Professional Documents
Culture Documents
NYU-RAM - ESG-Paper - 2021 Rev - 0
NYU-RAM - ESG-Paper - 2021 Rev - 0
PERFORMANCE:
Uncovering the Relationship by
Aggregating Evidence from 1,000 Plus
Studies Published between 2015 – 2020
By Tensie Whelan, Ulrich Atz, Tracy Van Holt and Casey Clark, CFA
Executive Summary
Meta-studies examining the relationship between ESG and financial performance have a decades-long
history. Almost all the articles they cover, however, were written before 2015. Those analyses found positive
correlations between ESG performance and operational efficiencies, stock performance and lower cost of
capital. Five years later, we have seen an exponential growth in ESG and impact investing – due in large
part to increasing evidence that business strategy focused on material ESG issues is synonymous with high
quality management teams and improved returns. A case in point: A recent study looked at the initial stock
market reaction to the COVID-19 crisis (up to March 23) and found that companies scoring high on a “crisis
response” measure (based on Human Capital, Supply Chain, and Products and Services ESG sentiment) were
associated with 1.4-2.7% higher stock returns (Cheema-Fox et al., 2020). Nevertheless, the topic continues to
be debated, with some arguing that companies and investors should stick to managing for stock price and
that ESG is, at best, a distraction from the real business of making money.
The authors of this report, NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business and Rockefeller Asset Management,
collaborated to examine the relationship between ESG and financial performance in more than 1,000
research papers from 2015 – 2020. Because of the varying research frameworks, metrics and definitions,
we decided to take a different approach than previous meta-analyses. We divided the articles into
those focused on corporate financial performance (e.g. operating metrics such as ROE or ROA or stock
performance for a company or group of companies) and those focused on investment performance (from
the perspective of an investor, generally measures of alpha or metrics such as the Sharpe ratio on a portfolio
of stocks), to determine if there was a difference in the findings. We also separately reviewed papers and
articles focused on low carbon strategies tied to financial performance in order to understand financial
performance implications through the lens of a single thematic issue.
We found a positive relationship between ESG and financial performance for 58% of the “corporate” studies
focused on operational metrics such as ROE, ROA, or stock price with 13% showing neutral impact, 21%
mixed results (the same study finding a positive, neutral or negative results) and only 8% showing a negative
relationship. For investment studies typically focused on risk-adjusted attributes such as alpha or the Sharpe
ratio on a portfolio of stocks, 59% showed similar or better performance relative to conventional investment
approaches while only 14% found negative results. We also found positive results when we reviewed 59
climate change, or low carbon, studies related to financial performance. On the corporate side, 57% arrived
at a positive conclusion, 29% a neutral impact, 9% mixed and, 6% negative. Looking at investor studies, 65%
showed positive or neutral performance compared to conventional investments with only 13% indicating
negative findings. A detailed breakdown can be found in Figure 1.
1. Improved financial
performance due to ESG
from inconsistent terminology and nomenclature. Meuer et al.
(2019) found 33 definitions of corporate sustainability in usage.
becomes more marked over For corporations, embedded sustainability (ESG is part of the
longer time horizons. business strategy) may have different performance implications
than traditional Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) efforts
that emphasize community relations and philanthropy, yet
2. ESG integration, broadly
speaking as an investment
there has been insufficient review of those differences, creating
noise in the findings (Douglas et al., 2017). We see some of
strategy, seems to perform
that confusion in a study by Manchiraju and Rajgopal (2017)
better than negative
which assessed the (poor) financial performance of companies
screening approaches. A
required to spend 2% of their profits on CSR by the Indian
recently released Rockefeller
government. In this case, CSR was philanthropy and community
Asset Management study
relations, not sustainability related to the material ESG issues
finds that ESG integration
that could enhance long-term performance.
will increasingly be
demarcated between • Research often fails to distinguish between material and
“Leaders” and “Improvers” immaterial ESG issues as well as ESG leaders versus improvers. For
with the latter showing example, Khan et al. (2016) demonstrate the alpha potential when
uncorrelated alpha- incorporating “material” ESG issues, with the stock performance
enhancing potential over of companies focused on material issues outperforming those
the long-term (Clark & that focuses on immaterial ESG issues or no ESG issues at all.
Lalit, 2020). Rockefeller Asset Management’s research shows similar results:
one study emphasizes that ESG integration will increasingly be
demarcated between “Leaders” and “Improvers” and finds long-
4.
