IJAT Vol.8 No.5 pp. 677-687
doi: 10.20965/ijat.2014.p0677


A Study on How Investors Decide on Socially Responsible Investments: Classification of Investment Behavior According to Companies’ Environmental Activities

Nariaki Nishino*, Kaoru Kihara*, Kenju Akai*,
Tomonori Honda**, and Atsushi Inaba***

*The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan

**National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, 1-1-1 Umezono, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8568, Japan

***Kogakuin University, 1-24-2 Nishi-shinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 163-8677, Japan

April 1, 2014
July 4, 2014
September 5, 2014
socially responsible investment, questionnaire survey, cluster analysis, prospect theory, cognitive bias

Environmental problems must be solved urgently, and sustainable production activities are desired. This study focuses on environmental finance, which is a method of promoting sustainable corporation activities. Environmental finance allows socially responsible investment to directly contribute to corporate activities and sustainable production activities. To clarify the mechanism of eco-friendly investment decision making, 4,843 respondents took a questionnaire survey on investment decision making, based on the framework of prospect theory. The results showed that prospect theory did not always work for environment issues and that people’s attitudes when they decide on eco-friendly investments could be classified to four clusters.

Cite this article as:
Nariaki Nishino, Kaoru Kihara, Kenju Akai,
Tomonori Honda, and Atsushi Inaba, “A Study on How Investors Decide on Socially Responsible Investments: Classification of Investment Behavior According to Companies’ Environmental Activities,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.8, No.5, pp. 677-687, 2014.
Data files:
  1. [1] M. Fargnoli, “Design Process Optimization for EcoDesign,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 33-39, 2009.
  2. [2] K. Masui, “Current Status of Environmentally Conscious Design Among Japanese Manufacturers,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 19-25, 2009.
  3. [3] Y. Kishita, E. Kunii, S. Fukushige, Y. Umeda, and J. Fujimoto, “Scenario Analysis of Global Resource Circulation with Traceability Index Targeting Sustainable Manufacturing,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 3-10, 2009.
  4. [4] S. Fukushige, Y. Inoue, K. Tonoike, and Y. Umeda, “Design Methodology for Modularity Based on Life Cycle Scenario,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 40-48, 2009.
  5. [5] H. Hiraoka and A. Tanaka, “Simulator for Reuse of Mechanical Parts with Network Agents,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 77-83-48, 2009.
  6. [6] S. Kondoh, K. Kurakawa, S. Kato, Y. Umeda, and S. Takata, “Analysis of Key Success Factors for Eco-Business Through Case Studies in Japan,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.6, No.3, pp. 252-263, 2012.
  7. [7] N. Nakamura, K. Mandai, S. Fukushige, and Y. Umeda, “Proposal of a Methodology for Supporting Eco-Business Planning,” Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol.6, No.3, pp. 264-271, 2012.
  8. [8] S. Labatt and R. R. White, “Environmental Finance: A guide to environmental risk assessment and financial products,” Joh Wiley & Sons, 2002.
  9. [9] “Environmental Economics and Policy Studies: Basic Facts and Concepts,” Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies (Ed.), Yuhikaku Publishing, 2006. (in Japanese)
  10. [10] L. Renneboog, J. T. Horst, and C. Zhang, “Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior,” J. of Banking & Finance, Vol.32, pp. 1723-1742, 2008.
  11. [11] Japan Sustainable Investment Forum, “2009 Review of Socially Responsible Invest In Japan,” 2009. (in Japanese)
  12. [12] UNEP Finance Initiative, [accessed on August 5, 2014]
  13. [13] C. Geczy, R. Stambaugh, and D. Levin, “Investing in Socially Responsible Mutual Funds,” Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania, 2005.
  14. [14] N. P. B. Bollen, “Mutual fund attributes and investor behavior,” J. of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol.42, No.3, pp. 683-708, 2007.
  15. [15] C. Consolandi, A. Innocenti, and A. Vercelli, “CSR, rationality and the ethical preferences of investors in a laboratory experiment,” Research in Economics, Vol.63, pp. 242-252, 2009.
  16. [16] D. Kahneman and A. Tversky, “Prospect theory – analysis of decision under risk,” Econometrica, Vol.47, No.2, pp. 263-292, 1979.
  17. [17] S. Benartzi and R. Thaler, “Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle,” The Quarterly J. of Economics, Vol.110, No.1, pp. 73-92, 1995.
  18. [18] T. Odean, “Are Investors Reluctant to Realize Their Losses?” The J. of Finance, Vol.53, No.5, pp. 1775-1789, 1998.
  19. [19] J. Goldberg and R. von Nitzsch, “Behavioral Finance,” John Wiley, 2001.
  20. [20] J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern, “Theory of Games and Economic Behavior,” Princeton University Press, 1944.
  21. [21] A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty,” J. of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol.5, pp. 297-323, 1992.
  22. [22] G. Choquet, “Theory of capacities, Annales de l’institut Fourier,” Vol.5, pp. 131-295, 1954.
  23. [23] C. F. Camerer, “Prospect Theory in the Wild: Evidence from the Field,” C. F. Camerer et al. (Eds.), Advances in Behavioral Economics, Princeton University Press, pp. 148-161, 2004.
  24. [24] C. Camerer, L. Babcock, G. Loewenstein, and R. Thaler, “Labor Supply of New York City Cabdrivers: One Day at a Time,” The Quarterly J. of Economics, Vol.112, No.2, pp. 407-441, 1997.
  25. [25] W. Samuelson and R. Zeckhauser, “Status quo bias in decision making,” J. of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol.1, No.1, pp. 7-59, 1988.
  26. [26] E. J. Johnson, J. Hershey, J. Meszaros, and H. Kunreuther, “Framing, Probability Distortions, and Insurance Decisions,” Vol.7, No.1, pp. 35-51, 1993.
  27. [27] B. Jullien and B. Salanié, “Estimating Preferences under Risk: The Case of Racetrack Bettors,” J. of Political Economy, Vol.108, No.3, pp. 505-530, 2000.
  28. [28] W. H. McGlothlin, “Stability of Choices among Uncertain Alternatives,” The American J. of Psychology, Vol.69, No.4, pp. 604-615, 1956.
  29. [29] A. Spence and N. Pidgeon, “Framing and Communicating Climate Change: The Effects of Distance and Outcome Frame Manipulations,” Global Environmental Change, Vol.20, No.4, pp. 656-667, 2010.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Mar. 05, 2021