Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Being Virtuous and Prosperous: SRI’s Conflicting Goals

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Can SRI be a means to make investors both virtuous and prosperous? This paper argues that there can be significant tensions between these goals, and that SRI (and indeed all investment) should not allow the pursuit of maximizing investment returns to prevail over an ethical agenda of promoting social and economic justice and environmental protection. The discourse on SRI has changed dramatically in recent years to the point where its capacity to promote social emancipation, sustainable development and other ethical goals is in jeopardy. Historically, SRI was a boutique sector of the market dominated by religious-based investors who sought to invest in accordance with the tenets of their faith. From the early 1970s, the aspirations of the SRI movement morphed significantly in the context of the divestment campaign against South Africa’s apartheid regime. No longer were social investors satisfied with just avoiding profit from immoral activities; instead, they also sought to change the behavior of others. Business case SRI is a problematic SRI benchmark for several reasons: often there is a countervailing business case for financing irresponsible activities, given the failure of markets to capture all social and environmental externalities; secondly, even if investors care about such concerns, there may be no means of financially quantifying their significance for investment purposes; and, thirdly, even if such factors can be financially quantified, they may be deemed to be such long-term financial costs or benefits that they become discounted and ignored. The ethics case for SRI and ethical business practices more generally takes the view that both investors and the companies they fund have ethical responsibilities that trump the pursuit of profit maximization. Ethical investment should be grounded on this foundation. However, it may not be enough. To keep ethical investment ethical will likely require institutionalizing new norms and governance standards, in such domains as reforming fiduciary duties and the internal governance of financial organizations. SRI’s own codes of conduct including the UNPRI have yet to demonstrate the robustness to move the financial community beyond business as usual.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, G.: 1993, ‘Pensions and Passivity’, Law and Contemporary Problems 5(1): 111-139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, K., R. Dhumale, and J. Eatwell: 2006, Global Governance of Financial Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, D., I. Drennan and L. Bates: 2006, Reputational Risk: A Question of Trust (Lessons Professional Publishing, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, S.M.: 2002, Corporation Law and Economics (Foundation Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Beder, S.: 2002, Global Spin. The Corporate Assault on Environmentalism (Green Books, Dartington, UK).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. and S. Morse: 2008, Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable (Earthscan, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brill, H., J.A. Brill, and C. Feingenbaum: 1999, Investing with Your Values: Making Money and Making a Difference (Bloomberg Press, Princeton).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, D.W. and J.M. Brinkerhoff: 2002, ‘Governance Reforms and Failed States: Challenges and Implications’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 68(4): 511-531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, L.J. and P. Dunn: 2010, Business and Professional Ethics for Directors, Executives and Accountants, 5th ed. (South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA): 2005, National Instrument 81-106 Investment Fund Continuous Disclosure and Companion Policy 81-106CP (CSA).

  • Clark, R.: 1986, Corporate Law (Aspen Publishers, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M.: 1998, The Corporation And Its Stakeholders: Classic and Contemporary Readings. (University of Toronto Press, Toronto).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosans, C.: 2009, ‘Does Milton Friedman Support a Vigorous Business Ethics?’ Journal of Business Ethics 87(3): 391-399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cragg, W.: 2000, ‘Human Rights and Business Ethics: Fashioning a New Social Contract’, Journal of Business Ethics 27(1-2): 205-214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cragg, W.: (2004). Human Rights, Globalization and the Modern Shareholder Owned Corporation. In T. Campbell (ed.), Human Rights and the Moral Responsibilities of Corporate and Public Sector Organisations. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 105-128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Criscione, V.: 2009, March 16, ‘Pension Fund Treads a Thorny Path’, Financial Times, p. 9.

  • Daly, H.: 1992, ‘Allocation, Distribution and Scale: Towards an Economics that is Efficient, Just and Sustainable’, Ecological Economics 6: 185-193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S., J. Lukomnik and D. Pitt-Watson: 2006, The New Capitalists: How Citizen Investors are Reshaping the Corporate Agenda (Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Guercio, D. and J. Hawkins: 1999, ‘The Motivation and Impact of Pension Fund Activism’, Journal of Financial Economics 52: 293-340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devall, B. and G. Sessions: 2001, Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered (Gibbs Smith, Layton).

    Google Scholar 

  • Doering, D., et al.: 2002, Tomorrow’s Markets - Global Trends and their Implications for Business (World Resources Institute, Washington DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and L.E. Preston: 1995, ‘The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implication’, Academy of Management Review 20(1): 65-91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, H. and D.R. Fischel: 1985, ‘Limited Liability and the Corporation’, University of Chicago Law Review 52: 89-117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elhauge, E.: 2005, ‘Sacrificing Corporate Profits in the Public Interest’, New York University Law Review 80(3): 733-869.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fair Pensions: 2006, UK Pension Scheme Transparency on Social, Environmental and Ethical Issues (Fair Pensions, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R: 1999, Predatory Globalization: A Critique (Polity Press, Cambridge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer: 2005, A Legal Framework for the Integration of Environmental, Social and Governance Issues into Institutional Investment (UNEPFI, Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiative (GRI): 2010, ‘G3 Guidelines’, http://www.globalreporting.org/ReportingFramework/G3Guidelines.