Sustainability initiatives example, reviewed a global survey of institutional investors and
at corporations appear concluded that “the biggest barrier is the lack of high quality
to drive better financial data about the performance of companies on their material
performance due to ESG factors.” Plenty of technical evidence also points to the
mediating factors such as shortcomings of accounting metrics and ESG data (Berg et
improved risk management al., 2019). We found that at least 40% of studies relied on an
and more innovation. overall, third-party ESG score.
• ESG integration, ESG momentum, decarbonizing, socially
5. Studies indicate that responsible investing (SRI), negative screening, and impact
managing for a low carbon investing are just a few of the varied approaches referenced
future improves financial in the research. They are often merged together, even though
performance. each has different risk-reward implications. A common research
approach is to query Bloomberg for funds labeled ESG – those
funds are self-designated, and may lack a robust ESG investing
Some of the earlier short-comings in the corporate research have been addressed in the last five years,
which may be why we have more clear positive findings. However, academic researchers continue to be
challenged by the variability of ESG data and the lack of distinction between different investment strategies,
creating an opportunity for investors and researchers who can overcome this challenge. Judging from the
fact that the volume of research produced since 2015 is comparable to all papers published before 2015, this
is clearly an area where we should expect to see increased and improved research in coming years.
Figure 1. Positive and/or neutral results for investing in sustainability dominate. Very few studies found a negative
correlation between ESG and financial performance (based on 245 studies published between 2016 and 2020) .
58%
57% Corporate (all) Investor (all)
Corporate (climate change) Investor (climate change)
43%
33%
29% 26% 28%
21% 22% 22%
13% 14% 13%
9% 8% 6%
Figure 2. Conceptual overview of how investing in sustainability/ESG drives financial Investor-focused studies
performance: We reviewed and categorized relevant academic studies and analyzed tend to look at a direct
them through correlations, mediating factors, and a specific theme – climate change. relationship between ESG
and performance based on
benchmarks and a portfolio-
level view of themes such as
Sustainability materiality or governance
strategy Corporate financial structure. Meta-analytical
& practice Correlation performance effects are Hedges’ g or d.
(CFP) or market
performance
Corporate-focused studies
Climate may include mediating
change factors such as innovation,
action operational efficiency, or
risk management for a
better understanding of how
sustainability initiatives lead
Mediation to CFP. Meta-analytical effects
are partial correlations from
regression models.
In reviewing over 1,000 studies published between Many of the studies reviewed described a finding
2015 – 2020, we found a positive relationship and tried to explain it through the lens of a social
between ESG and financial performance for 58% science derived model of the world. Several social
of the “corporate” studies focused on operational science theories dominate the research:
metric such as ROE, ROA, or stock price with 13%
showing neutral impact, 21% mixed results (the same • Stakeholder theory (successful companies need
study finding a positive, neutral or negative results) to manage for a wide variety of stakeholders
and only 8% showing a negative relationship. For such as employees, civil society, suppliers and
investment studies typically focused on risk-adjusted investors),
attributes such as alpha or the Sharpe ratio on a • Shared value (companies that create shared value
portfolio of stocks, 33% found positive performance for all stakeholders do better financially),
26% found neutral impacts (in other words,
performed similar to conventional investments), 28% • Legitimacy theory (a social contract between the
had mixed results (positive, neutral, or negative, corporation and society, which, if broken, leads
generally because they examined a variety of to consumers reducing demand or governments
variables and time periods as well as multiple imposing regulatory restrictions),
samples in one study) and 14% found negative • Resource-based view (emphasizing internal
results. In other words, 59% showed similar or better resources such as employees and intangible assets
performance relative to conventional investment for achieving a competitive advantage).
approaches while only 14% found negative results.
We also found positive results when we reviewed Studies most often invoked stakeholder theory
59 climate change, or low carbon, studies related (N=80), but shared value, legitimacy theory and the
to financial performance. On the corporate side, resource-based view appeared in a sizeable share of
57% arrived at a positive conclusion, 29% a neutral studies (16% - 25%).
impact, 9% mixed and, 6% negative. Looking at
investor studies, 65% showed positive or neutral Notably, those studies that did not include a social
performance compared to conventional investments science theory only found a one-in-three positive
with only 13% indicating negative findings. A detailed association with ESG and financial performance,
breakdown is found in Figure 1. whereas the odds were one-in-two on average for
research grounded in social science theories.
These findings were supported by an additional
meta-meta-analysis (a study of existing meta-studies) This finding points toward the need to better
we undertook. We found 13 corporate meta-analysis understand the mechanisms behind the relationship
studies published (covering 1,272 unique studies) with between ESG and financial performance. Ioannou
a quantitative approach and 2 investor meta-analysis and Serafeim (2019) in Corporate Sustainability: A
studies (covering 107 unique studies) published since Strategy? took a closer look at whether sustainability
2015. The former found consistent positive correlations might be considered a strategic approach (leading
between ESG and corporate financial performance; to a competitive advantage) or common practice
the latter found that ESG investing returns were (a set of standards within an industry that confer
generally indistinguishable from conventional investing legitimacy). They find that both options are relevant
returns. (Figure 2). We concluded that these two and that adoption of sustainability over time is
findings are robust across time and space. complex and dynamic.
0 0.24
1. Improved financial performance due to ESG in the academic studies (they serve as proxy
becomes more marked over a longer time horizon for “real-world” applicability; for example,
We found that our proxy for an implied long-term researchers may define a universe of available
relationship had a coefficient with a positive sign ESG funds or use an ESG score in a regression
that is statistically significant. The model suggests model). We found ESG integration seemed
that, everything else being constant, a study with to perform better than negative screening
an implied long-term focus is 76% more likely and divesting, with 33% of the (N=17) studies
to find a positive or neutral result. Hang et al. finding alpha and 53% finding neutral or mixed
(2019) undertook a meta-analysis (N=142) which results. The subgroup of papers analyzing
found corporate investments in environmental pooled investment strategies (combining
sustainability had no effect on corporate financial everything with some type of ESG label) was
performance in the short term, but had positive least convincing in terms of showing a positive
effects over the longer-term. Some recent papers association (65% less likely). We speculate it
were optimistic about how markets value long- might be because too many different strategies
term commitments. Kotsantonis et al. (2019) found were combined together. For example, this
that CEOs communication of “long-term plans” group contains socially responsible investing
resulted in an abnormal positive reaction by the (SRI) and ethical funds that may not have an
stock market. A cross-sectional study on firms ambition to match or outperform a conventional
with strong ESG ratings found returns up to 3.8% benchmark. Ielasi et al. (2018) compared
higher per standard deviation of ESG score in the different sustainable investing strategies with
mid- and long-term (Dorfleitner et al., 2018). each other and indeed found performance
differences between passive and active and
2. ESG Integration as a strategy seems to perform ethical versus ESG integration strategies.
better than negative screening approaches
and ESG momentum may cause improvers to Very few studies emphasized material ESG
outperform leaders issues and demarcated between ESG Leaders,
The sample size of studies on specific portfolio or best-in-class firms, and ESG Improvers,
management strategies and asset classes was or firms showing the greatest improvement
small, making it challenging to interpret how they in their ESG footprint. One seminal paper
would translate into decision-making for an asset titled Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence
manager. The dominant research approach was on Materiality published in 2016 by Kahn,
to find a sample of sustainable funds or indices Serafeim and Yoon from Harvard Business
and compare them to a conventional benchmark. School showed the outperforming potential of
Most of the research focused on equities (N=54, mapping material ESG issues and emphasizing
with 33% finding alpha, 54% finding a neutral or momentum, or ESG improvement (Khan et al.,
mixed effect) rather than fixed income (N=11, with 2016). Rockefeller Asset Management’s research
19% finding alpha and 56% finding a neutral or further supports these results. In their paper,
mixed effect). In addition, most studies focused ESG Improvers: An Alpha Enhancing Factor,
on active (N=41, with 29% alpha and 56% neutral they use materiality mapping to differentiate
or mixed) vs passive (N=6) investing. between ESG Leaders and ESG Improvers, and
We also looked at the explicit or implicit demonstrate the alpha potential of the latter in
investment strategies that underpin the analysis a study covering US equities from 2010 – 2020.
