Cited by 54FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceSustainable Finance and Green BondsCommunity Development and Social Impact

Why Do Retail Investors Pick Green Investments? A Lab-in-the-Field Experiment with Crowdfunders

Open access
Siemroth, Christoph, Hornuf, Lars·2023·Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

Abstract

Do investors invest in green projects because they expect higher returns, to help the environment, or to help other people? To separate these motivations, we run a decision experiment in which crowdfunders choose between a higher return or a positive environmental impact, and between a higher return or a positive social impact. A majority of investors choose environmental and social impact over higher returns, conditional on large enough impact. Combining the experimental data with historical investments, we find that investors allocate a larger share of funds to green projects if they value environmental impact more and if they expect a higher return, but not if they value social impact more, all else equal. These findings suggest that investors have a preference for positive environmental impact, and satisfy it by investing in green projects. Finally, we introduce new survey measures of impact for future use, which are experimentally validated and predict field behavior.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jebo.2023.02.023

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Ahlers, G.K., Cumming, D., Günther, C., Schweizer, D., 2015. Signaling in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 39 (4), 955-980 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0001)
  2. [1989.](http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(23)00063-X/sbref0002)
  3. Becker, G., Degroot, M., Marschak, J., 1964. Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. Behavioral Science 9 (3), 226-232 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0007)
  4. Bolton, P., Kacperczyk, M., 2021. Do investors care about carbon risk? Journal of Financial Economics 142 (2), 517-549 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0007s1)
  5. Brodback, D., Günster, N., Pouget, S., Wang, R., 2021. The valuation of corporate social responsibility: A willingness-to-pay experiment working paper . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0009)
  6. Bull, C., Courty, P., Doyon, M., Rondeau, D., 2019. Failure of the becker-degroot-marschak mechanism in inexperienced subjects: New tests of the game form misconception hypothesis. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 159, 235-253 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0010)
  7. Buser, T., Niederle, M., Oosterbeek, H., 2021. Can competitiveness predict education and labor market outcomes? evidence from incentivized choice and survey measures. NBER Working Paper 28916 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0011)
  8. Camerer, C.F., Hogarth, R.M., 1999. The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19 (1), 7-42 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0012)
  9. Caviola, L., Faulmüller, N., Everett, J.A., Savulescu, J., Kahane, G., 2014. The evaluability bias in charitable giving: Saving administration costs or saving lives? Judgment and Decision Making 9 (4), 303 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0013)
  10. Chay, K.Y., Powell, J.L., 2001. Semiparametric censored regression models. Journal of Economic Perspectives 15 (4), 29-42 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0014)
  11. Chinn, S., Hart, P.S., Soroka, S., 2020. Politicization and polarization in climate change news content, 1985-2017. Science Communication 42 (1), 112-129 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0015)
  12. Crumpler, H., Grossman, P.J., 2008. An experimental test of warm glow giving. Journal of Public Economics 92 (5-6), 1011-1021 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0016)
  13. Cumming, D., Hornuf, L., 2022. Marketplace lending of small-and medium-sized enterprises. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 16 (1), 32-66 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0017)
  14. Cumming, D., Meoli, M., Vismara, S., 2021. Does equity crowdfunding democratize entrepreneurial finance? Small Business Economics 56 (2), 533-552 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0018)
  15. Cumming, D., Reardon, R.S., 2022. Covid-19 and entrepreneurial processes in us equity crowdfunding. Journal of Small Business Management 1-24 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0019)
  16. Cumming, D.J., Leboeuf, G., Schwienbacher, A., 2017. Crowdfunding cleantech. Energy Economics 65, 292-303 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0020)
  17. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., Wagner, G.G., 2011. Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association 9 (3), 522-550 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0021)
  18. Dorfleitner, G., Hornuf, L., 2023. Der deutsche FinTech-Markt. In: Voß, T. (Ed.), Recht der FinTechs. De Gruyter . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0011k1)
  19. Dorfleitner, G., Priberny, C., Schuster, S., Stoiber, J., Weber, M., de Castro, I., Kammler, J., 2016. Description-text related soft information in peer-to-peer lending-evidence from two leading european platforms. Journal of Banking & Finance 64, 169-187 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0023)
  20. Døskeland, T., Pedersen, L.J.T., 2015. Investing with brain or heart? a field experiment on responsible investment. Management Science 62 (6), 1632-1644 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0024)
  21. Edmans, A., 2011. Does the stock market fully value intangibles? employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics 101 (3), 621-640. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.021 . · DOI · Paper page
  22. Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., 2018. Global evidence on economic preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 133 (4), 1645-1692 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0026)
  23. Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., 2016. The preference survey module: A validated instrument for measuring risk, time, and social preferences IZA discussion paper (9674) . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0027)
