Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAbidin, Sazalien
dc.contributor.authorGan, Christopheren
dc.contributor.editorSyme, G.en
dc.contributor.editorHatton MacDonald, D.en
dc.contributor.editorFulton, B.en
dc.contributor.editorPiantadosi, J.en
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-13T01:14:06Z
dc.date.issued2017en
dc.identifier.isbn978-0-9872143-7-9en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10182/11870
dc.description.abstractThe performance of Socially Responsible Investments (SRI) funds is one of the hottest debate in SRI research. As the process of constructing SRI funds employs many non-financial criteria, the performance of SRI might be influenced because of lack of diversification. With socially responsible consideration, the construction of SRI is restricted by many non-financial criteria. Therefore, the diversification of SRI funds would be reduced in two ways. Firstly, investment may be constrained in certain highly correlated scope. Secondly, some good investment opportunities may be excluded by the non-financial criteria. Using a number of screening criteria to measure the screening intensity, most studies found that the number of screens negatively impacts SRI fund performance. This research is motivated to answer a beleaguering question - do social, ethical, environmental and corporate governance friendly consideration and non-financial criteria employed in screening social responsible investment reduce SRI diversification benefits? There are three research questions answered by this paper. First, this paper studies whether the diversification of SRI funds is significantly different from the diversification of peer conventional funds. Peer conventional funds are selected with matching fund approach by considering fund domicile, year of inception and funds size. Diversification degree of fund in this paper is measured by six variables: the number of stocks, the percentage of top 10 holdings, and asset allocation in cash, bond, and equity. Both Mood’s median test and Student’s t-test are used in this paper to examine the significance of difference in diversification between SRI funds and peer conventional funds. Second, this paper investigates whether the influence of socially responsible screening criteria on SRI funds diversification is significantly negative. The results of t-test indicate whether the difference in diversification between SRI and conventional funds is significantly negatively. Third, this paper observes the diversification difference between environmental focus SRI funds and environment, social, and governance (ESG) focus SRI funds to determine whether the difference in diversification benefits of these different group of funds (with different screening strategies) is statistically significant. Both Mood’s median test and t-test are applied in this part. As the group of environmental focus SRI funds and the group of ESG focus SRI funds are different in size, independent t-test for means is used in this comparison.en
dc.format.extent777-783 (7)en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherMODSIMen
dc.relationThe original publication is available from - MODSIM - https://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim2017/en
dc.rights© The authors and the Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand Inc.en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.source22nd International Congress on Modelling and Simulation (MODSIM 2017)en
dc.subjectethicalen
dc.subjectinvestmentsen
dc.subjectfund managementen
dc.subjectdiversificationen
dc.titleDo socially responsible investments strategies significantly reduce diversification benefits?en
dc.typeConference Contribution - Published
lu.contributor.unitLincoln Universityen
lu.contributor.unitFaculty of Agribusiness and Commerceen
lu.contributor.unitDepartment of Financial and Business Systemsen
lu.contributor.uniten
lu.contributor.uniten
dc.subject.anzsrc150201 Financeen
dc.subject.anzsrc140210 International Economics and International Financeen
pubs.finish-date2017-12-08en
pubs.notesPaper available to download from conference website https://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim2017/E4/abidin.pdfen
pubs.organisational-group/LU
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Faculty of Agribusiness and Commerce
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Faculty of Agribusiness and Commerce/FABS
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Research Management Office
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Research Management Office/2018 PBRF Staff group
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen
pubs.publisher-urlhttps://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim2017/en
pubs.start-date2017-12-03en
dc.rights.licenceAttributionen
lu.identifier.orcid0000-0002-5618-1651
lu.identifier.orcid0000-0002-2484-0819
lu.subtypeConference Paperen


Files in this item

Default Thumbnail
Default Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Creative Commons Attribution
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Creative Commons Attribution