Do you pursue socially responsible investing?

0
746 views

SRI?

The concept of socially responsible investing is far from new; the first SRI fund appeared in 1952. It is not a passing fad!

Since then, these funds have used social and ethical screens to exclude companies selling products like tobacco, alcohol, or firearms.

So, do you pursue socially responsible investing?

SRI
Investments
Finance
Dr. David E. M
62 months ago

4 answers

0

SRI

Socially responsible investing (SRI), also known as sustainable, socially conscious, "green" or ethical investing, is any investment strategy which seeks to consider both financial return and social good.

Dr. David E. M
62 months ago
It is a valuable subject being green for better society and discourage tobacco, alcohol and firearms. - Er. Jangyadutta 62 months ago
But, most all mutual and index funds contain them - Dr. David E. 62 months ago
I agree thanks. But awareness is preventive for their safety. - Er. Jangyadutta 61 months ago
OK, but u still can not self select out - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
0

There are many different approaches and ESG seems to be the main focus. As an individual investor I have my own set of standards that is probably unique to me. If I were trying to collect assets to manage in this space I’d probably focus it on "impact investment" over any kind of ethical screen. It can seem like a distinction without a difference. I am surprised at some of the businesses that make the socially responsible indexes.

Anthony J
62 months ago
What are Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Criteria? Environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria are a set of standards for a company’s operations that socially conscious investors use to screen potential investments. Environmental criteria look at how a company performs as a steward of nature. Social criteria examine how a company manages relationships with its employees, supplie - Dr. David E. 62 months ago
Like any complex score card system it has some built in flaws and biases. I did a lot of work in this area. How would you rate a company like Tesla? Clearly offers major social and environmental benefits and also has huge governance problems.. how do you measure that out? - Anthony 62 months ago
Agreed - and speaks against index or mutual funds - Dr. David E. 62 months ago
I think ESG is a good reference point. As investors become more responsible they will also become more differentiated with respect to criteria. I see this as very positive. There is a limit to how wide an area a person can effectively manage. An informed, focused responsible investor can effect more change than a generalist. - Anthony 62 months ago
True - you must start somewhere and then drill down - Many thanks - Dr. David E. 62 months ago
Proposal is best, if construction companies will take responsibility with real estate owners and builders then it may be possible for green contribution of companies by thinking socially. - Er. Jangyadutta 61 months ago
May be possible - may be not! - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Green bonds is a huge area but most projects don't know how to structure themselves to make the capital available to them. - Anthony 61 months ago
Agreed - amateurs - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Green concept is to welcome - J N Das 61 months ago
Some places and may be OR not - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Thanks, good comment. - Er. Jangyadutta 61 months ago
I know - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
0

It should be right considering for better society to have a good environment and all should be aware about green developments. All should pursue to avoid activities against society. All companies should consider green product.

Er. Jangyadutta D
62 months ago
All companies should consider green product. - NOPE - Dr. David E. 62 months ago
Sir can we view about a green premises for which companies will support what should be plan. Can we think it as farm house, green home, Green cottage like than any idea. - Er. Jangyadutta 61 months ago
OK - not feasible in large urban cities - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
When talking about the "greenness" of products the market place will really set the level. - Anthony 61 months ago
Exactly - why government subsidies FAIL - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Not all government incentives fail. Solar credits have helped to accelerate the move the renewable energy. I agree that at the expense of some inefficiencies. But you have to start somewhere. - Anthony 61 months ago
Sure - You start somewhere but Not with MY tax money - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Solyndra was a manufacturer of cylindrical panels of copper indium gallium selenide thin film solar cells based in Fremont, California. Although the company was once touted for its unusual technology, plummeting silicon prices led to the company's being unable to compete with conventional solar panels made of crystalline silicon. The company filed for bankruptcy on September 1, 2011. - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Solyndra is the poster child for anti government involvement arguments. But tax credits direct to a consumer who makes their own decision on a vendor encapsulates market dynamics so it reduces the Solyndra phenomenon. - Anthony 61 months ago
Kinda like Tesla? - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Tesla is a little more complicated because there is some infrastructure needed to support electric vehicles beyond the consumer credit. But sure Tesla, or First Solar or Mitsubishi Heat Pumps or Low Emission Wood Stoves. All tax credits nudging society in a direction but not really picking winners or losers in the given market. - Anthony 61 months ago
It is ALWAYS complicated isnt it? - not capitalism at all! - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
I disagree. Incentives do not negate capitalism. And along those lines what do you think about the whole business incubator, tech transfer, public/private venture ecosystem.? There is government money in that system. - Anthony 61 months ago
public/private venture ecosystem = DEFENSE only - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
NIH? - Anthony 61 months ago
Maybe - good point - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Ok. - Er. Jangyadutta 61 months ago
DITTO - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
0

