (2012). Theory of social returns in portfolio choice with application to microfinance. Journal of Asset Management, 13, 384–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorfleitner, G., & Utz, S. (2012). Safety first portfolio choice based on financial and sustainability returns. European Journal of Operational Research, 221, 155–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drut, B. (2010). Sovereign bonds and socially responsible investment. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurosif (2012): European SRI study. Available at: http://www.eurosif.org/research/eurosif-sri-study/sri-study-2012

  • García-Melón, M., Gómez-Navarro, T., & Acuña-Dutra, S. (2012). A combined AHP-Delphi approach to evaluate sustainable tourism. Environmental Assessment Review, 34, 41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallerbach, W., Ning, H., Soppe, A., & Spronk, J. (2004). A framework for managing a portfolio of socially responsible investments. European Journal of Operational Research, 153, 517–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, S., Jo, H., & Statman, M. (1993). Doing well while doing good? The investment performance of socially responsible mutual funds, Financial Analysts Journal 49, 62–66.

  • Hellsten, S., & Mallin, C. (2006). Are ’Ethical’ or ’Socially Responsible’ investments socially responsible? Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 393–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herzig, C., & Moon, J. (2013). Discourses on corporate social ir/responsibility in the financial sector. Journal of Business Research, 66, 1870–1880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoepner, A. G., & McMillan, D. G. (2009). Research On ’Responsible Investment’: An Influential Literature Analysis Comprising A Rating, Characterisation, Categorisation and Investigation. (August 14, 2009).

  • Ingenbleek, P., Binnekamp, M., & Goddijn, S. (2004). Setting standards for CSR: A comparative case study on criteria-formulating organizations. Journal of Business Research, 60, 539–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lobel, Sharon. (2013). Predicting organizational responsiveness to poverty: Exploratory model and application to Brazil and the United States. European Management Journal, 31(5), 522–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: an integrative framework. Journal Acad Marketing Sciences, 32(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattingly, J. E., & Berman, S. L. (2006). Measurement of corporate social action discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Business & Society, 45(1), 20–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Méndez-Rodríguez, Bravo-Sellés, M., Galguera, L., & Pérez-Gladish, B. (2014): Profiling Spanish socially responsible investors, 8 June 2014, Available http://ssrn.com/abstract=2447456.

  • Moreno-Jiménez, J. M., Salvador, M., Gargallo, P., & Altuzarra, A. (2014). Systematic decision making in AHP: a Bayesian approach. Annals of Operations Research, 1–24. doi:10.1007/10479-014-1637-z.

  • Pérez-Gladish, B., & M’Zali, B. (2010). An AHP-based approach to mutual funds social performance measurement. International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, 1(1), 103–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Gladish, B., Benson, K., & Faff, R. (2012). Profiling ethical investors: Australian evidence. Australian Journal of Management, 37(2), 189–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Gladish, B., Méndez-Rodríguez, P., M’Zali, B., & Lang, P. (2013). Mutual funds efficiency measurement taking into account financial and socially responsible criteria. Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, 20(3/4), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga, A., & Scholtens, B. (2001). Socially responsible investing and management style of mutual funds in the Euronext stock markets. University of Groningen. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=259238, or doi:10.2139/ssrn.259238.

  • Renneboog, L., Horst, J., & Zhang, C. (2011). Is ethical money financially smart? Nonfinancial attributes and money flows of socially responsible investment funds. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 20(4), 562–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renneboog, L., Horst, J., & Zhang, C. (2008). Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(9), 1723–1742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L., & Peniwati, K. (2008). Group decision making: Drawing out and reconciling differences. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sievänen, R. (2014). Practicalities bottleneck to pension fund responsible investment? Business Ethics: A European Review, 23(3), 309–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Craig N. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: Whether or how? Calif Management Review, 45(4), 52–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spainsif. (2012). Socially responsible investment in Spain (In Spanish). Report Spainsif.

  • Spanish Law 35/2003 of 4 November on collective investment.

  • Sparkes, R. (2003). Socially responsible investment: A global revolution, Ed. Wiley

  • Spyridakos, A., & Yannacopoulos, D. (2014). Incorporating collective functions to multicriteria disaggregation-aggregation approaches for small groups decision making. Annals of Operations Research, doi:10.1007/s10479-014-1609-3.

  • Steuer, R. E., Qi, Y., & Hirschberger, M. (2007). Suitable-portfolio investors, non-dominated frontier sensitivity, and the effect of multiple objectives on standard portfolio selection. Annals of Operations Research, 152, 297–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W. H., Hsu, J. L., Chen, C. H., Lin, W. R., & Chen, S. P. (2010). An integrated approach for selecting corporate social responsibility programs and costs evaluation in the international tourist hotel. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(3), 385–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W., Chou, W., & Hsu, W. (2009). The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for selecting socially responsible investment: An effective MCDM model. Journal of Operational Research Society, 60, 1396–1410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utz, S., Wimmer, M., Hirschberger, M., & Steuer, R. (2014). Tri-criterion inverse portfolio optimization with application to socially responsible mutual funds. European Journal of Operational Research, 234, 491–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2003). Stakeholder performance implications of corporate responsibility. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 5(2), 114–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zopounidis, C., & Doumpos, M. (2013). Multicriteria decision systems for financial problems. TOP, 21, 241–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain

    Mónica García-Melón

  2. Quantitative Economics Department, University of Oviedo, Avda. Del Cristo s/n, 33006, Asturias, Spain

    Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez

  3. Energy Engineering Institute, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain

    Tomás Gómez-Navarro

Authors
  1. Mónica García-Melón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Blanca Pérez-Gladish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tomás Gómez-Navarro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paz Mendez-Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomás Gómez-Navarro.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

García-Melón, M., Pérez-Gladish, B., Gómez-Navarro, T. et al. Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology. Ann Oper Res 244, 475–503 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-016-2132-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-016-2132-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation