Institutional investor cliques and governance
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Empirical evidence shows that ESG investment can generate societal impact through various channels such as environmental activism, shareholder coordination, institutional commitment, divestment, and two-tier engagement.
“Empirical evidence shows that ESG investment can generate societal impact through various channels such as environmental activism (Naaraayanan et al., 2020), shareholder coordination (Crane et al., 2019), institutional commitment (Dyck et al., 2019), divestment (Berk & van Binsbergen, 2021), and two-tier engagement (Dimson et al., 2021).”
From A review on ESG investing: Investors' expectations, beliefs and perceptions (2024) · cites this paper as Crane et al., 2019
Only European institutional investors impact firms' environmental and social performance.
“Crane et al. (2019)show that only European institutional investors impact firms' environmental and social perfor- mance.”
From A review on ESG investing: Investors' expectations, beliefs and perceptions (2024) · cites this paper as Crane et al. (2019)
Higher institutional ownership, stronger investors' social norm or strong community belief, EU regional concentration, longer investor horizon, and public commitments are institutional investor characteristics that contribute to the improvement of firm's ESG performance.
“Higher institutional ownership (Chen et al., 2020;Crane et al., 2019;Dyck et al., 2019), stronger investors' social norm or strong community belief (Dyck et al., 2019), EU regional concentration (Crane et al., 2019), longer investor horizon (Glossner, 2019;Kim et al., 2019), and public commitments (Gibson et al., 2022) are all institutional investor characteristics that have been found to contri”
From A review on ESG investing: Investors' expectations, beliefs and perceptions (2024) · cites this paper as Crane et al., 2019
Cites
Dimson, E., Karakaş, O., & Li, X. (2015) · Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhv044 · Cited by 1,242 · see citing works
Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership
AZAR, J., SCHMALZ, M. C., & TECU, I. (2018) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/jofi.12698 · Cited by 980 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review on ESG investing: Investors' expectations, beliefs and perceptions
Kräussl, R., Oladiran, T., & Stefanova, D. (2024) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/joes.12599 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Dimson, E., Karakaş, O., & Li, X. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3209072 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
- Authors
- Crane, A. D., Koch, A., & Michenaud, S.
- Affiliations
- Rice University (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- DePaul University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Crane, Alan D.
- ORCID
- Crane, Alan D.
- Venue
- Journal of Financial Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 133
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 175-197
- ISSN
- 0304-405X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3122643534
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 33.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Financial Economics (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Corporate Finance and Governance
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
- Keywords
- institutional investors, corporate governance, proxy voting, shareholder networks, institutional ownership, liquidity shocks, firm value, exit threats, voice
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
