IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01312918.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Proxy voting policies as tools for shareholder engagement in CSR: an exploratory study

Author

Listed:
  • Rachelle Belinga

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Blanche Segrestin

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This paper presents an exploratory study on proxy voting policies as a lever for social shareholder engagement (SSE). It proposes an analysis framework for an ongoing empirical research and produces its first results of investigation. Although SSE is a growing phenomenon, it needs more concrete means of action. If the influence of shareholder activists is frequently denounced for its negative impact on corporations, which concrete means shareholders who want CSR to benefit from their leverage have at their disposal? While in Europe shareholder proposals are limited, proxy voting policies appear as a significant element which has been insufficiently explored in the SSE literature. Starting with a first sample of proxy voting policies, we examine the potential use of voting policies by engaged shareholders. Our analysis shows limited differentiation and we search for some first hypotheses that could lead and support further research.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachelle Belinga & Blanche Segrestin, 2016. "Proxy voting policies as tools for shareholder engagement in CSR: an exploratory study," Post-Print hal-01312918, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01312918
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://minesparis-psl.hal.science/hal-01312918v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://minesparis-psl.hal.science/hal-01312918v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yonca Ertimur & Fabrizio Ferri & David Oesch, 2013. "Shareholder Votes and Proxy Advisors: Evidence from Say on Pay," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 951-996, December.
    2. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    3. E. Gifford, 2010. "Effective Shareholder Engagement: The Factors that Contribute to Shareholder Salience," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 79-97, April.
    4. Jennifer Goodman & Céline Louche & Katinka Cranenburgh & Daniel Arenas, 2014. "Social Shareholder Engagement: The Dynamics of Voice and Exit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 193-210, December.
    5. Marina Martynova & Luc Renneboog, 2010. "Spillover of Corporate Governance Standards in Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisition," Chapters, in: Alessio M. Pacces (ed.), The Law and Economics of Corporate Governance, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Jeanne Logsdon & Harry Buren, 2009. "Beyond the Proxy Vote: Dialogues Between Shareholder Activists and Corporations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 353-365, April.
    7. Davis, Gerald F. & Kim, E. Han, 2007. "Business ties and proxy voting by mutual funds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 552-570, August.
    8. Simon Deakin & Richard Hobbs, 2007. "False Dawn for CSR? Shifts in regulatory policy and the response of the corporate and financial sectors in Britain," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 68-76, January.
    9. Larcker, David F. & McCall, Allan L. & Ormazabal, Gaizka, 2013. "Proxy advisory firms and stock option repricing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 149-169.
    10. Wim Vandekerckhove & Jos Leys & Dirk Braeckel, 2008. "A Speech-Act Model for Talking to Management. Building a Framework for Evaluating Communication within the SRI Engagement Process," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(1), pages 77-91, September.
    11. Aris Solomon & Jill Solomon, 1999. "Empirical Evidence of Long‐Termism and Shareholder Activism in UK Unit Trusts," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(3), pages 288-300, July.
    12. Cynthia J. Campbell & Stuart L. Gillan & Cathy M. Niden, 1999. "Current Perspectives on Shareholder Proposals: Lessons from the 1997 Proxy Season," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 28(1), Spring.
    13. Goodman, Jennifer & Arenas, Daniel, 2015. "Engaging Ethically: A Discourse Ethics Perspective on Social Shareholder Engagement," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 163-189, April.
    14. Fauver, Larry & Fuerst, Michael E., 2006. "Does good corporate governance include employee representation? Evidence from German corporate boards," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 673-710, December.
    15. Aris Solomon & Jill Solomon & Megumi Suto, 2004. "Can the UK Experience Provide Lessons for the Evolution of SRI in Japan?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 552-566, October.
    16. Josep M. Lozano & Laura Albareda & Tamyko Ysa & Heike Roscher & Manila Marcuccio, 2008. "Governments and Corporate Social Responsibility," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-59751-8, March.
    17. Emily McAteer & Simone Pulver, 2009. "The Corporate Boomerang: Shareholder Transnational Advocacy Networks Targeting Oil Companies in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-30, February.
    18. Parthiban David & Matt Bloom & Amy J. Hillman, 2007. "Investor activism, managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 91-100, January.
