Corporate Environmental Policy and Shareholder Value: Following the Smart Money
Abstract
We examine the value consequences of corporate social responsibility through the lens of institutional shareholders. We find a sharp asymmetry between corporate policies that mitigate the firm’s exposure to environmental risk and those that enhance its perceived environmental friendliness (“greenness”). Institutional investors shun stocks with high environmental risk exposure, which we show have lower valuations, as predicted by risk management theory. These findings suggest that corporate environmental policies that mitigate environmental risk exposure create shareholder value. In contrast, firms that increase greenness do not create shareholder value and are also shunned by institutional investors.
Integrity 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?
Another form of risk management would be to avoid problematic firms.
“Another form of risk management would be to avoid problematic firms as pointed out theoretically by Heinkel, Kraus, and Zechner (2001) and empirically tested by Fernando, Sharfman, and Uysal (2017).”
From The Importance of Climate Risks for Institutional Investors (2020) · cites this paper as Fernando, Sharfman, and Uysal (2017)
Cites
On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance
Carhart, M. M. (1997) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03808.x · Cited by 17,283 · see citing works
The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits
Friedman, M. (2007) · Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14 · Cited by 11,529 · see citing works
Corporate Governance and Equity Prices
Gompers, P., Ishii, J., & Metrick, A. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/00335530360535162 · Cited by 6,120 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Importance of Climate Risks for Institutional Investors
Krueger, P., Sautner, Z., & Starks, L. T. (2020) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhz137 · Cited by 3,034 · see citing works
Do Investors Value Sustainability? A Natural Experiment Examining Ranking and Fund Flows
HARTZMARK, S. M., & SUSSMAN, A. B. (2019) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/jofi.12841 · Cited by 1,607 · see citing works
You, L., & Payne, J. (2026) · Review of Financial Economics · doi:10.1002/rfe.70039
- Authors
- Fernando, C. S., Sharfman, M. P., & Uysal, V. B.
- ORCID
- Fernando, Chitru S.
- Venue
- Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2017-10
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2023-2051
- ISSN
- 0022-1090 (ISSN-L)
- 1756-6916
- OpenAlex
- W3125481893
- Cited by
- 241
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 29 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 26.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Sustainable Finance and Green Bonds
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
- Keywords
- corporate environmental policy, shareholder value, institutional investors, corporate social responsibility, environmental risk exposure, vegetation greenness, risk management theory, stock valuation, institutional ownership
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