  24. Farrell, J., 2016. Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113 (1), 92-97 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0028)
  25. Friede, G., Busch, T., Bassen, A., 2015. Esg and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 20 0 0 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (4), 210-233 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0029)
  26. Global Sustainable Investment Alliance, 2021. Global sustainable investment review.
  27. Gregory, A.G., Howard, D., 2009. The nonprofit starvation cycle. Stanford Social Innovation Review 7 (4), 49-53 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0031)
  28. Holt, C.A., Smith, A.M., 2016. Belief elicitation with a synchronized lottery choice menu that is invariant to risk attitudes. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 8 (1), 110-139 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0032)
  29. Hong, H., Kacperczyk, M., 2009. The price of sin: The effects of social norms on markets. Journal of Financial Economics 93 (1), 15-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco. 20 08.09.0 01 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.09.001 · DOI
  30. Hornuf, L., Schilling, T., Schwienbacher, A., 2022. The relevance of investor rights in crowdinvesting. Journal of Corporate Finance 77, 101927 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0034)
  31. Hornuf, L., Siemroth, C., 2022. A field experiment on attracting crowdfunders. Economics Letters 110928 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0035)
  32. Karlan, D., Wood, D.H., 2017. The effect of effectiveness: Donor response to aid effectiveness in a direct mail fundraising experiment. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 66, 1-8 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0036)
  33. Kirby, E., Worner, S., 2014. Crowd-funding: An infant industry growing fast. IOSCO Research Department . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0037)
  34. Lammer, D., Hanspal, T., Hackethal, A., 2019. Who are the bitcoin investors? evidence from indirect cryptocurrency investments working paper . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0038)
  35. Lin, M., Prabhala, N.R., Viswanathan, S., 2013. Judging borrowers by the company they keep: Friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Management science 59 (1), 17-35 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0039)
  36. Lin, M., Viswanathan, S., 2016. Home bias in online investments: An empirical study of an online crowdfunding market. Management Science 62 (5), 1393-1414 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0040)
  37. Luo, A., Balvers, R., 2017. Social screens and systematic investor boycott risk. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 52 (1), 365-399 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0041)
  38. [2017.](http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(23)00063-X/sbref0042)
  39. Metzger, L., Günther, I., 2019. Making an impact? the relevance of information on aid effectiveness for charitable giving. a laboratory experiment. Journal http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0043) of Development Economics 136, 18-33 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0043)
  40. Mohammadi, A., Shafi, K., 2017. How wise are crowd? a comparative study of crowd and institutions. In: Academy of Management Proceedings, p. 13707 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0044)
  41. Pedersen, L.H., Fitzgibbons, S., Pomorskia, L., 2021. Responsible investing: The esg-efficient frontier. Journal of Financial Economics 142 (2), 572-597 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0043a1)
  42. Penz, R.F., Hörisch, J., Tenner, I., 2022. Investors in environmental ventures want good money-and a clean conscience: How framing, interest rates, and the environmental impact of crowdlending projects influence funding decisions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 182, 121849 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0046)
  43. Powell, J.L., 1984. Least absolute deviations estimation for the censored regression model. Journal of Econometrics 25 (3), 303-325 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0047)
  44. Renneboog, L., Horst, J.T., Zhang, C., 2008. The price of ethics and stakeholder governance: The performance of socially responsible mutual funds. Journal of Corporate Finance 14 (3), 302-322 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0048)
  45. Unger, N., Bond, T.C., Wang, J.S., Koch, D.M., Menon, S., Shindell, D.T., Bauer, S., 2010. Attribution of climate forcing to economic sectors. Proceedings of the http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0050)
  46. Vismara, S., 2016. Equity retention and social network theory in equity crowdfunding. Small Business Economics 46 (4), 579-590 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0051)
  47. Vismara, S., 2018. Information cascades among investors in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 42 (3), 467-497 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0052)
  48. Zerbib, O.D., 2020. A sustainable capital asset pricing podel (s-capm): Evidence from green investing and sin stock exclusion. SSRN working paper Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract = 3455090 . http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0167-2681(2300063-X/sbref0053)

Authors
Siemroth, C., & Hornuf, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Essex (GB)
  • Technische Universität Dresden (DE)
Corresponding author
Siemroth, Christoph
Venue
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-05
Volume
209
Pages
74-90
ISSN
0167-2681 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4324027470
Cited by
54
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 1
FWCI
15.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Essex
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (031B0781A)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/T015357/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Sustainable Finance and Green Bonds
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Community Development and Social Impact
Keywords
green investment, crowdfunding, retail investors, environmental impact, social impact, investor motivation, expected returns, impact valuation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review