    19. Paul Fabris & Andrew Greinke, 1999. "Institutional Activism: attitudes of Australian fund managers," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(4), pages 379-384, October.
    20. Dhir, Aaron A., 2012. "Shareholder Engagement in the Embedded Business Corporation: Investment Activism, Human Rights, and TWAIL Discourse," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 99-118, January.
    21. Duncan McLaren, 2004. "Global Stakeholders: corporate accountability and investor engagement," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 191-201, April.
    22. Smith, Michael P, 1996. "Shareholder Activism by Institutional Investors: Evidence for CalPERS," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 227-252, March.
    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. Jennifer Goodman & Céline Louche & Katinka Cranenburgh & Daniel Arenas, 2014. "Social Shareholder Engagement: The Dynamics of Voice and Exit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 193-210, December.
    2. Fabrizio Ferraro & Daniel Beunza, 2018. "Creating Common Ground: A Communicative Action Model of Dialogue in Shareholder Engagement," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1187-1207, December.
    3. Natalia Semenova, 2020. "Company Receptivity in Private Dialogue on Sustainability Risks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Ahmed A. Sarhan & Basil Al‐Najjar, 2023. "The influence of corporate governance and shareholding structure on corporate social responsibility: The key role of executive compensation," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 4532-4556, October.
    5. Maria Ruiz‐Castillo & Juan Alberto Aragón‐Correa & Nuria Esther Hurtado‐Torres, 2024. "Independent directors and environmental innovations: How the visibility of public and private shareholders' environmental activism moderates the influence of board independence," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 424-440, February.
    6. Rachelle Belinga & Blanche Segrestin, 2019. "A conceptual mapping of the logics of institutional investors' corporate governance responsibilities: The case for "custodian" investor stewardship," Post-Print hal-02167819, HAL.
    7. Rachelle Belinga & Blanche Segrestin, 2019. "A conceptual mapping of the logics of institutional investors' corporate governance responsibilities: The case for "custodian" investor stewardship," Post-Print hal-02444756, HAL.
    8. Maria Goranova & Rahi Abouk & Paul C. Nystrom & Ehsan S. Soofi, 2017. "Corporate governance antecedents to shareholder activism: A zero-inflated process," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 415-435, February.
    9. Peter Cziraki & Luc Renneboog & Peter G. Szilagyi, 2010. "Shareholder Activism through Proxy Proposals: The European Perspective," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 16(5), pages 738-777, November.
    10. Dasgupta, Amil & Fos, Vyacheslav & Sautner, Zacharias, 2021. "Institutional investors and corporate governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112114, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Oehler, Andreas & Schmitz, Jonas Tobias, 2021. "Does intensified communication of hedge funds with letters affect abnormal returns?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 127-142.
    12. Soyon Paek & Jin-Young Kim & Sung Gyun Mun & Chulhee Jun, 2021. "In hotel REITs, are institutional investors beneficial for firm value?," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(4), pages 820-840, June.
    13. Hakkon Kim & Kwangwoo Park & Doojin Ryu, 2017. "Corporate Environmental Responsibility: A Legal Origins Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 381-402, February.
    14. Brunarski, Kelly R. & Campbell, T. Colin & Harman, Yvette S., 2015. "Evidence on the outcome of Say-On-Pay votes: How managers, directors, and shareholders respond," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 132-149.
    15. Salome Zimmermann, 2019. "Same Same but Different: How and Why Banks Approach Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, April.
    16. Berno Buechel & Lydia Mechtenberg & Alexander F. Wagner, 2022. "When do proxy advisors improve corporate decisions?," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 22-47, Swiss Finance Institute.
    17. Francesco Gangi & Jérôme Méric & Rémi Jardat & Lucia Michela Daniele, 2019. "Business for society," Post-Print hal-02382307, HAL.
    18. Barbara Voußem & Utz Schäffer & Denis Schweizer, 2015. "Top management turnover under the influence of activist investors," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 19(3), pages 709-739, August.
    19. Becker, Bo & Cronqvist, Henrik & Fahlenbrach, Rüdiger, 2011. "Estimating the Effects of Large Shareholders Using a Geographic Instrument," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(4), pages 907-942, August.
    20. Natalia Semenova, 2023. "The Public Effect of Private Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from Incident-Based Engagement Strategy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(2), pages 559-572, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    corporate social responsibility; proxy voting policies; proxy voting; shareholder engagement; corporate governance;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-01312918. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.