AI for SDGs illustration by OpenClipArt Vectors from Pixabay

22x new research on smartphones, state aid, green policy, green procurement, public benefit, risk-reducing ESG, ESG dividends, biodiversity costs and risks, ESG willingness to pay, pollution divestments, climate adaptions, green employee value, AI driven financial research, LLM investing help, virtual robo advisors, discount illusion, hedge funds and pixel art (#shows the number of SSRN full paper downloads as of Jan. 16^th, 2025: A low number shows a high news-potential).

Social and ecological research

AI for SDGs: Key Digital Enablers of Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis Using Elsevier Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Mapping by Jaewoo Bong, Jeongmi Ga, Myeongjun Yu, and Minjung Kwak as of Jan. 14^th, 2025 (#9): “The analysis identified key technologies frequently associated with the 17 SDGs, revealing trends in research volume, dominant technologies, and their impacts on specific SDGs. Notably, artificial intelligence and robotics have emerged as the most influential technologies across multiple goals, whereas other technologies such as 3D printing, cloud computing, and extended reality exhibit more targeted associations, highlighting their specialized applications. This study also highlights emerging research areas such as the integration of digital twins, blockchain, and the Internet of Things in sustainable development …” (abstract).

Stupid smartphones: From Decline to Revival: Policies to Unlock Human Capital and Productivity by Dan Andrews, Balázs Égert, Christine de La Maisonneuve as of Dec. 23^rd, 2024 (#20): “The productivity slowdown in many OECD countries over the last decades coincided with a significant deceleration in human capital growth. We show that nearly one-sixth of this productivity slowdown can be attributed to a decline in human capital growth, mainly driven by the decline in the quality of human capital, as measured by PISA scores. … The results highlight the negative effects of smartphone and social media usage on student performance and suggest that responsible internet use programs and education policy reforms could mitigate these effects. … Without policy intervention, continued declines in PISA scores could reduce long-term MFP (Sö: Multifactor productivity) growth by nearly 3%. Combining education reforms with structural reforms could mitigate these effects and boost long-term MFP by about 1.5%“ (abstract).

Bad state aid: A Bitter Aftertaste: How State Aid Affects Recipient Firms and Their Competitors in Europe by Luis Brandao Marques and Hasan Toprak from the International Monetary fund as of Dec. 16^th, 2024: “This paper estimates the effects of state aid between 2016 and 2023 on listed nonfinancial firms in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom (until 2020) … It finds that firms that receive state aid increase employment and revenue, but not investment or labor productivity. Moreover, it finds that there are adverse spillover effects to competing firms that significantly undo any positive own effects“ (abstract).

Green over all: Green Investing and Political Behavior by Florian Heeb, Julian F. Kölbel,  Stefano Ramelli, and Anna Vasileva as of Jan. 6^th, 2025 (#1586): “A fundamental concern about green investing is that it may crowd out political support for public policy addressing negative externalities. We examine this concern in a preregistered experiment shortly before a real referendum on a climate law with a representative sample of the Swiss population (N = 2,051). We find that the opportunity to invest in a climate-friendly fund does not reduce individuals’ support for climate regulation, measured as political donations and voting intentions. The results hold for participants who actively choose green investing. We conclude that the effect of green investing on political behavior is limited”.

Green procurement: The New EU-US Joint Catalogue of Best Practices on Green Public Procurement: A Breakthrough in International Dialogue on Sustainability and an Opportunity for the WTO Committee on Government Procurement to Move Forward by Robert D. Anderson and Antonella Salgueiro as of Jan. 14^th, 2025 (#29): “In April 2024, the European Union(EU) and the United States (US) jointly issued an extensive “Catalogue” of perceived best practices for promoting green public procurement (GPP) … The Catalogue provides an extremely useful compendium … the examples cited range from relatively standard goods procurement to the provision of public transport services through to building construction and a government-wide contract for IT and related infrastructure in an EU member state. The tools, approaches and innovations relating to the promotion of GPP that are set out in the Catalogue are equally diverse and impressive” (abstract).