Our analysis of more than 1,000 research papers (firms showing the greatest improvement in their
exploring the linkage between ESG and financial ESG footprint). Finally, thematic studies are also
performance since 2015 points to a growing relatively limited although climate change studies
consensus that good corporate management of show promise; research shows a strong relationship
ESG issues typically results in improved operational between decarbonization strategies and improved
metrics such as ROE, ROA, or stock price. For performance.
investors seeking to construct portfolios that
generate alpha, some ESG strategies seem to Studies need to better distinguish between different
generate market rate or excess returns when types of investment strategies and asset classes in
compared to conventional investment strategies, order to analyze financial performance. Thematic
especially for long-term investors, and provide studies on material issues such as climate change
downside protection during economic or social crisis. provide an intriguing approach as focusing on one
Notably, very few studies found definitive negative issue may lead to more conclusive results. We also
correlations between ESG and financial performance. recommend that future meta-analyses distinguish
between corporate and investor studies as we have
Unfortunately, studies to help us understand why done. Finally, an area that has been woefully under
these correlations exist were lacking. There were researched is the causal factors for improved financial
very limited studies on mediating factors such as performance by corporates with robust sustainability
innovation and operational efficiencies that might strategies – we recommend more research into
drive better corporate performance. And most sustainability-driven innovation, employee relations,
investment studies did not clearly demarcate the supplier loyalty, customer demand, risk mitigation,
differing risk-reward outcomes of varying ESG operational efficiency, and so on.
integration approaches, nor did they analyze
the different performance implications of ESG We look forward to reviewing the field of the
leaders (best-in-class firms) versus ESG improvers research in 2025!
To understand differences in studies in a systematic manner, we disaggregated the research into three types:
1. Studies that analyzed how corporations with sustainability initiatives performed financially.
These studies typically used a panel of public companies, a commercially available ESG score or an
environmental/social performance metric, and may include mediating factors such as innovation,
operational efficiency, or risk management for a better understanding of how sustainability initiatives
lead to corporate financial performance (Vishwanathan et al., 2019). Here, we relied on our codebook
(Supplement 1) and investigated how innovation, operational efficiency, risk management and other
mediating factors were present in the academic literature.
2. Studies that analyzed how ESG funds, portfolios, or indices performed financially. Most investment-oriented
research on ESG and financial performance was at a portfolio level of an asset class using some metric of
risk-adjusted return, for example, comparing alpha in conventional and sustainable mutual funds. More recent
studies also looked at issues such as materiality (Khan et al., 2016) or investment management strategies such
as negative screening. Here, we analyzed the investor-focused research, which ESG investment strategies
were considered, and how the investor research compared to the corporate research.
3. Studies that analyzed a specific theme such as climate change, which can be relevant for managers and
investors. A third type of study focuses on a specific ESG theme. We chose climate change because it is a
new and growing area of financial risk for managers and investors that also presents opportunities. Here, we
gathered studies and industry reports and examined the role of climate change for asset managers.
We searched ProQuest, Web of Science (WoS), Google Scholar, Social Science Research Network (SSRN),
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), and other journal databases for two sets of keywords: related to
sustainability/ESG and related to financial performance/CFP. Examples of the search queries are shown in Table
A1 in the Appendix. We restricted the search for the period of January 2015 to February 2020 to find relevant
studies that were published in English. We used various validation strategies to achieve a comprehensive sample.
To develop the final sample (Figure 2), we screened (level 1) academic papers that examined the causal
relationship between sustainability and financial performance. The rapid title screening identified relevant
studies based on three quick heuristics that screened for results that we hoped generalize the most:
In level 2 screening, we attempted to find the relevant section for the codebook (see Supplement 1) in the
full text such as definition of variables or a results table. The full set of eligible articles (1,141) was further
reduced, so that we could focus on coding studies for the quantitative synthesis. All quantitative meta-
analyses (n = 15) published in the reference frame were coded to achieve a dataset suitable for a second-
order meta-analysis (see Supplement 2 for details and data).
The median start and end date for an individual study’s data sample was 2007 to 2015. Many studies relied on
long time series with 27% having a mid-point year that was before the financial crisis of 2008. Nineteen percent
of studies used a sector-specific dataset. Geographically most studies focused on the USA (34%) and Europe
(24%) with a sizable share of global (29%) datasets. Over 30% of studies specified a specific country. For the
outcome variables we found that 18% analyzed ESG disclosures only and not ESG performance (and of those
40% used a third-party ESG score such as MSCI KLD). Market-based measures of financial performance (in 76%
of studies) were vastly more popular than accounting-based measures (27%) with some overlap.
The NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business (CSB) envisions a better world through better business.
