Moral sentiments and reciprocal obligations: The case for pension fund investment in community development
Ethics, Place and Environment 3 (1):7 – 24 (2000)
Squeezed between increasing entitlement expenditures and static or declining real revenues, state-funded urban development is increasingly perceived as an unaffordable luxury. At the same time, the power and significance of the banking sector is giving way to new kinds of financial institutions that have little or no interest in community development. Not surprisingly, it is often argued that pension funds ought to be more sensitive to community needs. However, some analysts argue that pension funds are properly only the agents of plan beneficiaries; any investment that took into account community needs would be, in effect, an unjustified tax on individuals' future welfare. Furthermore, analysts are very doubtful about the integrity of public pension plan investment decision-making. In this paper, I set out a morally informed justification of public pension plan investment in community development. In doing so, I develop a model of community development that stresses the reciprocal nature of the obligations embedded in the relationship between the community and pension plan beneficiaries. This approach also has significant implications for a wide variety of private sponsored plans. The paper begins with an assessment of pension fund decision-making and the practices of the investment management industry, drawing upon related research on pension fund capitalism. It goes on to issues of social obligation, referencing recent research on the nature of social contracts. To give the analysis empirical relevance I refer to the much disputed decision of the West Virginia legislature to require their public pension funds' Investment Management Board to invest in the state government's corrections authority.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction.Will Kymlicka - 2001 - Oxford University Press.
Liberalism and the Limits of Justice.Michael Sandel - 2003 - In Derek Matravers & Jonathan E. Pike (eds.), Journal of Philosophy. Routledge, in Association with the Open University. pp. 336-343.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Economic Inefficiency of Secrecy: Pension Fund Investors' Corporate Transparency Concerns. [REVIEW]Tessa Hebb - 2005 - Journal of Business Ethics 63 (4):385 - 405.
New CEOs Pursue Their Own Self-Interests by Sacrificing Stakeholder Value.Jeffrey S. Harrison & James O. Fiet - 1999 - Journal of Business Ethics 19 (3):301 - 308.
The Ethical Undercurrents of Pension Fund Management.Bryan Dennis - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (3):315-335.
Investing in Socially Responsible Companies is a Must for Public Pension Funds – Because There is No Better Alternative.S. Prakash Sethi - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 56 (2):99 - 129.
Stock Picking, Market Timing and Style Differences Between Socially Responsible and Conventional Pension Funds: Evidence From the United Kingdom.Luis Ferruz, Fernando Muñoz & Maria Vargas - 2010 - Business Ethics 19 (4):408-422.
Pension Funds Governance: An Overview of the Role of Trustees.Nada Kakabadse & Andrew Kakabadse - 2004 - International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics 1 (1):3-26.
Tournament Incentives and Pension Fund Manager Holdings of Socially Performing Stocks.Paul Cox - 2005 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 16:93-98.
The Distribution of IPO Holdings Across Institutional Mutual Funds.William C. Johnson & Jennifer Marietta-Westberg - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 90 (2):119 - 128.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #199,041 of 2,153,830 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #398,274 of 2,153,830 )
How can I increase my downloads?