Good intentions, bad outcome? For-benefit or For-profit? The Dark Side of Stakeholderism Legislation by Chenchen Li, Frank Zhang, and Kailiang Zhang as of Nov. 23^rd, 2024 (#50): “The Public Benefit Corporation (PBC) legislation redefines corporate purposes by introducing a new legal form of corporate structure, the for-benefit corporation, which must include public benefits in its certificate of incorporation. … We posit that PBC legislation heightens the uncertainty of directors’ fiduciary duties and diminishes the perceived commitment to public interests for traditional for-profit corporations. Consequently, for profit companies will reduce their corporate social responsibility activities following the enactment of PBC laws, a phenomenon we term the corrosion effect. By exploiting the staggered enactment of PBC legislation across U.S. states, we find results consistent with our predictions. … In addition, we find that traditional for-profit corporations become more shareholder-centric at the expense of broader stakeholder interests following PBC legislation, leading to improved financial performance. We also find an overall increase in state-level pollution, suggesting that the environmental efforts of for-benefit companies are insufficient to counterbalance the reduced environmental initiatives by for-profit firms“ (abstract).

ESG investment research (in: AI for SDGs)

Risk-reducing ESG: The Impact of Economic Uncertainty on Corporate ESG Performance by Geyao Zhang, Effie Kesidou, and Muhammad Ali Nasir as of Jan. 8^th, 2025 (#18): “… The results suggest that, in response to heightened economic uncertainty, firms tend to send positive signals by boosting their ESG performance. … the positive impact of economic uncertainty on corporate ESG performance is more significant for firms in consumer-facing and low-pollution industries. Additionally, the highly uncertain economic environment has had a significant positive impact on the ESG performance of firms in countries with lower media freedom and upper-middle income levels” (abstract).

ESG dividend effects: Are ESG ratings relevant? Evidence from dividend cuts by Guner Velioglu as of Jan.  14^th, 2025 (#30): “… the market reactions to dividend cuts are significantly less severe when the underlying firms have high Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) ratings. … the environmental pillar rating contributes most significantly to my findings. I further document that high ESG performance premium tend to partially substitute for dividend premium” (abstract).

Corporate biodiversity costs: The Silent Cost of Biodiversity Loss: Unveiling its Impact on Institutional Ownership by Yueyang Wang as of Sept. 11^th, 2024 (#14): “The research utilises a sample of U.S. companies from 2009 to 2023 … Companies facing higher biodiversity risks tend to experience a reduction in institutional ownership, likely due to concerns over increased debt risk and potential reputational damage” (abstract).

Costly biodiversity risks: Biodiversity, Governance, and Municipal Bonds by Yanghua Shi as of Jan. 9^th, 2025 (40): „The paper shows that legislative changes that are harmful to local biodiversity signicantly impact municipal bond markets and are associated with an increase in municipal bond yields. … The analysis is based on a series of statewide regulatory shocks that conservation biologists consider to be detrimental to biodiversity conservation. These regulatory changes result in laws that hinder effective population management of unowned cats a well-known invasive species that contributes to biodiversity loss” (abstract).

ESG Index WTP: Sustainability Preferences of Index Fund Investors: A Discrete Choice Experiment by Rob Bauer, Bin Dong, and Peiran Jiao as of Jan. 9^th, 2024 (#140): “… we show how index fund investors cope with the conflict between index tracking and the pursuit of sustainability. We measure the willingness-to-pay for sustainability in an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) with real index fund investors. On average, our participants are willing to pay for sustainability but are insensitive to ESG intensity. They prefer the negative screening strategy, but are indifferent among other ESG integration strategies. In the meantime, our latent class analysis shows considerable heterogeneity among investors in their sustainability preferences” (abstract).

Impact investment research

Pollution divestment (1): Sustainability or Greenwashing: Evidence from the Asset Market for Industrial Pollution by Ran Duchin, Janet Gao and Qiping Xu as of May 5^th, 2024 (#3616): “We study the asset market for pollutive plants. Firms divest pollutive plants in response to environmental pressures. The buyers are firms facing weaker environmental pressures, with supply chain relationships or joint ventures with the sellers. While pollution levels do not decline following divestitures, the sellers highlight their sustainable policies in subsequent conference calls, earn higher returns as they sell more pollutive plants, and benefit from higher ESG ratings and lower compliance costs. Overall, the asset market allows firms to redraw their boundaries in a manner perceived as environmentally friendly without real consequences for pollution and with substantial gains from trade” (abstract). My comment: If buyers (and owners of these buyers) care for ESG, divesting pollution does not work well. Also, the use of Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas emissions which includes suppliers helps to mitigated pollution divestments.

