Measurement of U.S. Equity Mutual Funds’ Environmental Responsibility Attractiveness for an Individual Investor

Paz Méndez¹, Bouchra M’Zali², Pascal Lang³, Blanca Pérez-Gladish^1*

¹Department of Quantitative Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
²UQAM, ESG-CRSDD, Montréal, Canada.
³Laval University, Québec, Canada.

DOI: 10.4236/ojbm.2014.22012                

Abstract

Socially responsible mutual funds, also known as socially responsible invested funds, are one of the main instruments of Socially Responsible Investment (SRI). The term “fund” is used to refer to a ready-made financial product where investor’s money is pooled into a portfolio and a fund/investment manager decides which shares to buy. Therefore, this financial product is attractive for passive investors without a high degree of financial knowledge. Nevertheless, investment tools aimed at assisting the investors in their selection of socially responsible companies which serve best their social and environmental values are rather scare and this lack of tools assisting investors in SRI is even more important when we refer to socially responsible mutual funds. The aim of this paper is to assist individual passive investors in their investment decisions providing them with a ranking of mutual funds adjusted to their social, environmental and ethical particular preferences. The proposed approach is illustrated with a real US equity mutual funds’ ranking example.

Keywords

Socially Responsible Investment; Environment; Equity Mutual Funds Evaluation; Multicriteria Decision Analysis; Decision Support Systems

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Barnett, M.L. and Salomon, R.M. (2006) Beyond Dichotomy: The Curvilinear Relationship between Social Responsibility and Financial Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27, 1101-1122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.557
[2]	Renneboog, L., Horst, J.T. and Zhang, C.D. (2008) Socially Responsible Investments: Institutional Aspects, Performance, and Investor Behavior. Journal of Banking and Finance, 32, 1723-1742. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2007.12.039
[3]	Lee, D.D., Humphrey, J.E., Benson, K.L. and Ahn, J.Y.K. (2010) Socially Responsible Investment Fund Performance: the Impact of Screening Intensity. Accounting and Finance, 50, 351-370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2009.00336.x
[4]	Jegourel, Y. and Maveyraud, S.A. (2010) A Reassessment of European SRI Funds Underperformance: Does the Intensity of Extra-Financial Negative Screening Matter? Economics Bulletin, 30, 913-923.
[5]	Scholtens, B. (2007) Financial and Social Performance of Socially Responsible Investments in the Netherlands. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15, 1090-1105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00633.x
[6]	Pérez-Gladish, B. and M’Zali, B. (2010) An AHP-Based Approach to Mutual Funds Social Performance Measurement. International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making (IJMCDM), 1, 103-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJMCDM.2010.033689
[7]	Bana e Costa, C.A. and Vansnick, J.-C. (1999) The MACBETH Approach: Basic Ideas, Software, and an Application. In: Meskens, N. and Roubens, M., Eds., Advances in Decision Analysis (Book Series: Mathematical Modelling: Theory and Applications), Vol. 4, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 131-157.
[8]	Bana e Costa, C.A., De Corte, J.M. and Vansnick, J.C. (2003) MACBETH. Working Paper LSEOR 03.56, London School of Economics, London.
[9]	Bana e Costa, C.A., Vansnick, J.C. and De Corte, J.M. (2011) MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique). In: Cochran, J.J., Eds., Wiley Encyclopedia in Operational Research and Management Science, Wiley, New York, 2945-2950. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470400531.eorms0970
[10]	Bana e Costa, C.A., Barroso, L.A. and Soares, J.O. (2002) Qualitative Modelling of Credit Scoring: A Case Study in Banking. Journal of European Research Studies, 5, 37-51.
[11]	Bana e Costa, C.A. and Oliveira, M.D. (2012) A Multicriteria Decision Analysis Model for Faculty Evaluation. OMEGA: The International Journal of Management Science 40, 424-436. www.sciencedirect.com.
[12]	Koellner, T., Weber, O., Fenchel, M. and Scholz, R. (2005) Principles of Sustainability Rating of Investment Funds. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14, 54-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bse.423
[13]	KLD (2007) KLD Research. Environmental, Social and Governance Ratings Criteria. www.kld.com