Skip to main content

The Choice Architecture of Sustainable and Responsible Investment: Nudging Investors Toward Ethical Decision-Making

Journal of Business Ethics volume 140, pages 743–753 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

This paper applies insights from behavioral economics and nudge theory to foster sustainable and responsible investment (SRI). SRI provides an opportunity to express and promote ethical values via choice of financial instruments. While policy-makers have tried to encourage greater participation in SRI, the majority of retail investors retain a conventional approach to investment. I develop a conceptual framework to improve the effectiveness of SRI policy-making. The first part of the framework comprises a transmission mechanism which emphasizes the role of SRI as a driver for sustainable development. The second part is a model of the individual decision for or against SRI. The framework suggests that low SRI demand is a case of behavioral market failure, and that nudging is a suitable tool for dismantling behavioral barriers to SRI. A specific example of smart choice architecture is used to illustrate the framework’s potential in the design of an SRI nudge. Assuming the nudge stands up to the rigors of empirical testing, it may well provide a feasible alternative for policy-makers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Abbreviations

CSR:

Corporate social responsibility

ESG:

Environmental, social, and governance

KID:

Key information document

MAUT:

Multiple attribute utility theory

SRI:

Sustainable and responsible investment

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Akerlof, G. A. (1991). Procrastination and obedience. The American Economic Review, 81(2), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anand, P., & Cowton, C. J. (1993). The ethical investor: Exploring dimensions of investment behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 14(2), 377–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashraf, N., Camerer, C. F., & Loewenstein, G. (2005). Adam Smith, behavioral economist. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(3), 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, M. S., Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2008). Behaviorally informed financial services regulation. Washington, DC: New America Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77(305), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brundtland. (1987). Our common future. World commission on environment and development, Report. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C. F. (1999). Behavioral economics: Reunifying psychology and economics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96(19), 10575–10577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility. Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruana, R., & Chatzidakis, A. (2013). Consumer social responsibility (CnSR): Toward a multi-level, multi-agent conceptualization of the “Other CSR”. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dembinski, P. H., Bonvin, J.-M., Dommen, E., & Monnet, F.-M. (2003). The ethical foundations of responsible investment. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 203–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsche Bank. (2012). Sustainable investing: Establishing long-term value and performance. New York: DB Climate Change Investment Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doskeland, T., & Pedersen L. J. T. (2015). Investing with brain or heart? A field experiment on responsible investment. Retrieved January 5, 2015, from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2040696.

  • EFAMA. (2013). Asset management in Europe. Facts and figures. 6th annual review. Brussels: EFAMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for corporate social responsibility. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Applying Behavioural Sciences to EU Policy-making. Joint Research Centre Scientific and Policy Reports, EUR 26033 EN. Luxembourg: European Commission.

  • European Union. (2014). Regulation (EU) No. 1286/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on key information documents for packaged retail and insurance-based investment products. Official Journal of the European Union, L 352/1-23.

  • EUROSIF. (2012). European SRI Study 2012. Paris: EUROSIF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • FNG. (2013). Marktbericht nachhaltige Geldanlagen 2013. Berlin: Forum nachhaltige Geldanlagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girerd-Potin, I., Jimenez-Garcès, S., & Louvet, P. (2014). Which dimensions of social responsibility concern financial investors? Journal of Business Ethics, 121(4), 559–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glac, K. (2009). Understanding socially responsible investing: The effect of decision frames and trade-off options. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2012). Old wine in new casks: Libertarian paternalism still violates liberal principles. Social Choice and Welfare, 38(4), 635–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, P. G., & Jespersen, A. M. (2013). Nudge and the manipulation of choice. A framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2013(1), 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heimann, M., Pouget, S., Mullet, E., & Bonnefon, J.-F. (2011). The Experimental Approach to Trust in Socially Responsible Investment Funds. In W. Sun, C. Louche, & R. Perez (Eds.), Finance and sustainability: Towards a new paradigm? (pp. 169–183). Emerald Insight: Bingley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Heinkel, R., Kraus, A., & Zechner, J. (2001). The effect of green investment on corporate behavior. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 36(4), 431–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, E., Hoelzl, E., & Kirchler, E. (2008). A comparison of models describing the impact of moral decision making on investment decisions. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, S. S., & Kamenica, E. (2010). Choice proliferation, simplicity seeking, and asset allocation. Journal of Public Economics, 94(7–8), 530–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2013). Foreword to the Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy. In E. Shafir (Ed.), The behavioral foundations of public policy (VII-IX). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlan, D., McConnell, M., Mullainathan, S., & Zinman, J. (2010). Getting to the top of mind: How reminders increase saving. NBER Working Paper Series, No. 16205.