  • John Glover, ‘Banks and Fiduciary Relationships’ (1995) 7(1) Bond Law Review 50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S. and T. Little: 2003, The Gap in GAAP: An Examination of Environmental Accounting Loopholes (Rose Foundation, Oakland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribben, C. and M. Gitsham: 2006, Will UK Pension Funds Become More Responsible: A Survey of Trustees (UK Social Investment Forum, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunningham, N.: 2009, Corporate Environmental Responsibility (Ashgate, Farnham).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harte, G., L. Lewis and D. Owen: 1991, ‘Ethical Investment and the Corporate Reporting Function’, Critical Perspectives on Accounting 12(3): 227-253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawken, P.: 2004, Socially Responsible Investing (Natural Capital Institute, Sausalito).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, J., and A. Williams: 2000, The Rise of Fiduciary Capitalism (University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia).

    Google Scholar 

  • Herz, S., A. Vina, and J. Sohn: 2007, Development without Conflict: The Business Case for Community Consent (World Resources Institute, Washington DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, A.: 1999, Principles of Equity and Trusts (Cavendish, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization (ISO): 2010, ‘About ISO Social Responsibility’, http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/830949/3934883/3935096/07_gen_info/aboutStd.html.

  • Jeucken, M,: 2001, Sustainable Finance and Banking: The Financial Sector and the Future of the Planet (Earthscan, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Juravle, C. and A. Lewis: 2008, ‘Identifying Impediments to SRI in Europe: A Review of the Practitioner and Academic Literature’, Business Ethics: A European Review 17(3): 285-310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, N.: 2000, No Logo (Flamingo Harper-Collins, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozul-Wright, R. and R. Rowthorn: 1998, ‘Spoilt for Choice? Multinational Corporations and the Geography of International Production’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 14(2): 74-92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labatt, S. and R. White: 2002, Environmental Finance: A Guide to Environmental Risk Assessment and Financial Products (John Wiley and Sons, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Laffont, J. and J. Tirole: 1991, ‘The Politics of Government Decision Making: A Theory of Regulatory Capture’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4): 1089-1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langbein, J.: 2005 ‘Questioning the Trust Law Duty of Loyalty: Sole Interest or Best Interest?’ Yale Law Journal 114: 929-990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langbein, J. and R.A. Posner: 1980, ‘Social Investing and the Law of Trusts’, Michigan Law Review 79: 72-112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light, A. and H. Rolston III, eds.: 2002, Environmental Ethics: An Anthology (Blackwell, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Longstreth, B.: 1986, Modern Investment Management and the Prudent Man Rule (Oxford University Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N.: 1995, Social Systems (Stanford University Press, Palo Alto).

    Google Scholar 

  • Macey, J.: 1991, ‘An Economic Analysis of the Various Rationales for Making Shareholders the Exclusive Beneficiaries of Corporate Fiduciary Duties’, Stetson Law Review 21: 23-55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marjorie, K.: 2001, The Divine Right of Capital: Dethroning the Corporate Aristocracy (Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marris, R. and D.C. Mueller: 1980, ‘The Corporation, Competition and the Invisible Hand’, Journal of Economic Literature 18: 32-63.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGeachie, S., M. Kiernan and E. Kirzner: 2005, Finance and the Environment in North America: The State of Play of the Integration of Environmental Issues into Financial Research (Environment Canada, Ottawa).

    Google Scholar 

  • McMurtry, J.: 1998, The Cancer Stage of Capitalism (Pluto Press, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Board (MEAB): 2005, Living Beyond Our Means: Natural Assets and Human Well-Being. Statement from the Board (MEAB).

  • Moodie, D.W. and J.C. Lehr: 2008, ‘Macro-Historical Geography and the Great Chartered Companies: The Case of the Hudson’s Bay Company’, Canadian Geographer 25(2): 267-271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parliament of Ireland, Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service: 2006, Parliamentary Debates (February 23), p. 44.

  • Purcell, N.: 2007; Remarks, UNEPFI Global Roundtable, Melbourne, October 24–25.

  • Quarter, J., L. Mook, and B. Richmond: 2003, What Counts: Social Accounting for Nonprofits and Cooperatives (Prentice Hall, New Jersey).

    Google Scholar 

  • Redgwell, C.J.: 1997, ‘Privatisation and Environmental Regulation: Some General Observations’, Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law 15: 34-40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B.J.: 2006, ‘Financing Environmental Sustainability: A New Role for the Law’, in S. Benn and D. Dunphy (eds), Corporate Governance and Sustainability: Challenges for Theory and Practice (Routledge, London), 122-142

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B. J.: 2007, ‘Financing Sustainability: The New Transnational Governance of Socially Responsible Investment’, in Yearbook of International Environmental Law (Oxford University Press, New York), pp. 73–110.