CSB was founded on the principle that sustainable business is good business, and is proving the value of
sustainability for business management and performance at a time when people and the planet need it
most. Through education, research, and engagement, CSB prepares individuals and organizations with the
knowledge, skills, and tools needed to embed social and environmental sustainability into core business
strategy. In doing so, businesses reduce risk; create competitive advantage; develop innovative services,
products, and processes; while improving financial performance and creating value for society. For more
information, visit CSB’s website: https://www.stern.nyu.edu/sustainability
Table 1. Cross-tabulations for the mediating factor risk management and overall study finding. Note how investor studies
had fewer positive results (27% vs 48%) when the study did not consider risk.
Table 2. Selected codes for all studies across overall finding. Interpret rows with low counts with caution.
Table 3. Selected codes for studies of the investor type across overall finding. Interpret rows with low counts with caution.
Notes. See Supplement 1: Codebook for further details. Portfolio management strategy: Investors describe practical portfolio management
strategies in many ways, sometimes inconsistent. We broadly follow Matos (2020): “ESG and Responsible Institutional Investing Around the
World: A Critical Review from the CFA Institute Research Foundation.” Existing literature explores several ESG investing strategies in portfolio
management. Oftentimes the strategies are used interchangeably without clear distinctions. Negative screening & divesting is an investing
strategy where companies that do not comply with pre-established ESG principles are excluded from the portfolio. If the paper focuses on the
so-called “sin” industries alone, investing (or not) in the tobacco industry or staying away from oil and gas companies, it is coded as negative
screening, also. For an example see Richey (2016). Pooled strategies as created by researchers: Instead of excluding companies, investors
analyze and select firms and assets that exemplify sustainable business practices. If a paper compares ESG investing versus conventional
investing, such as comparing ESG mutual funds vs. conventional mutual funds, or SRI mutual funds versus conventional mutual funds, or ESG
index vs a benchmark conventional index, the strategy is coded as pooled strategies. For an example see Pereira et al. (2019). ESG integration
as created by researchers incorporates ESG analysis into fundamental research and portfolio construction beyond screening or pooled
strategies. We allowed for two subcodes in this category: ‘best-in-class’ and ‘improvers’. 1) If the paper specifically discusses “best-in-class” or
“improver”, then the paper is coded accordingly. The strategy is coded as best-in-class or improver when the strategy is the subject of study
in the paper, or the paper employs the strategy in portfolio construction. In this case, we code the paper accordingly. 2) If the paper does
not distinguish best-in-class and improver but rather using “ESG integration” as a generic strategy, then both strategies are selected. 3) If the
paper discusses ESG momentum strategy or the impact of ESG on momentum portfolios without distinguishing between best-in-class or
improvers, the strategy is coded as both (Kaiser & Welters, 2019; Yen et al., 2019).
Table 4. Selected codes for studies of the climate change issue type across overall finding.
Interpret rows with low counts with caution.
Dependent variable
1 2 3 4 5
-0.767** -0.751**
ESG disclosure (vs performance)
(0.347) (0.37)
-0.856*** -0.842**
Accounting-based (vs market)
(0.322) (0.331)
0.36 0.451
ESG score (vs E/S/G/other)
(0.36) (0.381)
-0.371 -0.214
No social science theory
(0.359) (0.388)
0.711* 0.536
Mediating factor: Risk
(0.394) (0.413)
-0.046 0.148
Mediating factor: Operational efficiency
(0.5) (0.539)
1.132* 1.212*
Mediating factor: Innovation
(0.678) (0.689)
Notes. This table shows the result of an ordered logit regression model for all studies with five model specifications. The largest
statistically significant coefficient appeared from the investor indicator suggesting that the type of research is one of the main
explanatory variables for positive or negative results. Study design factors were important but proxies for causality or specific mediating
factors were not. The indicator variables for the three mediating factors are proxies and are based on few studies, and they should hence
be interpreted with caution. See Supplement 1: Codebook for the definitions of codes and variables. Standard errors in parentheses;
*p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01.