  • Kluver, J., Frazier, R., & Haidt, J. (2014). Behavioral ethics for homo economicus, homo heuristicus, and homo duplex. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 150–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1943). Defining the field at a given time. Psychological Review, 50(3), 292–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madrian, B. C. (2014). Applying insights from behavioral economics to policy design. Annual Review of Economics, 6, 663–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer. (2007). Demystifying responsible investment performance: A review of key academic and broker research on ESG factors. London: Mercer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 15(5), 296–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, J. (2008). Investment with a conscience: Examining the impact of pro-social attitudes and perceived financial performance on socially responsible investment behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 307–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Observatoire de la Finance. (2011). Manifesto for finance that serves the common good. Geneva: Observatoire de la Finance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pichert, D., & Katsikopoulos, K. V. (2008). Green defaults: Information presentation and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(1), 63–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pictet, O. (2008). The SRI performance paradox: How to gauge and measure the extra-financial performance of socially responsible investment. Geneva: Pictet & Cie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilaj, H., & Reisinger, B. P. (2015). Geldanlage mit gutem Gewissen? Eine Privatanlegerbefragung zu nachhaltigen Investments. Österreichisches Bankarchiv, 63(10), 740–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B. J. (2009). Keeping ethical investment ethical: Regulatory issues for investing for sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(4), 555–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. Economica, 5(17), 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens, B. (2006). Finance as a driver of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(1), 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens, B. (2014). Indicators of responsible investing. Ecological Indicators, 36, 382–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1977). Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behaviour. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1759). The theory of moral sentiments. London: Penguin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sparkes, R., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). The maturing of socially responsible investment: A review of the developing link with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 45–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statman, M. (2005). Normal investors, then and now. Financial Analysts Journal, 61(2), 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statman, M. (2007). Socially responsible investments. The Journal of Investment Consulting, 8(2), 17–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statman, M. (2008a). Quiet conversations: The expressive nature of socially responsible investors. Journal of Financial Planning, 21(2), 40–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statman, M. (2008b). Socially responsible investors and their advisors. The Journal of Investment Consulting, 9(1), 14–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statman, M. (2011). What investors really want. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2013a). The Storrs lectures: Behavioral economics and paternalism. The Yale Law Journal, 122(7), 1826–1899.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2013b). Simpler. The future of government. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2014a). Nudges.gov: Behaviorally informed regulation. In E. Zamir & D. Teichman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of behavioral economics and the law (pp. 719–747). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2014b). Why nudge? The politics of libertarian paternalism. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2015). Choosing not to choose: Understanding the value of choice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H. (1999). The end of behavioral finance. Financial Analysts Journal, 55(6), 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H. (2000). From homo economicus to homo sapiens. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(1), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler R. H. (2012). Watching behavior before writing the rules. The New York Times, July 8, 2012.

  • Thaler, R. H., & Benartzi, S. (2004). Save more Tomorrow™: Using behavioral economics to increase employee saving. Journal of Political Economy, 112(1), 164–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. The American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge. Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3(6), 358–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UK Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights Team. (2012). Applying behavioural insights to reduce fraud, error and debt. http://www.behaviouralinsights.co.uk/publications.

  • UK Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights Team. (2013). Applying behavioural insights to charitable giving. http://www.behaviouralinsights.co.uk/publications.

  • UNEP. (2009). Fiduciary responsibility: Legal and practical aspects of integrating environmental, social and governance issues into institutional investment. Geneva: UNEP Asset Management Working Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waygood, S. (2011). How do the capital markets undermine sustainable development? What can be done to correct this? Journal of Sustainable Finance and Investment, 1(1), 81–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2015). Mind, society, and behavior. World Development Report 2015. Washington: World Bank.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Banking and Finance, University of Graz, Universitätsstraße 15/F2, 8010, Graz, Austria

    Herwig Pilaj

Authors
  1. Herwig Pilaj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Herwig Pilaj.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pilaj, H. The Choice Architecture of Sustainable and Responsible Investment: Nudging Investors Toward Ethical Decision-Making. J Bus Ethics 140, 743–753 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2877-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2877-9

Keywords

  • Choice architecture
  • Corporate social responsibility
  • Economic policy-making
  • Ethics
  • Investor behavior
  • Nudge theory
  • Sustainable and responsible investment
  • Sustainable development