Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to examine the stewardship practices of BlackRock, one of the world’s biggest index managers, to highlight a tension and contradictions associated with demonstrating sustainability leadership and its actual substance.
Design/methodology/approach
To support its argument, this paper draws on the author’s long-standing industry and academic experience, existing academic evidence and documentary analysis.
Findings
This paper reveals conflicting data, highlighting a tension between BlackRock’s commitment to environmental, social and governance (ESG) in its public statements and translating this commitment into tangible outcomes through voting, ESG investments and stewardship reporting, which seem to be more assumed than demonstrated.
Research limitations/implications
This viewpoint is based on a review of existing evidence. It offers some critique on current stewardship reporting practices, which has implications for management and policymakers. It identifies areas for future research in the area of stewardship and ESG reporting.
Practical implications
This paper highlights the need for a more critical interrogation of investor stewardship and ESG reporting and a more joined-up policy and regulatory approach to stewardship and sustainability reporting.
Social implications
Improving stewardship practices of asset managers will help enhance the social value created by the financial services sector.
Originality/value
In drawing on personal experience and existing literature, the originality lies in the combination of arguments brought together to highlight the challenges of making sense of the conflicting ESG reporting data to see how this may impact policies, regulation and future practices in the area of sustainability and ESG reporting.
Subject
General Business, Management and Accounting,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
Reference72 articles.
1. ESG fund scores in UK SRI and conventional pension funds: are the ESG concerns of the SRI niche affecting the conventional mainstream?;Finance Research Letters,2020
2. Some scepticism about increasing shareholder power;Ucla Law Review,2006
3. Anton, M., Ederer, F., Gine, M. and Schmalz, M.C. (2018), “Common ownership, competition and tom management incentives”, European Corporate Governance Institute Unpublished Working Paper.
4. Analysing documentary realities,1997
5. Anticompetitive effects of common ownership;Journal of Finance,2018
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献