The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Market Interest in Nonfinancial Information
Open accessAbstract
During the past two decades, more and more companies have volunteered to provide “corporate social responsibility” or “sustainability” reports that include information about their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies and performance. Such reporting has come about largely in response to demands by a wide range of stakeholders for information about how the company's operations are affecting society in a number of different ways. But do investors really care about companies' ESG performance and policies? Using data from Bloomberg, the authors provide the first broadly based empirical evidence of investors' interest in ESG data. More specifically, the authors show how interest in the top 20 ESG metrics varies with geographical location (European vs. American), asset class (fixed income vs. equity), and firm type. At the aggregate market level, there is greater interest in environmental and governance information than in “social” information. U.S. investors are more interested than their European counterparts in governance and less interested in environmental information. Equity investors are interested in a wider range of nonfinancial information than are fixed income investors. And whereas sell‐side analysts are primarily interested in greenhouse gas emissions, money managers tend to focus on a broader set of metrics. Similarly, pension funds and hedge funds have shown interest in more nonfinancial metrics than insurance companies. The authors' bottom line: Companies need to recognize the growing market interest in nonfinancial information and ensure that they are providing it according to the specific information needs of market users.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Consequences of Mandatory Corporate Sustainability Reporting
Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2011) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1799589 · Cited by 484
Self-citation
Cited by
The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance
Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2014.1984 · Cited by 4,104
Self-citationCorporate social responsibility and access to finance
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2131 · Cited by 3,896
Self-citationFirm-value effects of carbon emissions and carbon disclosures
Matsumura, E. M., Prakash, R., & Vera-Muñoz, S. C. (2014) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr-50629 · Cited by 1,681
Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2015) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2268 · Cited by 1,124
Self-citationAlsayegh, M. F., Abdul Rahman, R., & Homayoun, S. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12093910 · Cited by 774
Metadata
- Authors
- Eccles, R. G., Serafeim, G., & Krzus, M. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Corporate Finance
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 113-127
- ISSN
- 1078-1196 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6622
- OpenAlex
- W2058717750
- Cited by
- 521
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 50.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Market Interest in Nonfinancial Information. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2011.00357.x
- The paper
- Eccles, R. G., Serafeim, G., & Krzus, M. P. (2011). Market Interest in Nonfinancial Information. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2011.00357.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.