Advanced search
1 file | 889.14 KB Add to list

Where do-gooders meet bottom-liners: disputes and resolutions surrounding socially responsible investment

Author
Organization
Abstract
Purpose Much of the management research on socially responsible investment (SRI) consists in demonstrating how SRI is good for business and good for society. But the belief that business and market-based strategies will bring positive social and ecological change is far from natural and results in disputes. This study shows how SRI proponents have to develop and combine arguments in order to construct and defend a valid and plausible discourse on SRI that could resist the critiques and appease the disputes resulting from its institutionalization. Methodology We collect articles in the media to identify the SRI controversies. For these disputes, we look at the attempts of SRI to give a robust justification of the particular arrangement it promotes, vis-à-vis a public audience, and we discuss possible resolutions. Findings SRI focuses on appealing to conventional finance with a market logic, resulting in very few challenges of the legitimacy of the existing institutional order. In a few cases, SRI seeks a resolution based on a competing principles resulting in hybrid constructions of compromises, which could be consolidated by SRI models and tools. Implications The results contribute to a better understanding of SRI as it is perceived today, and of how the disputes around its mainstreaming may unfold in the future. This helps us clarify our expectations towards SRI and shows that if we want to address shortcomings in finance, we should probably not rely on SRI as it is defined and practiced in the 21st century.
Keywords
SRI, disputes, justification, legitimacy, convention theory, justice

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 889.14 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Dumas, Christel, and Emmanuelle Michotte. “Where Do-Gooders Meet Bottom-Liners: Disputes and Resolutions Surrounding Socially Responsible Investment.” Socially Responsible Investment in the 21st Century Does It Make a Difference for Society?, edited by Céline Louche and Tessa Hebb, vol. 7, Emerald, 2014, pp. 119–47.
APA
Dumas, C., & Michotte, E. (2014). Where do-gooders meet bottom-liners: disputes and resolutions surrounding socially responsible investment. In C. Louche & T. Hebb (Eds.), Socially responsible investment in the 21st century does it make a difference for society? (Vol. 7, pp. 119–147). Emerald.
Chicago author-date
Dumas, Christel, and Emmanuelle Michotte. 2014. “Where Do-Gooders Meet Bottom-Liners: Disputes and Resolutions Surrounding Socially Responsible Investment.” In Socially Responsible Investment in the 21st Century Does It Make a Difference for Society?, edited by Céline Louche and Tessa Hebb, 7:119–47. Emerald.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Dumas, Christel, and Emmanuelle Michotte. 2014. “Where Do-Gooders Meet Bottom-Liners: Disputes and Resolutions Surrounding Socially Responsible Investment.” In Socially Responsible Investment in the 21st Century Does It Make a Difference for Society?, ed by. Céline Louche and Tessa Hebb, 7:119–147. Emerald.
Vancouver
1.
Dumas C, Michotte E. Where do-gooders meet bottom-liners: disputes and resolutions surrounding socially responsible investment. In: Louche C, Hebb T, editors. Socially responsible investment in the 21st century does it make a difference for society? Emerald; 2014. p. 119–47.
IEEE
[1]
C. Dumas and E. Michotte, “Where do-gooders meet bottom-liners: disputes and resolutions surrounding socially responsible investment,” in Socially responsible investment in the 21st century does it make a difference for society?, vol. 7, C. Louche and T. Hebb, Eds. Emerald, 2014, pp. 119–147.
@incollection{5862077,
  abstract     = {Purpose
Much of the management research on socially responsible investment (SRI) consists in demonstrating how SRI is good for business and good for society. But the belief that business and market-based strategies will bring positive social and ecological change is far from natural and results in disputes. This study shows how SRI proponents have to develop and combine arguments in order to construct and defend a valid and plausible discourse on SRI that could resist the critiques and appease the disputes resulting from its institutionalization.

Methodology
We collect articles in the media to identify the SRI controversies. For these disputes, we look at the attempts of SRI to give a robust justification of the particular arrangement it promotes, vis-à-vis a public audience, and we discuss possible resolutions.

Findings
SRI focuses on appealing to conventional finance with a market logic, resulting in very few challenges of the legitimacy of the existing institutional order. In a few cases, SRI seeks a resolution based on a competing principles resulting in hybrid constructions of compromises, which could be consolidated by SRI models and tools.

Implications
The results contribute to a better understanding of SRI as it is perceived today, and of how the disputes around its mainstreaming may unfold in the future. This helps us clarify our expectations towards SRI and shows that if we want to address shortcomings in finance, we should probably not rely on SRI as it is defined and practiced in the 21st century.},
  author       = {Dumas, Christel and Michotte, Emmanuelle},
  booktitle    = {Socially responsible investment in the 21st century does it make a difference for society?},
  editor       = {Louche, Céline and Hebb, Tessa},
  isbn         = {9781783504688},
  issn         = {2043-9059},
  keywords     = {SRI,disputes,justification,legitimacy,convention theory,justice},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {119--147},
  publisher    = {Emerald},
  series       = {Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability},
  title        = {Where do-gooders meet bottom-liners: disputes and resolutions surrounding socially responsible investment},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S2043-905920140000007005},
  volume       = {7},
  year         = {2014},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric