Socially Responsible Investing: A Market & Industry Analysis

Justin Bean SUS6200 S-1 SP10 Page 1

4/20/2010

SUS 6200 S-1 SP10 | Presidio Graduate School

JUSTIN BEAN

SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE INVESTING AN INDUSTRY ANALYSIS


Table of Contents

1.0 Context and Purpose Statement……………………………………………………………..…..3

2.0 Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

3.0 Overview…………………………………………………………………………………………………….3

3.1 History…………………………………………………………………………………………..4

3.2 Definitions, Metrics, and Regulations……………………….…………………….5

4.0 Market Analysis……………….………………………………………………………………………..6

4.1 Growth………………….………………………………………………………………………6

4.2 Performance…………….…………………………………………………………………..8

4.3 Community Investing ………….………………………………………………………..9

4.4 Perceptions and Wider Industry Acceptance……………………………….10

5.0 Industry Analysis……………………………………………………………………………………… 11

5.1 Composition……………………………………………………………………………….11

5.1a Online Trading……………………………………………………………11

5.2 Competition & Threats……………………………………………………………….12

6.0 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………13

7.0 Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14

8.0 Works Cited……..……………………………………………………………………………………….15


The Socially Responsible Investing Industry

1.0 Context and Purpose Statement

This paper was written with the intent to study the background and dynamics of the sustainable

investing industry for the purpose of assessing the viability of an online sustainable investing

platform. This website would allow investors to choose individual projects or industries to

invest in, from local clean energy to base-of-pyramid entrepreneurship in developing

economies. Using this website as a bridge to existing SRI funds and community investments, it

would be an easy one-stop interface for investors and enable smaller investors to join an

industry that has historically been known to be cost-prohibitive and perplexing.

2.0 Abstract

The Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) industry is booming, with above average ROI, concerns

about long term viability of irresponsible companies, and goodwill being the main drivers of the

fledgling industry. However, valid concerns about what constitutes an environmentally, socially,

and governance-responsible (ESG) company linger in the absence of clear metrics and

regulations for these investments. Many companies and some NGOs are taking steps to

develop standards for the industry, and this, in combination with resilience seen during the

financial crisis, is improving perceptions about SRIs in general. The environment is only

moderately competitive because of its lack of clearly defined rules and requirements for entry,

and many sustainable financial products are still in development. However, with the success of

online investing, it is becoming more competitive, with price wars occurring occasionally and

existing as a legitimate worry. Because it is in the early stages of development and establishing

momentum for strong growth, sizeable opportunities exist to establish new market entrants.

3.0 Overview

The Socially Responsible Investing industry (SRI) consists of investors who put their money into

companies which implement environmental, social, and/or governance (ESG) responsibility

measures. This is done with the combined goals of making a return on their investment, as well

as making a positive social impact. Many funds exist which screen their investments for


negative impacts or involvement with products which cause negative impacts, such as guns,

tobacco, military operations, or alcohol (negative screening). Others take a proactive approach

by investing in companies which are seen to produce positive environmental or social impacts

(positive screening), or have beneficial governance policies and financial best practices

(industry best-in-class screening). A more comprehensive list can be seen in figure A.1.

3.1 History

Socially responsible investments were originally developed by religious institutions, which

didn’t want to be associated with “sinful” behavior. This was accomplished by using negative

screening, which has been a part of Jewish, Islamic, and Christian traditions for quite some time

(Novethic, 2009). In the US it was pioneered by the early Methodists and Quakers, who refused

to participate in the human slave trade, and avoided investing in industries which had negative

health consequences for workers, such as chemical production and leather tanning. Later it

came to the attention of Anti-war activists during the US-Vietnam war, who urged people not

to invest in Dow Chemical, the largest producer of napalm at the time (Businessweek, 1969).

Internationally, negative screening and divesting was used to pressure South African companies

to abandon apartheid, and, indirectly, pressure the government to do the same (Knight, 1990).

Image 1: Screening Choices


The development of these screened investments and the desire of people to use them

underscored (and still underscores today) the growing distrust of corporations in society

following such events as the 1984 Bhopal chemical disaster and 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, as

well as the more recent corporate scandals of companies such as Enron, WorldCom, and Arthur

Andersen. Positive screens, once called “targeted investments” were used by labor unions in

the mid-20th century to invest pension funds in building housing projects and medical facilities.

Presidential candidates in the 1980 presidential election also discussed using pension funds for

social investment (Gray, 1983). As recently as the 1990s positive screening began to take on

the meaning of investing in sustainable development and companies that have a positive social

impact or produce sustainable goods and services (such as renewable energy or microfinancing

for entrepreneurs in low- income areas).

3.2 Definitions, Metrics, and Regulations

The main barriers to mainstream acceptance facing this fledgling industry are a lack of

consensus on the definition of what an SRI is, and establishing widely-accepted metrics to

measure the social benefits or costs of a particular investment. This has been one of the most

frustrating roadblocks for proponents of sustainable investing, with many fearing that the

practice of arbitrarily assigning criteria for classifying SRIs on a company-by-company basis

could be a delegitimizing force in the industry. Paul Hawken, author of The Ecology of

Commerce, (2004) found that “SRI fund advertizing caters to people’s desires to improve the

world by avoiding bad actors in the corporate world, but it can be misleading and often has

little correlation to portfolio holdings”. In a 2003 investigation, Hawken also found that the

cumulative investment portfolio of combined SRI funds was essentially no different than the

combined portfolio of traditional mutual funds. Ironic examples include Halliburton found in 23

funds, including the Dow Jones Islamic Index Fund, Raytheon (a weapons manufacturer) found

in the Capstone Social Ethics and Religious Values fund, Monsanto found in the Global

Environment Fund, among many others (Hawken 2004).

More recently, however, the defining attributes of SRI funds are beginning to be quantified and

agreed upon by more members of the field. In 2006 the UN released its Principles for


Responsible Investing, in which it lays out guidelines for best practices for developing and

promoting cause-based investing. These guidelines are self reported to be “designed to be

voluntary and aspirational” (UNEP 2006), and in no way represent regulation that will

guarantee enforcement, but they are a substantial step in the right direction for the industry,

and, if followed, will do much to legitimize and make it more transparent.

Since 2005 Goldman Sachs has adopted the “integrated approach”, which incorporates ESG

related risk factors and principles into conventional financial analysis. Fund managers

incorporate sustainability research into their investment analysis to “identify “submerged” risks

and opportunities – those outside the traditional boundaries of equity research” (IFC 2009).

The consensus within the industry is that regulation is needed to standardize and further

legitimize the industry, which will have the added effect of giving it more clout when

approaching companies for constructive transformative dialogue (IFC 2009). Freidman and

Miles, Director of Research at the University of Bristol, and Senior Research Fellow in

Accounting and Finance at Oxford Brookes University School of Business, respectively, in

considering regulation in the UK (2000) state that “Representing 35% of the stock market, the

potential impact of this regulation (Pensions Review) is highly significant.” Because of this, in

an effort to capture a portion of this investment, some SRI funds in the UK began diversifying

their products, which led to higher implementation of constructive dialogue and the potential

to stimulate shareholder activism. They felt that this would result in greater market power and

size, empowering the SRI sector to influence the overall market and attract the interest of

mainstream fund managers who were competing for institutional money (Friedman & Miles

2000). They also noted that “The catalyst that is needed to ensure that CS&ER (Corporate

Social & Environmental Reporting) becomes legitimised within the accounting orthodoxy is

either the ‘mainstreaming’ of the SRI sector or the recognition by mainstream funds that CS&ER

is an important indicator of performance.” As this paper will present in the Market Analysis

section, this is exactly what is happening now with the recognition of ESG principles for

investments by mainstream firms like Goldman & Sachs and international organizations like the

United Nations.


The recent (April 16th, 2010) well-publicized allegations of fraud at Goldman Sachs may show

that they need to practice these principles in-house, and the 13% stock value drop they

experienced may signal that good governance has value beyond a polished image. However,

lessons learned from this and similar damage done by poorly-regulated banks and investment

institutions may be only temporary without stronger regulations or a change in consumer

behavior (Saft 2010). The recent proposed regulations for the US financial industry, and

hedging against the possibility of more to come in the US and abroad, in combination with the

business case for implementing ESG principles and investing in companies that adopt them

(presented later in this paper), may have a positive influence on the growth of the SRI industry,

but at this point it is too early to speculate with bankable certainty.

4.0 Market Analysis

4.1 Growth

Since Freidman and Miles speculated about the increasing size and power of SRI funds, the

number in the US has expanded rapidly (see figure 2), and some of the front-runners who are

gaining industry acceptance in defining the criteria by which SRI indexes are chosen are gaining

mainstream acceptance and demand: the Calvert Social Index, Domini 400 Social Index, GS

(Goldman Sachs) SUSTAIN, Dow Jones World Sustainability Index, and Dow Jones STOXX

Sustainability Index, among others. In 2008 SRIs amounted to $5 trillion worldwide (Sherter,

2009).

