DOCSLIB.ORG

Cesifo Working Paper No. 9197

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cesifo Working Paper No. 9197 9197 2021 July 2021 Do Retail Investors Value Environmental Impact? A Lab-in-the-Field Experiment with Crowdfunders Christoph Siemroth, Lars Hornuf Impressum: CESifo Working Papers ISSN 2364-1428 (electronic version) Publisher and distributor: Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research - CESifo GmbH The international platform of Ludwigs-Maximilians University’s Center for Economic Studies and the ifo Institute Poschingerstr. 5, 81679 Munich, Germany Telephone +49 (0)89 2180-2740, Telefax +49 (0)89 2180-17845, email [email protected] Editor: Clemens Fuest https://www.cesifo.org/en/wp An electronic version of the paper may be downloaded · from the SSRN website: www.SSRN.com · from the RePEc website: www.RePEc.org · from the CESifo website: https://www.cesifo.org/en/wp CESifo Working Paper No. 9197 Do Retail Investors Value Environmental Impact? A Lab-in-the-Field Experiment with Crowdfunders Abstract Are investors willing to give up a higher return if the investment generates positive environmental impact? We investigate this question with a decision experiment among crowdfunders, where they choose between a higher return or environmental impact. Overall, 65% of investors choose environmental impact at the expense of a higher return for sufficiently large impact, 14% choose impact independent of the magnitude of impact, while 21% choose the higher return independent of impact. Combining the experimental data with historical investments, we find that investors allocate a larger share of funds to green projects if they value environmental impact more, and if they expect green projects to be more profitable. These findings suggest that investors have a preference for positive environmental impact, and satisfy it by investing in green projects. We further show that the preference for environmental impact is distinct from a preference for positive social impact. Finally, we introduce new survey measures of impact for future use, which are experimentally validated and predict field behavior. JEL-Codes: C930, D140, D900, G320. Keywords: debt crowdfunding, environmental impact, ESG, green investments, social impact, sustainable finance. Christoph Siemroth Lars Hornuf University of Essex University of Bremen Department of Economics Faculty of Business Studies and Economics United Kingdom – Colchester, CO4 3SQ Germany – 28359 Bremen [email protected] [email protected] July 14, 2021 We are grateful to Paul Belleflamme, Friederike Mengel, Dennie van Dolder, and Lisa Spantig, as well as seminar participants at Essex and ESCP Berlin for valuable comments. We also thank the representatives of the ROCKETS crowdfunding platforms for their incredible support for this field experiment, in particular Silke Glauninger. This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council [grant number ES/T015357/1] and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [grant number 031B0781A]. This experiment received ethical approval from the University of Essex, application no. ETH2021-0924. Moreover, we pre-registered the statistical analysis: https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/7597. 1 Introduction Climate change is increasingly seen as a major societal problem. Addressing climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions will require substantial changes in the global economy, especially in the energy or transportation sector (e.g., Unger et al., 2010). These changes will require substantial investments in R&D for new technologies, such as renewable energy or low emission transportation, and in infrastructure, to replace or phase out the existing high emission technology. The capital market plays a central role in the financing of these new technologies, products, and services. If the financing is inefficient, or financing constraints prevent better technologies from being developed and socially desirable projects from being implemented, then the goal to limit climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions might not be attainable. Indeed, the conditions in capital markets directly determine how costly addressing climate change will be. For these reasons, it is important to understand how investors evaluate investments in \green" projects that have a positive environmental impact, compared to conventional projects that have no or even a negative environmental impact. On the one hand, investments in new green technologies may be more risky or less profitable, as many new technologies and products fail. Thus, risk averse investors might be hesitant to invest in such projects. On the other hand, investors might have a preference for doing something positive for the environment, effectively increasing their utility from investing in a green project, while also expecting a return on investment. Such preferences might make green projects more attractive than conventional projects, keeping all other factors such as expected returns, risk, and liquidity equal. In this paper, we study investors from a group of crowdfunding platforms that offers both green investment projects and conventional investment projects. This allows us to investigate why investors choose green projects over conventional projects. The main question is whether investors invest because they believe green projects are more profitable in expectation, or whether they invest because they also have a preference to achieve a positive environmental impact. Testing the hypothesis that investors value environmental impact is difficult, because measuring the true preferences for impact is not straightforward. One approach is to ask investors directly whether it is important to them to achieve a positive environmental impact. However, given that questions of environmental policies and climate change have been met with increasing polarization in recent years (e.g., Farrell, 2016; Chinn et al., 2020), there is a concern that answers to such survey questions would be biased. In particular, social desirability bias might favor answers that let the investor appear as caring about the environment and wanting to achieve positive environmental impact, even if they do not have such preferences. Because survey answers do not have material consequences, there is little cost to investors in giving the socially desired rather than true answer, which might lead to biased measures. We address the potential problem with self-reporting and the social desirability bias by conduct- ing an online \lab in the field” decision experiment. This allows us to use an incentivized preference elicitation method to find out how much the investors truly value environmental impact when mak- ing investment decisions. Our method|a menu-based Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) mechanism 