Abstract
This study examines to what extent investors take into their consideration's sustainability risks of three different nature, Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG). We use ESG risks rating and eight three nasdaq100 stocks excess return to evaluate whether those risk influence excess returns from 2016 till the end of April 2021. We find that while environmental risks negatively affects excess returns in some years, social risks are the most influential factor negatively related to excess returns for investors. Corporate Governance risks have been found to be embedded in the traditional Systematic risk factor "Beta" but we did not find any evidence for negative correlations between that kind of risk and stock's excess returns. We also find that since 2018 investors value environmental risks and punish companies that their activities harm the environment in any way. Examining three green energy exchange trade funds returns in recent years have showed that solar energy companies have achieved the highest returns to investors, followed by low-carbon and wind energy producers. Those result can insinuate about the future of green energy production methods.
Notes
Provided by finance.yahoo.com.
The "Beta" was provided by Finance.yahoo.com and it was calculated using five years monthly data.
The data for 2021 are until the end of April 2021.
References
Eccles R, Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2012) Is sustainability now the key to corporate success? The Guardian
Elkington J (1998) Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone, Oxford (UK).
Garcia AS, Mendes-Da-Silva W, Orsato RJ (2019) Corporate sustainability, capital markets, and ESG performance. In: Mendes-Da-Silva W (ed) Individual behaviors and technologies for financial innovations. Springer, Cham.
Lee DD, Faff RW, Rekker SAC (2013) Do high and low-ranked sustainability stocks perform differently?. Int J Account Inf Manag 21(2):116–132
Lo SF (2010) Performance evaluation for sustainable business: a profitability and marketability framework. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 17:311–319
Montiel I (2008) Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: separate pasts, common futures. Organization and Environment.
Morioka SN, Bolis I, Evans S, Carvalho MM (2017) Transforming sustainability challenges into competitive advantage: Multiple case studies kaleidoscope converging into sustainable business models. J Clean Prod 167:723–738
Morioka SN, Bolis I, de Carvalho MM (2018) From an ideal dream towards reality analysis: proposing sustainable value exchange matrix (SVEM) from systematic literature review on sustainable business models and face validation. J Clean Prod 178:76–88
Nizam E, Ng A, Dewandaru G, Nagayev R, Nkoba MA (2019) The impact of social and environmental sustainability on financial performance: a global analysis of the banking sector. J Multinatl Financ Manag 49:35–53
Ortiz-de-Mandojana N, Bansal P (2016) The long-term benefits of organizational resilience through sustainable business practices. Strateg Manag J 37:1615–1631
Schaltegger S, Beckmann M, Hansen EG (2013) Trans disciplinarity in corporate sustainability: mapping the field. Bus Strateg Environ 22:219–229
Schönherr N, Findler F, Martinuzzi A (2017) Exploring the interface of CSR and the sustainable development goals. Transnatl Corp 24:33–47
Schramade W (2017) Investing in the UN sustainable development goals: opportunities for companies and investors. J Appl Corp Financ 29:87–99
Topple C, Donovan JD, Masli EK, Borgert T (2017) Corporate sustainability assessments: MNE engagement with sustainable development and the SDGs. Transnatl Corp 24:61–71
Funding
There is no funding source to declare.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest associated with this paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gil, C. What can we learn from the financial market about sustainability?. Environ Syst Decis 42, 1–7 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-021-09835-x
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-021-09835-x