Dependent variable
1 2 3 4 5
-1.334** -1.120*
ESG disclosure (vs performance)
(0.568) (0.622)
0.144 0.154
Accounting-based (vs market)
(0.923) (0.965)
-0.082 -0.231
ESG score (vs E/S/G/other)
(0.594) (0.623)
-0.004 -0.028
Negative screening or divesting
(0.575) (0.597)
-1.146** -1.041
Pooled strategies
(0.523) (0.559)
0.865* 0.450
ESG integration
(0.520) (0.557)
0.075 0.451
Active management
(0.437) (0.484)
0.313 -0.083
Equities
(0.443) (0.486)
Observations 86 86 86 86 86
Notes. This table shows the result of an ordered logit regression model for investor-focused studies with five model specifications. The
smaller sample size suppressed the power of the statistical tests, but some coefficients were comparable in magnitude to the models in
Table 5. Coefficients for pooled strategies as defined by researchers were largest among portfolio management strategies suggesting
that papers that relied on that ESG portfolio management selection were more likely to find negative or neutral results. The difference
between the pooled strategies and ESG integration was statistically significant. See Supplement 1: Codebook for the definitions of codes
and variables. Standard errors in parentheses; *p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01.
Records excluded
(n = 1,465)
Screening
Records screened
Level 1
Records labeled as
background papers
(n = 108)
Full-text articles de-prioritized Studies that are prioritized Studies included in qualitative
(year = 2015, 2016) and eligible synthesis (meta-analyses)
(n = 354) (M = 579; I = 103; CC = 105) (n = 27)
Inclusion
Atz, U., Van Holt, T., Douglas, E., & Whelan, T. (2019). Eccles, R. G., Kastrapeli, M. D., & Potter, S. J. (2017).
The Return on Sustainability Investment (ROSI): How to Integrate ESG into Investment Decision-
Monetizing Financial Benefits of Sustainability Making: Results of a Global Survey of Institutional
Actions in Companies. Review of Business, 39(2). Investors. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,
Berg, F., Kölbel, J., & Rigobon, R. (2019). Aggregate 29(4), 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12267
Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings. Eurosif. (2018). European SRI 2018 Study. http://
SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ www.eurosif.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/
ssrn.3438533 European-SRI-2018-Study.pdf
Chatterjee, S. (2018). Fund Characteristics and Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG
Performances of Socially Responsible Mutual Funds: Performance and Firm Value: The Moderating Role
Do ESG Ratings Play a Role? ArXiv:1806.09906 of Disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 38, 45–64.
[q-Fin]. http://arxiv.org/abs/1806.09906 EconLit. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001
Cheema-Fox, A., LaPerla, B. R., Serafeim, G., Fernández, M. S., Abu-Alkheil, A., & Khartabiel, G.
Turkington, D., & Wang, H. (2019). Decarbonization M. (2019). Do German Green Mutual Funds Perform
Factors. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10/ Better Than Their Peers? Business and Economics
ggkrb6 Research Journal, 10(2), 297–312. https://doi.org/10/
Cheema-Fox, A., LaPerla, B. R., Serafeim, G., & ggkrbb
Wang, H. (Stacie). (2020). Corporate Resilience and Glossner, S. (2018). The Price of Ignoring ESG
Response During COVID-19 (SSRN Scholarly Paper Risks (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3004689). Social
ID 3578167). Social Science Research Network. Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3578167 abstract=3004689
Clark, C., & Lalit, H. (2020). ESG Improvers: An Alpha Hang, M., Geyer-Klingeberg, J., & Rathgeber, A.
Enhancing Factor. Rockefeller Capital Management. W. (2019). It is merely a matter of time: A meta-
https://rcm.rockco.com/insights_item/esg- analysis of the causality between environmental
improvers-an-alpha-enhancing-factor/ performance and financial performance. Business
Das, N., Chatterje, S., Ruf, B., & Sunder, A. (2018). Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 257–273.
ESG Ratings and the Performance of Socially Hernaus, A. I. (2019). Exploring the strategic variety
Responsible Mutual Funds: A Panel Study. Journal of of socially responsible investment—Financial
Finance Issues, 17(1), 49–57. performance insights about SRI strategy portfolios.
Demers, E., Hendrikse, J., Joos, P., & Lev, B. (2020). Sustainability Accounting Management and Policy
ESG Didn’t Immunize Stocks Against the COVID-19 Journal, 10(3), 545–569. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Market Crash (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3675920). SAMPJ-07-2018-0182
Social Science Research Network. https://doi. Hübel, B., & Scholz, H. (2020). Integrating
org/10.2139/ssrn.3675920 sustainability risks in asset management: The role
Diaz-Rainey, I., Robertson, B., & Wilson, C. (2017). of ESG exposures and ESG ratings. Journal of Asset
Stranded research? Leading finance journals are Management, 21(1), 52–69.
silent on climate change. Climatic Change, 143(1–2), Ielasi, F., Rossolini, M., & Limberti, S. (2018).
