2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10551-010-0714-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Socially Responsible Investment and Fiduciary Duty: Putting the Freshfields Report into Perspective

Abstract: ethical investment, fiduciary duty, Fresh-fields report, institutional investors, legal reform, prudent investor rule, social effectiveness, socially responsible investment, United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative,

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
60
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
2
60
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In their early assessment of the potential of engagement, Sparkes & Cowton (: 54) argue that engagement by institutional investors ‘is likely to prove the most powerful way in which [socially responsible investment] will influence corporate executives to engage in corporate social responsibility’. Similar sentiments can be found in later studies, suggesting that engagement is particularly ‘proactive’ or that ‘shareholder activism is the most progressive option for institutional investors’ (Sandberg : 157). Ransome & Sampford (: 112) contend that ‘[o]ne powerful reason in favour of engagement over … screening is that it is more likely to be effective, because it entails direct involvement in an attempt to cause change.’ Louche & Lydenberg (: 77) argue that exit and engagement ‘can gain in effectiveness if used in combination’.…”
Section: Third Claim: Engagement With Exclusion Is Always More Effectsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…In their early assessment of the potential of engagement, Sparkes & Cowton (: 54) argue that engagement by institutional investors ‘is likely to prove the most powerful way in which [socially responsible investment] will influence corporate executives to engage in corporate social responsibility’. Similar sentiments can be found in later studies, suggesting that engagement is particularly ‘proactive’ or that ‘shareholder activism is the most progressive option for institutional investors’ (Sandberg : 157). Ransome & Sampford (: 112) contend that ‘[o]ne powerful reason in favour of engagement over … screening is that it is more likely to be effective, because it entails direct involvement in an attempt to cause change.’ Louche & Lydenberg (: 77) argue that exit and engagement ‘can gain in effectiveness if used in combination’.…”
Section: Third Claim: Engagement With Exclusion Is Always More Effectsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…RI literature has recognized the long-standing issue concerning the legal obligation to invest the assets of the pension fund solely in the interests of plan beneficiaries, in essence, driving the investing towards a ''maximizing return'' and ''minimizing risk'' portfolio management strategy. Until recently, this fiduciary duty has frequently been offered as a barrier to RI investing by pension funds, but the debate is not yet completely settled (Sandberg 2011). Even though the status of RI investing from a legal perspective may be arguably resolved, certain practices have emerged out of this obligation that continue to themselves act as challenges to the effective implementation of RI investments.…”
Section: The Compliance Domain Of Pension Fund Investments In Canadamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Illustrative examples for the most common themes are provided below-with more examples shown in appendix A. The issue of fiduciary duty and SRI investment has been explored [35,36] especially in relation to the United Nations Environment Programme's Finance Initiative (UNEP FI), commonly known as the Freshfields Report. It supports that fiduciary duty is often cited as the reason why environmental and SRI issues are not taken into account in investment decisions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%