Nagda in Madhya Pradesh is the site of a large viscose rayon factory employing significant numbers of workers from surrounding villages. Pollution and health and safety issues in and around the factory have been key concerns for several decades and this, combined with the continuous shift system and division of labour, embodies industry as the apparently (negative) antithesis of the rural. This is certainly the perspective of local high-caste village employers who articulate a very negative view of the factory, seeking to project it as part of the degenerate kaliyug which is associated with machinery, the goddess Kali, and a dangerous and unstable modernity. Local village-resident factory workers, however, value the comparatively high industrial wages, shorter working hours, and their liberation from the oppressive expectations of rural 'patronage'. The complex everyday predicaments of living in the kaliyug are explored through a variety of different voices which suggest the inadequacy of trans-local narratives of industrialisation.
The number of public companies reporting ESG information grew from fewer than 20 in the early 1990s to 8,500 by 2014. Moreover, by the end of 2014, over 1,400 institutional investors that manage some $60 trillion in assets had signed the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI). Nevertheless, companies with high ESG “scores” have continued to be viewed by mainstream investors as unlikely to produce competitive shareholder returns, in part because of the findings of older studies showing low returns from the social responsibility investing of the 1990s. But studies of more recent periods suggest that companies with significant ESG programs have actually outperformed their competitors in a number of important ways.The authors’ aim in this article is to set the record straight on the financial performance of sustainable investing while also correcting a number of other widespread misconceptions about this rapidly growing set of principles and methods:Myth Number 1: ESG programs reduce returns on capital and long‐run shareholder value.Reality: Companies committed to ESG are finding competitive advantages in product, labor, and capital markets; and portfolios that have integrated “material” ESG metrics have provided average returns to their investors that are superior to those of conventional portfolios, while exhibiting lower risk.Myth Number 2: ESG is already well integrated into mainstream investment management.Reality: The UNPRI signatories have committed themselves only to adhering to a set of principles for responsible investment, a standard that falls well short of integrating ESG considerations into their investment decisions.Myth Number 3: Companies cannot influence the kind of shareholders who buy their shares, and corporate managers must often sacrifice sustainability goals to meet the quarterly earnings targets of increasingly short‐term‐oriented investors.Reality: Companies that pursue major sustainability initiatives, and publicize them in integrated reports and other communications with investors, have also generally succeeded in attracting disproportionate numbers of longer‐term shareholders.Myth Number 4: ESG data for fundamental analysis is scarce and unreliable.Reality: Thanks to the efforts of reporting and investor organizations such as SASB and Ceres, and of CDP data providers like Bloomberg and MSCI, much more “value‐relevant” ESG data on companies has become available in the past ten years.Myth Number 5: ESG adds value almost entirely by limiting risks.Reality: Along with lower risk and a lower cost of capital, companies with high ESG scores have also experienced increases in operating efficiency and expansions into new markets.Myth Number 6: Consideration of ESG factors might create a conflict with fiduciary duty for some investors.Reality: Many ESG factors have been shown to have positive correlations with corporate financial performance and value, prompting ERISA in 2015 to reverse its earlier instructions to pension funds about the legitimacy of taking account of “non‐financial” considerations when investing in companies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.