2 (Becker et al., 1964)|achieves this by introducing an explicit trade-off. In the decision experiment, investors can either receive a higher expected investment return by choosing a voucher to be used for non-green investment projects. Or, instead, they can give this money to an environmental cause, thus achieving environmental impact, but getting no higher investment return. Consequently, investors cannot merely claim to care about environmental impact without consequence; they would have to give up a higher investment return to do so, which makes our lab measures of the importance of environmental impact more credible. The voucher can later be used by the investors on a real estate project of their choice, but not on green projects, which ensures the clean trade-off between higher investment return or environmental impact, but not both. We asked all investors for their willingness to donate to each of two organizations to capture environmental impact. First, a carbon offsetting firm, which uses the donation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, for example by substituting fossil fuel energy sources with renewable energy sources. And second, Greenpeace, the most well known and most donated to environmental organization in the country we study. A donation to either of these two organizations implies environmental impact, and by using donations to both organizations our measure of environmental impact is broader than just carbon offsetting. Our BDM procedure allows us to determine|for each investor and each organization|the do- nation amount for which the investor just prefers the donation to the specific organization over the investment voucher for themselves. Hence, the BDM procedure produces a fine measure of the impor- tance of environmental impact. Investors who choose the voucher for themselves, no matter how large the donation amount, reveal themselves as not attaching any importance to environmental impact. Investors who forgo the investment voucher for a smaller donation amount, on the other hand, attach a larger importance to environmental impact. About 21% of investors choose the voucher independent of the donation amount to the environ- mental organizations, and hence reveal they do not value environmental impact. At the other extreme, about 14% of investors are willing to give up the voucher for any donation amount, and hence reveal a very strong preference for environmental impact. The remaining 65% are willing to give up the voucher only for a sufficiently large donation, with a large variation in the indifference point. These numbers suggest that a large portion of investors might be willing to accept slightly lower investment returns from green projects if the environmental impact is sufficiently large. Among the two environmental organizations, carbon offsetting is valued more by investors than a donation to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I Investigations Into the Structure of Crowdfunding Research
    Investigations into the Structure of Crowdfunding Research and the Role of the Content and Linguistic Cues in Risk Disclosure in Crowdfunding Campaigns A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Ahmad Ridhuwan Abdullah Master of Science in Finance (Northern University of Malaysia) Bachelor of Business Administration in Finance (MARA University of Technology) School of Economics Finance and Marketing College of Business RMIT University March 2019 i DECLARATION I certify that except where due acknowledgement has been made, the work is that of the author alone; the work has not been submitted previously, in whole or in part, to qualify for any other academic award; the content of the thesis is the result of work which has been carried out since the official commencement date of the approved research program; any editorial work, paid or unpaid, carried out by a third party is acknowledged; and, ethics procedures and guidelines have been followed. Ahmad Ridhuwan Abdullah 25 March 2019 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisors, Professor Jason Potts, Dr Nthati Rametse, and Dr Joanne Laban for their wisdom and constructive supervision, consistent encouragement, and intellectual commitment in guiding me since the first day of my study and upon finishing writing this thesis. Special thanks to Professor Jason Potts who is kind- hearted enough to allow me to develop my own academic interests. I must thank my family members, especially my wife Siti Salwani Abdullah and my daughter Dhia Alia for their support and encouragement throughout my study. They went through hard times throughout the research process and I am grateful for their patience and understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Role of Crowdfunding in Promoting Entrepreneurship Paulo
    The Role of Crowdfunding in Promoting Entrepreneurship Paulo Silva Pereira 01/21/2012 The Lisbon MBA International (Catolica | Nova | MIT) Contacts: +351933803759; [email protected] 1 Contents 1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................4 2. Research Methodology.........................................................................................................7 3. On the Impact of Crowdfunding on Entrepreneurship .........................................................8 3.1. Early model validation from small scale operation onwards........................................8 3.2. Pre‐sales and Pre‐order ..............................................................................................11 3.3. Incremental rounds of funding and equity and control dilution.................................12 3.4. The evolution of the user role and its impact in the entrepreneurial value chain .....17 3.5. Innovation and Entrepreneurship promotion in Crowdfunding .................................20 3.6. Promotion and Marketing in Start‐ups .......................................................................27 3.7. On pricing, entrepreneurship and crowdfunding .......................................................31 4. Discussion and Concluding Remarks...................................................................................36 4.1. Implications and the Future of Crowdfunding ............................................................37 4.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Jun Zhang (10742239) Msc