Pollution divestment (2): Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Divestments and the Global Reallocation of Pollutive Assets by Tobias Berg, Lin Ma, and Daniel Streitz as of Nov. 13^th, 2024 (#762): “We analyze firms’ carbon reduction strategies worldwide and identify one key channel: large, primarily European firms facing increased investor pressure divest pollutive as sets to firms that are less in the limelight. There is no evidence of increased engagement in other emission reduction activities. We estimate that 369 million metric tons (mt) of CO2e are reallocated via divestments in the post-Paris Agreement period, shifting pollutive assets from Europe to the rest of the world. Our results indicate significant global asset reallocation effects and imply that responsible investors who want to truly invest responsibly need to monitor firms’ divestment strategies closely” (abstract).

Adaptation dividends: Why do we need to strengthen climate adaptations? Scenarios and financial lines of defense by Francesco Paolo Mongelli, Andrej Ceglar, and Benedikt Alois Scheid as of Dec. 17^th, 2024 (#39): “… we now have better granular climate data to study the impacts of climate hazards and forecast climate risks … and there is an increasing pool of case studies from which to learn. There is evidence that efficient adaptation investments can yield “triple-dividends” helping to close the financing gap. … Innovative financial instruments, such as catastrophe bonds and climate bonds, might support challenged insurance coverages“ (abstract).

Green employee pressure? Clients, employees and institutional owners: Who influences corporate decarbonisation commitments? by Andreas G. F. Hoepner, Ifigenia Paliampelou and Frank Schiemann as of Jan. 8^th, 2025 (#17): “This study examines the determinants of corporate decarbonization commitments … the findings highlight that institutional ownership (IO) exerts the strongest influence on decarbonization decisions, followed by employees with CSR concerns (SGA). Additionally, companies with higher green revenues are more likely to set decarbonization commitments, often at the subsidiary level, driven by specific customer pressures …” (abstract).

Employee engagement: Bottom-up collaborative approach to transformative sustainable business model innovation: Developing engagement in an incumbent firm by Genet Corine and Rose Bote as of Dec. 6^th, 2024 (#6): “This paper investigates the emergence of employee engagement through the process of transformative sustainable business model innovation (SBMI) within an established organization. … Recognizing the critical role that employees play in these transformations, we aim to examine how their engagement emerges. Based on a qualitative case study of a mature nuclear-based organization … From a practical perspective, we advocate for forums to encourage intrapreneurial creativity for incumbent firms seeking transformation in their business models” (abstract). My comment: I try to include employees in ma stakeholder engagement activities see HR-ESG shareholder engagement: Opinion-Post #210 – Responsible Investment Research Blog

Other investment research (in: AI for SDGs)

AI driven financial research: AI and Finance by Andrea Eisfeldt and Gregor Schubert as of November 18th, 2024 (#1102): “We provide evidence that the development and adoption of Generative AI is driving a significant technological shift for firms and for financial research. We review the literature on the impact of ChatGPT on firm value and provide directions for future research investigating the impact of this major technology shock. Finally, we review and describe innovations in research methods linked to improvements in AI tools, along with their applications. We offer a practical introduction to available tools and advice for researchers interested in using these tools” (abstract).

LLM investing help: Stock Portfolio Selection Based on Risk Appetite: Evidence from ChatGPT by Constantin J. Schneider and Yahya Yilmaz as of Dec. 17^th, 2024 (#155): “… We prompt ChatGPT to generate portfolios tailored to different risk appetites of retail investors focusing on U.S. and European equity markets. Our analysis of multiple ChatGPT models reveals that higher risk portfolios generally yield higher returns. However, the models exhibit varying performance across different markets … We further demonstrate that ChatGPT can effectively adjust portfolio risk and return metrics in accordance with individual risk preferences” (abstract).

Virtual robo advice: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Virtual Reality Convergence in Financial Services: The Power of Digital Twin Robo-Advisers by Marco I. Bonelli and Jiahao Liu as of Dec. 31^st, 2024 (#22): “… By combining AI’s predictive power with the immersive nature of VR, robo-advisors now offer the most advanced toolset available to investors. AI-powered Digital Twins provide real-time simulations of investment portfolios, allowing users to explore multiple scenarios, assess risks, and optimize their strategies with precision. The addition of VR creates a lifelike, 3D financial environment where users can visualize their portfolios, simulate various financial decisions, and gain deeper insights into how these choices impact their long-term financial goals“ (p. 12).