  • Richardson, B.J.: 2008, Socially Responsible Investment Law: Regulating the Unseen Polluters (Oxford University Press, New York).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sarra, J.: 2003, ‘The Corporation as Symphony: Are Shareholders First Violin or Second Fiddle?’ UBC Law Review 36: 403-441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S.: 1996, Losing Control? Sovereignty in the Age of Globalization (Columbia University Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Slapper, G. and S. Tombs: 1999, Corporate Crime (Longman, Harlow, UK).

    Google Scholar 

  • Soros, G.: 2008, The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means (Public Affairs, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Soskolne, C. ed.: 2007, Sustaining Life on Earth (Lexington Books, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R.B.: 2001, ‘A New Generation of Environmental Regulation?’ Capital University Law Review 29: 21-182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout, L.: 2002, ‘Lecture and Commentary on the Social Responsibility of Corporate Entities: Bad and Not-So-Bad Arguments for Shareholder Primacy’, Southern California Law Review 75: 189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R.: 1990, ‘Paradoxes of the Regulatory State’, University of Chicago Law Review 57: 407-441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R.: 1991, ‘Administrative Substance’, Duke Law Journal 3: 607-646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teubner, G.: 1987, Juridification of Social Spheres (Walter deGruyter, Berlin).

    Google Scholar 

  • Teubner, G.: 1998, ‘Juridification: Concepts, Aspects, Limits, Solutions’, in R. Baldwin, C. Scott, and C. Hood (eds), A Reader on Regulation (Oxford University Press, Oxford), 389-410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, R.: 2008, ‘Ethical Investments: A Case of Disjointed Thinking’, Cambridge Law Journal 67: 396-422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triolo, P., M. Palmer, and S. Waygood: 2000, A Capital Solution: Faith, Finance and Concern for a Living Planet (Pilkington Press, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Troyer, T., W. Slocombe, and R. Boisture: 1985, ‘Divestment of South Africa Investments: The Legal Implications for Foundations, Other Charitable Institutions, and Pension Funds’, Georgetown law Journal 74: 127-161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trucost. 2007, Carbon Counts 2007: The Carbon Footprint Ranking of UK Investment (Trucost, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Unerman, J., J. Bebbington, and B. O’Dwyer (eds): 2007, Sustainability Accounting and Accountability (Routledge, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Union of Concerned Scientists: 1992, ‘World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity’, http://www.ucsusa.org/ucs/about/1992-world-scientists-warning-to-humanity.html.

  • United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): 2004, Use of Economic Instruments in Environmental Policy: Opportunities and Challenges (UNEP, Nairobi).

  • United Nations Environment Program Finance Initiative (UNEPFI): 2004a, The Materiality of Social, Environmental and Corporate Governance Issues in Equity Pricing (UNEPFI, Geneva).

  • UNEPFI: 2004b. Generation Lost: Young Financial Analysts and Environmental, Social and Governance Issues. Executive Summary (UNEPFI, Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEPFI: 2006, Show Me the Money: Linking Environmental, Social and Governance Issues to Company Value (UNEPFI, Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEPFI: 2007, Responsible Investment in Focus: How Leading Public Pension Funds are Meeting the Challenge (UNEPFI, Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEPFI: 2009, Fiduciary Responsibility. Legal and Practical Aspects of Integrating Environmental, Social and Governance Issues into Institutional Investment (UNEPFI, Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • Watt, G.: 2006, Trusts and Equity (2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, P.: 2009, Directors’ Powers and Duties (LexisNexis, Wellington).

    Google Scholar 

  • Waygood, S.: 2006, Capital Market Campaigning (Risk Books, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. and J. Conley: 2007, ‘Triumph or Tragedy: The Curious Path of Corporate Disclosure Reform in the UK’, William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review 31(2): 317-361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, R.M.: 2001, ‘Will the Nation-State Survive Globalization?’ Foreign Affairs 80(1): 178-190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, S.: 2006, ‘Voluntary Environmental Codes and Sustainability’, in B.J. Richardson and S. Wood (eds), Environmental Law for Sustainability (Hart Publishing, Oxford), 229-276.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Economic Forum (WEF): 2005, Mainstreaming Responsible Investment (WEF, Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeager, P.C.: 1991, The Limits of Law: The Public Regulation of Private Pollution (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada

    Benjamin J. Richardson

  2. Schulich School of Business, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Wes Cragg

Authors
  1. Benjamin J. Richardson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wes Cragg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin J. Richardson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Richardson, B.J., Cragg, W. Being Virtuous and Prosperous: SRI’s Conflicting Goals. J Bus Ethics 92 (Suppl 1), 21–39 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0632-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0632-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation