Financial Markets and Portfolio Management · forthcoming
Pearson correlations between providers’ ITR values, from Figure 1 of the
paper (Iceberg = Iceberg Data Lab). Perfect agreement would place every pair
at 1.00.
Across four major providers, cross-provider correlations at the company level are
close to zero. The disagreement persists at the portfolio level and does not fall
between 2021 and 2022.
Abstract
Implied temperature rise (ITR) metrics translate corporate emissions pathways
into a temperature-based measure of climate alignment and are used to assess
climate alignment at the company and portfolio levels. This paper examines the
consistency across providers and practical relevance of ITR metrics. Using data
from four major providers, we document substantial disagreement in reported
climate-alignment outcomes. Cross-provider correlations at the company level
are close to zero. Observable company characteristics explain little of the
variation, indicating that provider-specific methodological choices are the
main source of divergence. This disagreement does not diminish at the portfolio
level and materially affects reported climate alignment for optimized
portfolios and Paris-aligned benchmark funds. We find no evidence of meaningful
convergence between 2021 and 2022, despite improvements in climate-related
disclosure. Overall, our findings suggest that ITR metrics should be used
thoughtfully when aligning portfolios with climate goals.
with Jens Eckberg, Gregor Dorfleitner and Sebastian Utz
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · 241, 107354
Forecasting greenwashing accusations for 2023, cost-weighted accuracy in the
setting that penalises missed cases most heavily, from Table 6 of the paper.
The naive forecast carries the previous year’s severity score forward.
In a sample of STOXX Europe 600 firms, greenwashing has a U-shaped relationship
with ESG and environmental scores, so firms at both ends of the scale are more
likely to engage in it. We then use these determinants to build machine learning
models that forecast greenwashing risk.
Abstract
This paper empirically analyzes the determinants of corporate greenwashing
behavior to enhance forecasting and mitigation of greenwashing practices,
particularly in the context of stakeholder decision-making. Using
company-level characteristics from a sample of STOXX Europe 600 constituents,
we show that ESG and environmental (E) scores exhibit a U-shaped relationship
with greenwashing, indicating that companies with both low and high (E)SG
scores are more likely to engage in greenwashing. Additionally, ESG disclosure
score, company size, cash-to-assets, and capital intensity are positively
associated with greenwashing behavior. Furthermore, greenwashing behavior is
more prevalent in consumer-related industries than in other industries.
Building on the identified determinants of greenwashing behavior, we develop
machine learning models grounded in economic theory to forecast greenwashing
risk. Overall, our analyses demonstrate how current and future greenwashing
risks can be effectively assessed. This enables stakeholders such as investors
and policymakers to better identify corporate greenwashing behavior and
incorporate the associated risks into their decision-making.
Using a control function approach with the European Takeover Directive as an
instrument, I find that peers improve profitability after a buyout through
better asset utilization and cost efficiency. Unlike in the US literature,
positive industry developments also contribute to the effect.
Abstract
This paper analyzes the impact of leveraged buyouts (LBOs) on the
profitability of target firms’ industry peers in Europe. To address the
endogeneity of LBO activity, I employ a control function approach, using the
European Takeover Directive as an instrumental variable. The results indicate
that peers improve their profitability following LBOs, driven by improved
asset utilization and enhanced cost efficiency. Unlike the findings in the
US-based literature, my analysis reveals that positive future industry
developments also contribute to the overall effect. These findings suggest
that the impact of LBOs on industry peers varies to some extent in the
European context.
with Sebastian Utz, Gregor Dorfleitner, Jens Eckberg and Lea Chmel
Finance Research Letters · 74, 106710
Pearson correlations of LSEG ESG scores with apparent and real environmental
performance and with greenwashing risk, from Table 5 of the paper (full sample).
ESG scores are positively correlated with a firm’s environmental
communication and negatively correlated with its actual environmental impact.
Greenwashing accusations are most frequent among large firms with high scores.
Abstract
This paper shows that ESG scores capture a company’s greenwashing
behavior. Greenwashing accusations are most prevalent among large companies
with high ESG scores. We empirically employ a novel theoretical model that
distinguishes between the communication of a company’s environmental
efforts (apparent environmental performance) and its actual environmental
impact (real environmental performance). The correlation of the apparent
(real) environmental performance with ESG scores is significantly positive
(negative). Therefore, ESG scores are unsuitable for measuring real
environmental impact. Thus, investors focusing on high ESG-rated companies
may unknowingly increase their greenwashing risk exposure, and academics may
use misleading information to assess greenwashing risk.
Mean peer cumulative abnormal returns by event window, market model. The
single largest daily reaction falls on the announcement day (−0.38%).
The average peer announcement CAR is −1.98%. We use two quasi-natural
experiments to separate the information channel from the competition channel and
find support for both, which helps reconcile the conflicting results in earlier
work.
Abstract
Our paper provides a contribution to the literature on peer effects in
leveraged buyouts and delivers an explanation for the seemingly contradicting
findings in the existing literature. We find that the average peer
announcement CAR amounts to −1.98%. A buyout may reveal private
information about peer value and can also change in the competition within
the buyout target industry. Our identification strategy to examine the
information and competition channels relies on two quasi-natural experiments,
which generate exogenous variation in the information and competition
environments. In addition, we analyze various mechanisms within these two
channels by considering the cross-section of peer CARs and by running
additional tests. Our results support the revaluation and the competitive
pressure hypotheses.
with Raphaela Roeder, Sebastian Utz and Martin Nerlinger
Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series
Change in emission intensity from the year before to the year after a tariff
cut, relative to the control group. Illustrative magnitudes reported for
Table 4 of the paper; exact values vary across specifications.
Using reductions in import tariffs as a quasi-natural experiment, we find that
stronger competition lowers firms’ Scope 1 and 2 emission intensities.
Firms with high emission intensity respond with visible environmental measures,
while firms with low intensity increase investment instead.
Abstract
We examine how changes in competition affect firms’ carbon performance.
Exploiting reductions in import tariffs as a quasi-natural experiment that
increases competitive pressure, we find that stronger competition improves
firms’ carbon efficiency through lower Scope 1 and 2 emission
intensities. These results remain robust to alternative specifications,
heterogeneous treatment effects, and placebo tests. Mechanism analyses
indicate systematic differences in firms’ strategic responses.
High-emission-intensity firms tend to adopt visible environmental actions and
reallocate resources toward intangible assets, whereas low-emission firms
increase investment and internal financing activities. Overall, our results
highlight competition as a determinant of corporate decarbonization,
suggesting that market forces can complement regulatory approaches to
improving firms’ environmental performance.
In a sample of US public firms, peers raise their leverage ratios after an LBO
is announced in their industry, and more so in competitive industries. Managers
appear to use leverage as a takeover defense rather than to address
industry-wide agency problems.
Abstract
This study examines how leveraged buyouts (LBOs) affect the capital structure
of target firms’ industry peers. Using a sample of US public firms, I
find that peer firms significantly increase their leverage ratios following
LBO announcements in their industry. The effect is more pronounced in
competitive industries, consistent with LBOs generating positive competitive
spillovers. Managers of peer firms also use higher leverage ratios as a
defense tool against potential follow-on acquisitions, independent of existing
anti-takeover provisions. There is no evidence that peers increase leverage to
address industry-wide agency problems signaled by LBOs. Further analyses show
that the results are not driven by changes in debt supply. Overall, the
findings indicate that LBOs convey valuable information for managers of
industry peers regarding capital structure decisions.
Work in Progress
Point-in-Time Emissions Data and Their Consequences for Sustainable Finance
Competition and ESG misconduct: Evidence from import penetration