It is a tougher question that it appears on the surface. Socially Responsible investment is more expenseve / yields lower financial gains, at least short term and can in a way be seen as a luxury. For example, if you start a new small business, and want to use e.g. 'good' ingredients in your product. In that case you don't have the economies of scale to get that product at a good price, so your product will be expensive. Which in turn means that either you choose for a niche market where consumers are willing to pay this price, or you go halfway so you can reach the masses. Then grow your business and hopefully move to fully socially responsible.

That's a tough choice. Do you accept short terms letting go of your principles because you believe you can do more good in the long run?

Bart Groenewoud
61 months ago
No - I do not - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
I like to remain in control - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
I think we need a distinction between responsible investing for passive capital and entrepreneurial ventures and their relative sustainability strategy. Seems like two very different conversations. - Anthony 61 months ago
Agree - the later is more for profit - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
It seems to work well for Apple - Bart 61 months ago
Does not have to be mutually exclusive, that would be an oversimplification - Bart 61 months ago
Actually it makes it MUCH simplier - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
You can have a "mission to do good" but in any for profit enterprise there has got to be constant validation of the market for a given product or service beyond "it's good for society, or the planet." If there are consumers who want that you tell the story effectively and sell the product. - Anthony 61 months ago
I like capitalism PERIOD Then, if you wish u can support your cause of choice - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
There are many companies telling a more sustainable story in their product design, sourcing, and overall operation. It is capitalism since they make a profit and stay in business. The story connects them to a consumer that wants to use their purchasing power to make a better world. No conflict in the model. And it drives through the chain. - Anthony 61 months ago
Anthony Jaccarino agree: more and more companies combine 'for profit' with social responsibility. Many companies have a CSR officer these days. - Bart 61 months ago
Just a cultural phenomenon - not sustainable - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
I think sustainability efforts in corporations are a great thing and very necessary. At the very least consumers and investors alike want that type of transparency. Look at Johnson and Johnson and the whole asbestos in the baby powder issue. In the end that will cost money in the form of liability that could have been avoided with greater transparency. - Anthony 61 months ago
If true and proved - the investors lose - that is capitalism - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
It is true. There are ghosts of companies past that failed due to a high impact, slow developing unknown risk. Investors lose but investors also win. I'd rather win so I look at risks and invest accordingly. One of the factors is how sustainable is the company and are their liability risks? Also are there market risks based on that same perception. - Anthony 61 months ago
Government should not pick stocks and companies - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
It's one thing only to look at the profit side, but what about people & planet? People: avoid child labor, pay fair wages, pay fair prices. Planet: reduce (or remove) carbon and toxic emissions. These are very important social aspects any person, and thus company should care about. - Bart 61 months ago
I agree Government should not pick stocks and companies. Bart I agree with you. There is a lot of "free ridership" going on in the sustainability area. What happens when one day Florida is unlivable? Who pays? What do we do with the "refugees?" - Anthony 61 months ago
Humans exhale CO2 - did u know that? - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Of course I know that and trees inhale it so to speak. - Anthony 61 months ago
Trees exhale O2 = oxygen - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
So, if we eliminate carbon produces - we are all doomed to be logical - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
It's more about finding and maintaining a healthy balance that does not make ice caps melt. And not ignoring climate change. - Bart 61 months ago
ASK CHINA? - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Bart Let's not limit the focus to climate change. That is just one aspect. There are many issues that are not sustainable. Toxicity for example. - Anthony 61 months ago
As a kid, I remember the global cooling zealots - wrong - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
As a kid, I remember the population explosion zealots - wrong again - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
I don't think population explosion concern was unfounded. It is a key contributor to our pushing the limits of the earth's carry capacity of our modern society. - Anthony 61 months ago
Anthony Jaccarino agreed, it's a bigger picture than climate alone. And it's urgent. - Bart 61 months ago
REALLY - THINK Japan! - Dr. David E. 61 months ago
Good comment. - Er. Jangyadutta 61 months ago
Many thanks - Dr. David E. 61 months ago

Have some input?