In the US alone the market for sustainable investments and mutual funds has risen from $639

billion in 1995 to a whopping $2.71 trillion in 2007 (Social Investment Forum (SIF), 2007), as

seen in figure 1, and is predicted to reach $3 trillion by 2011 (Celent, 2007). This figure

represents 11% of the 25.1 trillion of assets under professional management, and growth at a

rate of 18% between 2005 and 2007, when the overall investing industry was growing at less

than 3%.


This is not only true in the United States, but also in the developing world, where nearly $300

billion of these funds were allocated in 2009, up from $2.7 billion in 2002, more than 1,101%

growth in 7 years (IFC 2009). The number of socially-screened funds in the US grew from 55 to

260 between 1995 and 2007 (see figure 2), and Net Assets boomed from $12 billion to $202

billion in the same period (SIF 2007).

Figure 1 Source: Social Investment Forum (SIF) 2007

The Social Investment Forum (2007) identified three main drivers of this boom:

Consumer demand: Stimulated by climate change concerns, excitement surrounding clean

energy, and investor demands to divest in regions with oppressive or violent regimes (most

notably Sudan).

Stakeholder engagement: Shareholders and money managers alike are increasingly

incorporating ESG criteria in their investment criteria and supporting shareholder resolutions.

Improved choices: The expanding number of choices available to investors and variety of

options has opened the possibility of social investing to a wider range of investors.

The size of the overall investment market is expected to grow as well, with 64% of Americans

saying they will save more money in 2010 than in 2009, 71% reporting that investing for

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

SRI in the US ($ bil)

Community Investing

Shareholder Advocacy

Social Screening


retirement is important to them, and 89% saying that building a rainy day fund is important this

year, according to a study done by ING Direct (2010). This human behavior and perception is

extremely important, as it makes up our entire economy, despite the field being considered a

“hard” science (Christian 2010).

Figure 2 Source: SIF 2007

4.2 Performance

During the economic downturn of 2009, the Social Investment Forum (2009) reported that 65%

of their mutual funds (nearly 73% for large-cap funds) outperformed the S&P 500, most by

“significant margins”. They also found that a majority of SRI funds outperformed the S&P 500

over 3 years and 10 years. Globally, in 16 out of 18 industries socially responsible funds

outperformed their peers by an average of 15% (or $650 million per company) over the 6-

month period leading up to November 2008 (Mahler, et al. 2009). Businessweek (2009)

reported that in the first 7 months of 2009, "green mutual funds such as the Winslow Green

Growth Fund and the Calvert Global Alternative Energy Fund have outperformed the Standard

& Poor's 500-stock index by a factor of 3 to 1. Other investments, such as eco-focused

exchange-traded funds…are also reporting double-digit gains since the start of the year.” These

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Socially Screened Funds

Number of SRI Funds

Total Net Assets ($ bil)


performance figures are getting a substantial amount of attention from mainstream investors

and asset management companies, setting the stage for more growth and stability of the

market in the future (Emerson, 2009).

4.3 Community Investing

Community investing (including microlending) targets impoverished or low-income

communities which may not qualify for other forms of financing, and while still only a small

portion of the SRI market, is showing strong growth and potential. This segment consists of

several community investment institutions (CIIs): community development banks, credit unions,

loan funds, and venture capital. The assets in US CIIs have grown over 540%, from $4 billion in

1995 to more than $25 billion in 2007 (SIF 2009).

Figure 3 Source: SIF 2007

CI loan funds (especially microlending), while only comprising 18% of the CII landscape, have

recently received considerable media attention in the US, helping to grow the peer-to-peer

investing sector, notably organizations like Kiva.org and MicroPlace.com. Kiva.org alone, one of

the more popular sites, has distributed $132 million worth of loans as of April 2010, and

$13.62

$6.28

$4.67

$1.20

Community Investment Institutions ($ bil)

CI Banks

CI Credit Unions

CI Loan Funds

CI Venture Capital

Total = $25.77 billion


disperses over $5 million in loans every month (Kiva 2010). High repayment rates (98.57% for

Kiva, 97% for MicroPlace), accessibility to nearly all income levels (a minimum loan amount of

$25), and visibility of impact make these options quite attractive for online users globally.

Deutsche Bank (2007) expects individual and institutional community investments to grow by a

factor of ten by 2015.

4.4 Perceptions and Wider Industry Acceptance

In emerging market economies the Economist Intelligence Unit, along with the IFC (2009) polled

asset owners, fund managers and emerging market companies, and found that (as seen in

figure 4) 70%-75% of respondents at least somewhat agreed with the statement, “ESG

principles are an important part of research, portfolio management, and manager selection

process.” For between 77%-82%, they were more likely to adopt ESG principles, or see them as

an important part of their research, portfolio management, or manager selection process after

the crisis or even as a result of it (see figure 5). The results of their study showed the resilience

of the SRI market and the adoption of ESG principles in general, as 30%-40% of those who

would adopt them responded that ESG principles would be adopted in the long term, even if

they were used less in the short term. Together, these trends and perceptions show that the

sustainable investing market has built up momentum, and established a reputation as a viable,

rewarding option for investors around the globe, and one that is highly probable to experience

strong growth in the foreseeable future. However it is still a young market whose continuing

survival and success depends on mainstream acceptance and legitimacy (or at least the

perception of it), for the reasons explained above. A long-term issue is that ESG principles

could simply be integrated industry-wide, making the services of sustainability-specific investing

firms redundant. This issue is far from a reality in the near future, however, as “vice funds” (oil,

weapons, alcohol, etc.) comprise a large portion of our economy and the industries on which it

is dependent.


Figure 4 Source: IFC 2009

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Strongly Agree

Agree Somewhat

Neutral Disagree Somewhat

Strongly Disagree

"ESG issues are an important part of our research, portfolio management, and manager selection process"

Asset Owners

Fund Managers

Emerging Market Companies

Figure 5 Source: IFC 2009


5.0 Industry Analysis

5.1 Composition

The SRI industry is composed of asset management companies, venture capital firms, and CIIs.

Many of the asset management companies have SRI portfolios as an optional alternative to

their standard investment portfolios. Asset management companies which focus solely on

sustainable investments (such as HIP Investor, Harrington Investments, and

missionmarkets.com) are gaining a foothold in the industry but are still mainly powered by high

net-worth individuals or institutions who have at least $500,000 to invest.

5.1a Online Investing

Although there are around 50 online brokerages in the US, only 5 control 80% of the market

(Thimangu, 2008). Discount brokerages are enjoying strong growth as more investors are

unwilling to pay high brokerage fees and/or becoming more comfortable doing business over

the internet in general. This has meant that even traditional brick-and-mortar firms have found

it necessary to do a majority of their business online because customers have flocked to online

investing, especially after the financial crisis (Carey, 2009).

Figure 6 Source: St. Louis Business Journal 2008

$2,400

$1,300 $256

$62

$1,005

Online Brokerage Industry ($ bil)

FMR Corp.

Charles Schwab

TD Ameritrade

Scottrade

Rest of Industry


Barron’s Online (2009) reports that Tradeking.com’s customer base doubled in 2008, and

number of stocks traded online rose by 114%. Thinkorswim.com’s accounts grew 88% and had

a 101% rise in daily retail trades. In an effort to secure a larger piece of the pie, firms have

engaged in price wars and continue to capture new customers in this expanding market

(Morgan 2010).Online platforms like Scottrade.com and Ameritrade.com are also enjoying

strong growth and attracting many new investors because of their convenience. They allow

investors with as little as $500 to enter the market, and charge low fees per trade. However,

the economies of scale are still high, and there is no specific section for investors interested in

SRI. These platforms empower investors to decide where their money goes, and provide

transparency to assist them in the decision-making process.

5.2 Competition and Threats

Because of the young age of the market and niche nature of the proposed idea, competition

within the targeted customer base (middle-class investors) would come mainly from substitutes.

People may prefer to lend money via Kiva.org without a return in order to feel that they have

truly made a personal sacrifice. Or they may feel more comfortable investing with large,

established companies instead of a new startup website. Any direct competition would have to

come from a new market entrant with the same idea, or an established company adopting this

platform itself and leveraging its market power. For these reasons speed of market entry,

establishment of strong brand loyalty, and raising sufficient capital are key considerations and

barriers to entry for the start-up. However, because it is a wide-spanning website that invests

in already-existing firms, some elements of competition will be eliminated, with mutual success

creating mutual benefits.