243–260. https://doi.org/10/gbmz8g Sustainability-themed mutual funds: An empirical
Dorfleitner, G., Utz, S., & Wimmer, M. (2018). Patience examination of risk and performance. Journal of Risk
pays off – corporate social responsibility and long- Finance, 19(3), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRF-
term stock returns. Journal of Sustainable Finance & 12-2016-0159
Investment, 8(2), 132–157. https://doi.org/10/ggk2kd In, S. Y., Park, K. Y., & Monk, A. H. B. (2019). Is “Being
Douglas, E., Van Holt, T., & Whelan, T. (2017). Green” Rewarded in the Market?: An Empirical
Responsible Investing: Guide to ESG Data Providers Investigation of Decarbonization and Stock Returns
and Relevant Trends. The Journal of Environmental (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3020304). Social Science
Investing, 8(1), 92–114. Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/
abstract=3020304
Busch, T., & Friede, G. (2018). The Robustness of Lu, L., & Taylor, M. (2015). Which Factors
the Corporate Social and Financial Performance Moderate the Relationship between Sustainability
Relation: A Second-Order Meta-Analysis. Performance and Financial Performance? A Meta-
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Analysis Study. Journal of International Accounting
Management, 25(4), 583–608. https://doi. Research, 15, 150320083431001. https://doi.
org/10.1002/csr.1480 org/10.2308/jiar-51103
Gallardo-Vázquez, D., Barroso-Méndez, M. Miras-Rodríguez, M. del M., Carrasco-Gallego, A., &
J., Pajuelo-Moreno, M. L., & Sánchez-Meca, J. Escobar-Pérez, B. (2015). Are Socially Responsible
(2019). Corporate social responsibility disclosure Behaviors Paid Off Equally? A Cross-cultural
and performance: A meta-analytic approach. Analysis. Corporate Social - Responsibility and
Sustainability, 11(4), 1115. Environmental Management, 22(4), 237. ABI/
Hang, M., Geyer-Klingeberg, J., & Rathgeber, A. INFORM Collection.
W. (2019). It is merely a matter of time: A meta- Plewnia, F., & Guenther, E. (2017). The benefits
analysis of the causality between environmental of doing good: A meta-analysis of corporate
performance and financial performance. Business philanthropy business outcomes and its implications
Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 257–273. for management control. Journal of Management
Hoobler, J. M., Masterson, C. R., Nkomo, S. M., & Control, 28(3), 347–376.
Michel, E. J. (2018). The Business Case for Women Rost, K., & Ehrmann, T. (2017). Reporting Biases
Leaders: Meta-Analysis, Research Critique, and Path in Empirical Management Research: The Example
Forward. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2473–2499. of Win-Win Corporate Social Responsibility.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316628643 Business and Society, 56(6), 840–888. ProQuest
Hou, M., Liu, H., Fan, P., & Wei, Z. (2016). Does CSR Central; Sociological Abstracts. https://doi.
practice pay off in East Asian firms? A meta-analytic org/10.1177/0007650315572858
investigation: APJM APJM. Asia Pacific Journal of Vishwanathan, P., van Oosterhout, H. (J. ), Heugens,
Management, 33(1), 195–228. ProQuest Central. P. P. M. A. R., Duran, P., & Essen, M. (2019). Strategic
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9431-2 CSR: A Concept Building Meta-Analysis. Journal of
Jeong, S.-H., & Harrison, D. A. (2017). Glass breaking, Management Studies, joms.12514. https://doi.org/10/
strategy making, and value creating: Meta-analytic gf3hq9
outcomes of women as CEOs and TMT members. Wang, Q., Dou, J., & Jia, S. (2016). A Meta-Analytic
Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1219–1252. Review of Corporate Social Responsibility
López-Arceiz, F. J., Bellostas, A. J., & Rivera, and Corporate Financial Performance: The
P. (2018). Twenty Years of Research on the Moderating Effect of Contextual Factors.
Relationship Between Economic and Social Business & Society, 55(8), 1083–1121. https://doi.
Performance: A Meta-analysis Approach. Social org/10.1177/0007650315584317
Indicators Research, 140(2), 453–484. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11205-017-1791-1