IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v14y2005i1p54-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Principles for sustainability rating of investment funds

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Koellner
  • Olaf Weber
  • Marcus Fenchel
  • Roland Scholz

Abstract

During the last decade, the idea of sustainable investments hit the market. Investors both private and institutional started to supplement financial considerations with social and ecological ones. Meanwhile the supply of mutual funds in the ‘green’ investment sector increased enormously. Currently in Europe about 300 mutual funds are available that are managed according to sustainability and social responsibility. Potential investors face the difficulty of keeping track of the various funds and choosing among them based on a reliable comparative assessment. This paper outlines the basic principles and methods on which such a comparative sustainability rating is based. The method was designed to be analogous to rating of the funds financially. The sustainability rating is based on assessment of the research processes in the fund management as well as investigation of the fund portfolio in terms of composition and sustainability performance. It should support investors in their investment choices by offering them a third party view. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Koellner & Olaf Weber & Marcus Fenchel & Roland Scholz, 2005. "Principles for sustainability rating of investment funds," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 54-70, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:14:y:2005:i:1:p:54-70
    DOI: 10.1002/bse.423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.423
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/bse.423?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krahnen, Jan Pieter & Weber, Martin, 2001. "Generally accepted rating principles: A primer," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-23, January.
    2. Pamela Edwards & Frank K. Birkin & David G. Woodward, 2002. "Financial comparability and environmental diversity: an international context," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(6), pages 343-359, November.
    3. J. Emil Morhardt & Sarah Baird & Kelly Freeman, 2002. "Scoring corporate environmental and sustainability reports using GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and other criteria," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 215-233, December.
    4. Andrew A. King & Michael J. Lenox, 2001. "Does It Really Pay to Be Green? An Empirical Study of Firm Environmental and Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Firm Environmental and Financial Performance," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 5(1), pages 105-116, January.
    5. Stewart, Theodor J. & Losa, Fabio B., 2003. "Towards reconciling outranking and value measurement practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 645-659, March.
    6. Riina‐Riitta Helminen, 2000. "Developing tangible measures for eco‐efficiency: the case of the Finnish and Swedish pulp and paper industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 196-210, May.
    7. Franklin R. Edwards & Mustafa Onur Caglayan, 2001. "Hedge Fund Performance and Manager Skill," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(11), pages 1003-1028, November.
    8. Virginia W. Gerde & Jeanne M. Logsdon, 2001. "Measuring environmental performance: use of the toxics release inventory (TRI) and other US environmental databases," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(5), pages 269-285, September.
    9. Delyse Springett, 2003. "An ‘incitement to discourse’: benchmarking as a springboard to sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, January.
    10. Daniel Tyteca & Jérôme Carlens & Frans Berkhout & Julia Hertin & Walter Wehrmeyer & Marcus Wagner, 2002. "Corporate environmental performance evaluation: evidence from the MEPI project," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, January.
    11. Pontus Cerin, 2002. "Characteristics of environmental reporters on the OM Stockholm exchange," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 298-311, September.
    12. Thomas Dyllick & Kai Hockerts, 2002. "Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 130-141, March.
    13. Morey, Matthew R. & Morey, Richard C., 1999. "Mutual fund performance appraisals: a multi-horizon perspective with endogenous benchmarking," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 241-258, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markus Milne & Rob Gray, 2013. "W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 13-29, November.
    2. Marileena Koskela & Jarmo Vehmas, 2012. "Defining Eco‐efficiency: A Case Study on the Finnish Forest Industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 546-566, December.
    3. Ozgur Isil & Michael T. Hernke, 2017. "The Triple Bottom Line: A Critical Review from a Transdisciplinary Perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1235-1251, December.
    4. Tze San Ong & Boon Heng Teh & Ah Suat Lee, 2019. "Contingent Factors and Sustainable Performance Measurement (SPM) Practices of Malaysian Electronics and Electrical Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-33, February.
    5. Rosa Maria Dangelico & Pierpaolo Pontrandolfo, 2015. "Being ‘Green and Competitive’: The Impact of Environmental Actions and Collaborations on Firm Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 413-430, September.
    6. Nazim Hussain, 2015. "Impact of Sustainability Performance on Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Global Fortune (N100) Firms," Working Papers 1, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    7. Noor Muhammad & Frank Scrimgeour & Krishna Reddy & Sazali Abidin, 2015. "The Impact of Corporate Environmental Performance on Market Risk: The Australian Industry Case," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 347-362, December.
    8. Yang Chen & Guiyao Tang & Jiafei Jin & Ji Li & Pascal Paillé, 2015. "Linking Market Orientation and Environmental Performance: The Influence of Environmental Strategy, Employee’s Environmental Involvement, and Environmental Product Quality," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 479-500, March.
    9. Michael Dobler & Kaouthar Lajili & Daniel Zéghal, 2014. "Environmental Performance, Environmental Risk and Risk Management," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 1-17, January.
    10. Birgit Brunklaus & Tove Malmqvist & Henrikke Baumann, 2009. "Managing stakeholders or the environment? The challenge of relating indicators in practice," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 27-37, January.
    11. Azlan Amran & Shiau Ping Lee & S. Susela Devi, 2014. "The Influence of Governance Structure and Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility Toward Sustainability Reporting Quality," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 217-235, May.
    12. Claudia Poser & Edeltraud Guenther & Marc Orlitzky, 2012. "Shades of green: using computer-aided qualitative data analysis to explore different aspects of corporate environmental performance," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 413-450, January.
    13. Shuangyu Xie & Kohji Hayase, 2007. "Corporate environmental performance evaluation: a measurement model and a new concept," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 148-168, February.
    14. Wagner, Marcus, 2010. "The role of corporate sustainability performance for economic performance: A firm-level analysis of moderation effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1553-1560, May.
    15. Semenova, Natalia, 2010. "Corporate Environmental Performance: Consistency of Metrics and Identification of Drivers," Sustainable Investment and Corporate Governance Working Papers 2010/9, Sustainable Investment Research Platform.
    16. Füsun Küçükbay & Ebru Sürücü, 2019. "Corporate sustainability performance measurement based on a new multicriteria sorting method," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 664-680, May.
    17. Francesca Borga & Annalisa Citterio & Giuliano Noci & Emanuele Pizzurno, 2009. "Sustainability report in small enterprises: case studies in Italian furniture companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 162-176, March.
    18. Gabriel Eweje, 2011. "A Shift in corporate practice? Facilitating sustainability strategy in companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 125-136, May.
    19. Basil Al‐Najjar & Aspioni Anfimiadou, 2012. "Environmental Policies and Firm Value," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 49-59, January.
    20. Angeloantonio Russo & Stefano Pogutz & Nicola Misani, 2021. "Paving the road toward eco‐effectiveness: Exploring the link between greenhouse gas emissions and firm performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 3065-3078, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:14:y:2005:i:1:p:54-70. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0836 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.