External threats could come in the form of high inflation, a decrease in people’s marginal

propensity to save, the dismissal of the industry as an attempt to “greenwash” on a large scale,

a substantial decrease in profitability of SRIs, or (perhaps the least realistic in the short-to-

medium-term) worldwide regulations requiring all companies to adopt strict ESG principles and

complete divestment in “vice” funds, companies, and industries. The best that can be done to

hedge against these threats would be to diversify investments as much as possible


geographically and across industries, maintain a dynamic structure that can adjust to changing

world events and demand, and hold enough assets to sustain the company during transitions

and periods of economic hardship.

6.0 Conclusion

The early years of the SRI market has seen it accused of greenwashing and inconsistency,

however the industry trend is towards more well-defined and regulated standards,

transparency, and mainstream acceptance. Given the strong and resilient growth of the SRI

market in the US and abroad, the growing popularity of community investing, and the success

of online peer-to-peer lending and investing, it follows that the online SRI investing industry has

enough growing demand to support a market opportunity for the middle-class investor who

wants their money to be used to support responsible enterprise growth and sustainable

development, while still making a sizable return on their investment. Few direct competitors

exist, but in this fast-growing market establishing the brand early may be the most important

way to ensure success. This will also buffer the company if and when boutique investors take

notice and attempt to position themselves and vie for market share. Not only is this idea viable

within the industry, but it has a significant opportunity to ride the wave of market growth and

power, all the while utilizing our financial resources to create a cleaner, safer, and more

equitable world.


7.0 Appendix

Figure A.1 Source: Public Policy Research 2008

Figure A.1 The Multiple Styles of Sustainable and Responsible Investing


8.0 Works Cited:

2007 Report on Socially Responsible Investing Trends in the United States, Social Investment Forum, Washington, DC, retrieved from: http://www.socialinvest.org/resources/pubs/documents/FINALExecSummary_2007_SIF_Trends_wlinks.pdf

After the credit crunch: the future of sustainable investing, Public Policy Research, Dec2008, Vol. 15 Issue 4, p192-197, 6p, 3 charts, Chart; found on p194, retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/imageQuickView?sid=17e6b86e-8cfc-4296-9bb5-21c05e6b9f56@sessionmgr111&vid=9&ui=6446442&id=36460650&parentui=36460650&tag=AN&db=a2h

Bergden, Helga, Dr. Guyatt, Danyelle, Dr. Jia, Xinting, Gaining ground, Integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors into investment processes in emerging markets, International Finance Commission, 2009, retrieved from: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_SI_GainingGround_Mercer/$FILE/270309MIC9080_IFC+Report_WEB+secured.pdf

Blodget, Henry, Atlantic Monthly; Oct 2007, Vol. 300 Issue 3, p78-88, 7p, retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=9&hid=101&sid=b49fd25f-f5ef-40f0-bc91-5276849e8f92@sessionmgr14&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=aph&AN=26558999

Carey, Theresa W., Market Misery Sends Investors Online, Barron’s Online, March 9th, 2009, retrieved from: http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123638334906457983.html

Chan, Sewell, Financial Debate Renews Scrutiny on Banks’ Size, New York Times, April 21st, 2010, retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/business/21fail.html?ref=business

Christian, Leslie, Henningsen, Portfolio 21 Interview, Green Money Journal, Spring 2010, retrieved from: http://www.greenmoneyjournal.com/article.mpl?newsletterid=51&articleid=732

Deutsche Bank Research, Microfinance: An Emerging Investment Opportunity, 2007, retrieved from: http://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000219174.pdf

Emerson, Jed, Beyond Good Versus Evil, Hedge Fund Investing, Capital Markets, and the Sustainability Challenge. Personal Reflection, (2009), retrieved from: http://www.blendedvalue.org/media/pdf-beyond-good-vs-evil.pdf

Friedman, Miles, 2000, Socially Responsible Investment and Corporate Social And Environmental Reporting in the UK: An Exploratory Study, retrieved from: http://www.commerce.adelaide.edu.au/research/aaaj/apira_2001/papers/Friedman88.pdf

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Introducing GS SUSTAIN, 2007, retrieved from: http://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/summit2007/gs_esg_embargoed_until030707pdf.pdf

Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2009 Analysis of Trends and Issues in the Financing of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, Sustainable Energy Finance Initiative, United Nations Environment


Programme, 2009, retrieved from: http://sefi.unep.org/fileadmin/media/sefi/docs/publications/Executive_Summary_2009_EN.pdf

