Economic Substance Behind Texas Political Anti-ESG Sanctions
Published Online:11 Aug 2025https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.05180
References
- (2019) Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Sci. 65(10):4451–4469.Link, Google Scholar
- (2007) Monitoring the monitor: Evaluating CalPERS’ activism. J. Invest. 16(4):66–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2014) Does it pay to be ethical? Evidence from the FTSE4Good. J. Banking Finance 47:54–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2025) The impact of impact investing. J. Financial Econom. 164:103972.Google Scholar
- (2015) Do social factors influence investment behavior and performance? Evidence from mutual fund holdings. J. Banking Finance 60:112–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2005) Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions. Amer. J. Political Sci. 49(2):388–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. J. Finance 52(1):57–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2009) How active is your fund manager? A new measure that predicts performance. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(9):3329–3365.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2013) Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: Evidence from mergers. J. Financial Econom. 110(1):87–109.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2014) Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility. J. Financial Econom. 111(1):158–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) Managerial activeness and mutual fund performance. Rev. Asset Pricing Stud. 5(2):156–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2019) Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence. J. Financial Econom. 131(3):693–714.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Does ESG negative screening work? Preprint, submitted July 12, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4150524.Google Scholar
- (2015) ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2,000 empirical studies. J. Sustainable Finance Invest. 5(4):210–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Does money talk? Divestitures and corporate environmental and social policies. Rev. Finance 26(6):1469–1508.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Gas, guns, and governments: Financial costs of anti-ESG policies. Preprint, submitted June 7, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4123366.Google Scholar
- (2006) Favoritism in mutual fund families? Evidence on strategic cross‐fund subsidization. J. Finance 61(1):73–104.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Do responsible investors invest responsibly? Rev. Finance 26(6):1389–1432.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. J. Corp. Finance 66:101889.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2016) The effect of social screening on bond mutual fund performance. J. Banking Finance 67:69–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2023) Analyzing active managers’ commitment to ESG: Evidence from United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment. Management Sci. 69(2):741–758.Link, Google Scholar
- (2022) Responsible hedge funds. Rev. Finance 26(6):1585–1633.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) Do ESG funds make stakeholder-friendly investments? Rev. Accounting Stud. 27(3):822–863.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2009) Ideas, discourse, and rhetoric in political choice. Polity 41(2):189–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2008a) Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. J. Banking Finance 32(9):1723–1742.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2008b) The price of ethics and stakeholder governance: The performance of socially responsible mutual funds. J. Corp. Finance 14(3):302–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Perceived greenwashing: The effects of green marketing on environmental and product perceptions. J. Bus. Ethics 171:719–739.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1999) The effect of socially activist investment policies on the financial markets: Evidence from the South African boycott. J. Bus. 72(1):35–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2020) Greenwashing and environmental communication: Effects on stakeholders’ perceptions. Bus. Strategy Environ. 29(2):407–421.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) Framing, partisan predispositions, and public opinion on climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 31:187–198.Crossref, Google Scholar