Discount illusion: „Buy the Dip“ – Wie gut funktioniert diese Anlagestrategie? von Gerd Kommer vom 9. Januar 2024: Buy the Dip-Investieren (BTD) … produziert schlechtere Durchschnittsrenditen und Endvermögenswerte als vergleichbares Sofort-All-In Buy-and-Hold Investieren (SAI B&H). Zwar steigt die statistische Renditeerwartung von Aktien nach einem Abschwung in der Tat, dieser Anstieg gleicht die Minderrendite, also die Opportunitätskosten, der für BTD notwendigen Investitionsreserve nicht ausreichend aus. Die Argumentation, dass BTD-Strategien im Allgemeinen ein geringeres Risiko aufweisen als vergleichbare SAI B&H-Strategien relativiert die maue BTD-Performance u. E. nur partiell“ (in: Fazit).

Disappointing hedge funds: Hedge Funds: A Poor Choice for Most Long-Term Investors by Richard M. Ennis as of Dec. 13^th, 2024 (#27): “For years, hedge fund investments have reduced the alpha of most institutional investors (helped drive it negative, actually). At the same time, they deprive long-term investors of desired equity exposure. In other words, hedge funds have been alpha-negative and beta-light. For these reasons, it is difficult to see a strategic benefit to having a diversified hedge fund allocation in the mix for most endowment and pension funds. If, however, an institution has access to a few truly exceptional hedge funds and can resist the temptation to diversify hedge fund exposure excessively, a small allocation may be warranted” (p. 7).

Pixel passion: Passion for Pixels: Affective Influences in the NFT Digital Art Market by Guneet Kaur Nagpal and Luc Renneboog as of Jan. 8^th, 2025 (#23): “Passion investment (e.g., paintings, sculptures, non-fungible tokens [NFTs]) are not based on straightforward valuations. To establish the valuation of collectible NFTs in the nascent market of digital art, this study uses approximately 14,000 transactions by 3,230 unique traders in a highly liquid digital collectibles market … First, there is evidence of subjective valuation of visual (aesthetic) elements of art among market participants, who are homogenous on the value of objectively measurable traits. Second, contrary to popular perception, NFT market participants’ who are naive (in terms of crypto currency experience) or experienced a windfall gain (due to favorable cryptocurrency exchange rates) trade at lower prices. … Third, prior trading activity and prices positively associate with future prices, implying price extrapolation and anchoring. The findings suggest that compared to the traditional art and investment domains, digital ownership might evoke similar, if not stronger, emotional responses among consumers than physical ownership“ (abstract).

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Werbung (in: AI for SDGs)

Unterstützen Sie meinen Researchblog, indem Sie in den von mir beratenen globalen Small-/Mid-Cap-Investmentfonds (siehe FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T) investieren und/oder ihn empfehlen.

Der Fonds konzentriert sich auf die UN-Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung mit durchschnittlich außerordentlich hohen 99% SDG-vereinbaren Umsätzen der Portfoliounternehmen und verwendet separate E-, S- und G-Best-in-Universe-Mindestratings sowie Aktionärsengagement bei derzeit 28 von 30 Unternehmen (siehe auch My fund).

Zum Vergleich: Ein traditionelle globaler Small-Cap-ETF hat eine SDG-Umsatzvereinbarkeit von 5%, für einen Gesundheits-ETF beträgt diese 1% und für einen ETF für erneuerbare Energien 44%.

Insgesamt hat der von mir beratene Fonds seit der Auflage im August 2021 eine ähnliche Performance wie durchschnittliche globale Small- und Midcapfonds (vgl. z.B. Fonds-Portfolio: Mein Fonds | CAPinside und Globale Small-Caps: Faire Benchmark für meinen Artikel 9 Fonds?).

Ein Fondsinvestment war also bisher ein „Free Lunch“ in Bezug auf Nachhaltigkeit: Man erhält ein besonders konsequent nachhaltiges Portfolio mit markttypischen Renditen und Risiken.