Gray, Hillel. New Directions in the Investment and Control of Pension Funds. Washington, DC, Investor Responsibility Research Center, 1983

Hawken, Paul (2004). Socially Responsible Investing, how the SRI industry has failed to respond to people who want to invest with conscience and what can be done to change it, retrieved from: http://www.naturalcapital.org/docs/SRI%20Report%2010-04_word.pdf

International Financial Corporation (March 2009), Gaining Ground – Integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors into investment processes in emerging markets, retrieved from:http://www.bentley.edu/cbe/documents/Gaining_Ground_Integrating_environmental_social_and_governan.pdf

International Finance Corporation & Economist Intelligence Unit (2009), Sustainable Investing in Emerging Markets: Unscathed by the Financial Crisis, retrieved from: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_SI-EmergingMarkets/$FILE/Sustainable+Investing+in+Emerging+Markets.pdf

Islamic Finance and SRI: Any Crossover? Novethic, 2009, retrieved from: http://www.responsible-investor.com/images/uploads/resources/research/11248094270Working_paper_on_islamic_finance_and_SRI.pdf

Kendall, Roy, Americans Optimistic about Home Economics, U.S. Economy in New Year, ING DIRECT USA Survey: 2010 - The Year Of Personal Financial Optimism, retrieved from: http://home.ingdirect.com/about/about.asp?s=News_Room&news=News_Releases&years_list=PressReleases2010.xml&id=0

Knight, Richard, Sanctioning Apartheid, Africa World Press, 1990, retrieved from: http://richardknight.homestead.com/files/uscorporations.htm

Morgan, Sarah, Online Trading Price War Heats Up, Wall Street Journal, Smart Money, February 2nd, 2010, retrieved from: http://www.smartmoney.com/Investing/Stocks/Online-Trading-Price-War-Heats-Up/

Mahler, Daniel, Ph.D., Barker, Jeremy, Belsand, Louis, “Green” Winners, The Performance of Sustainability-Focused Companies During the Financial Crisis, AT Kearny, Inc., 2009, retrieved from: http://www.atkearney.com/images/global/pdf/Green_winners.pdf

Napalm, University of Virginia Center for Digital History, Business Week February 10, 1969, retrieved from: http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/PVCC/mbase/docs/napalm.html

Reynders, Chat, McVeigh, Patrick, Best Practice in Portfolio Management: Socially Responsible Investing Comes of Age (2009), retrieved from: http://investmentadvisor.com/Issues/2009/November-2009/PublishingImages/Socially%20Responsible%20Investing%20Comes%20Of%20Age.pdf


Saft, James, Don’t Bank on Clients to Punish Goldman, Reuters, April 20th, 2010, Retrieved from: http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/

Scott, Mark, Green Investing is Paying Off, Businessweek, August 15th, 2009, retrieved from: http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/aug2009/gb2009085_888782.htm

Sherter, Alain, Socially Responsible Investment Matches Conventional Market Strategies (2009), retrieved from: http://industry.bnet.com/financial-services/10002194/socially-responsible-investment-matches-conventional-market-strategies/

Social Investment Forum, Community Investing Overview & Institution/Project Matrix, 2007, retrieved from: http://www.socialinvest.org/resources/factsheets_resources/Community_Investing_Overview.pdf

Social Investment Forum. Emerging Markets Investor Survey Report: An analysis of responsible investment in emerging markets. , retrieved from: http://www.socialinvest.org/resources/research/documents/EMDPpaper062609.pdf

Social Investment Forum, PERFORMANCE OF SOCIAL INVESTMENT FORUM MEMBER MUTUAL FUNDS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2009, retrieved from: http://www.socialinvest.org/resources/factsheets_resources/documents/123109SIFFundPerformance.pdf

Social Investment Forum, SRI Facts, 2010, retrieved from: http://www.socialinvest.org/resources/sriguide/srifacts.cfm

Socially Responsible Investing in the US and Europe: Same Goals But Different Paths, 2007 Celent LLC, Paris, France, retrieved from: http://www.celent.com/PressReleases/20070313/SRI.htm

Thimangu, Patrick L., Rodger Riney Pushes Scottrade to New Highs, St. Louis Business Journal, Feb. 1st, 2008, retrieved from: http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2008/02/04/story2.html

UNEP Finance Initiative, Principles for Responsible Investment, 2006, retrieved from:http://www.unpri.org/files/pri.pdf

Investor Relations

Socially Responsible Investing: A Market & Industry Analysis