    To Which Extend Do Material Incentives Matter? A Study on Backers’ Motivation behind Crowdfunding Behaviour Master Thesis Student: Jun Zhang (10742239) MSc. in Business Administration - Entrepreneurship and Innovation Faculty of Business and Economics of UvA Supervisor: First Supervisor: Dr. G.T. Vinig Second Supervisor: Dr. W. van der Aa Date: 26 Jun 2015 (Final Version) Statement of Originality This document is written by Student Jun Zhang, who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document. I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it. The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents. Page 2 of 91 Contents Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................................... 5 Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.1 Academic Relevance ................................................................................................. 10 1.2 Managerial Relevance ............................................................................................... 11 1.3 Thesis Outline ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Can the Crowd Bridge the Cleantech Financing Gap? a Comparative Analysis of Equity Crowdfunding and Venture Capital Returns in the US
    Can the Crowd Bridge the Cleantech Financing Gap? A comparative analysis of Equity Crowdfunding and Venture Capital returns in the US Harvard Extension School ALM in Extension Studies, Field: Sustainability Student Name: Seif Belhani HUID: 91171260 May 2019 Can the Crowd Bridge the Cleantech Financing Gap? ii Abstract Sustainability has become one of the most discussed topics on the social, economic and political stages. While many experts and policymakers acknowledge the need for funneling more capital towards clean technologies (Cleantech) in order to achieve a genuine transition to a more sustainable economy, there is growing evidence that the current efforts are not only insufficient but that investments in the green sector are, in fact, decreasing. This is particularly true for the early stages of Cleantech innovation. This paper explores new private capital models which can help bridge some of that financing gap. Specifically, the central question asked in this project is whether Equity Crowdfunding can be a viable alternative, as an investment vehicle, for investors interested in Cleantech as well as a source of reliable funding for entrepreneurs. The United States provides the geographic focus of this research. From 2012, the US JOBS Act opened the privilege previously reserved to professional investors, such as venture capitalists, by allowing “non-accredited” investors to acquire equity shares in startups through licensed crowdfunding platforms. In terms of methodology, this capstone is based on a comparative analysis of the financial returns of three financial protagonists; Equity Crowdfunding, Cleantech-focused Venture Capital (VC) and diversified VC. Drawing on the pioneering work of Signori (2017) and Gaddy (2016), the results of this analysis show that, although Cleantech Equity Crowdfunding lags behind diversified VC, it has performed significantly better than Cleantech VC over the same investment horizon.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding and the Role of Managers in Ensuring the Sustainability of Crowdfunding Platforms; Iv
    Crowdfunding and the Role of Managers in Ensuring the Sustainability of Crowdfunding Platforms Author: Javier Ramos, Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales (ICEI) Third Main Title Line Third Line Editor: James Stewart, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS) 2 0 1 4 Report EUR 26596 EN European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Contact information Address: Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3. E-41092 Seville (Spain) E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 954488318 Fax: +34 954488300 http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu Legal Notice Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server http://europa.eu/. JRC85752 EUR 26596 EN ISBN 978-92-79-37727-3 (pdf) ISSN 1831-9424 (online) doi:10.2791/76003 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014 © European Union, 2014 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Printed in Spain About the Author Javier is currently working as a Research Associate at the Zentrum für Demokratie Aarau (ZDA), University of Zurich and at the Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales (ICEI), Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of Qualitative Factors in Making Venture Capital Investment
    A CASE STUDY OF QUALITATIVE FACTORS IN MAKING VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT DECISIONS by Frances Brunner, B.B.A. A thesis submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration with a Major in Business Administration May 2017 Committee Members: Alexis Stokes, Chair Jana Minifie Matthew Hood COPYRIGHT by Frances Brunner 2017 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Frances Brunner, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. DEDICATION I am dedicating this thesis to my children Ashton, Saffron, Cinnamon, Collin, and Sage, that they may take this as an inspiration to overcome fears and challenges, to push past perceived boundaries and reach great things in life. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my husband, Stefan, who supported my decision to take a break from the corporate world to pursue my dream of earning a Master in Business Administration. I would like to thank my children Sage, Collin, Cinnamon, Saffron, and Ashton who were patient and endured long hours waiting for me to finish interviewing, researching, and writing. I especially would like to thank my chair Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ocean Finance Handbook
    The Ocean Finance Handbook Increasing finance for a healthy ocean Co-Chairs’ foreword The ocean covers two-thirds of the Earth’s surface, and provides great economic, social and cultural value to the lives of billions of people. At the same time, human activity is causing a clear decline in the health of the ocean, with concurrent loss of the existing and potential value of the services and resources we derive from it. That decline is due to the unconscionable levels of pollution we subject the ocean to, our harmful fisheries practices, our unsustainable extraction of its resources, along with human destruction of its habitats and ecosystems. Meanwhile our greenhouse gas emissions continue to escalate, causing rising levels of ocean acidification, deoxygenation and warming, with their attendant problems for life in and around the ocean. Where there are major challenges, so too are there great opportunities. The ocean has remarkable resilience, with the recovery of whale numbers demonstrating that if we are prepared to change our destructive ways, the ocean’s rich environment allows a positive response. We at the Friends of Ocean Action are dedicated to reversing the cycle of decline in which the ocean has been caught. Our activities include championing the sustainable blue economy, believing that if we treat the ocean with respect, it will provide humanity with all the energy, sustenance and health resources required for a secure human future upon this planet. A blue economy ruled by the principle of sustainability stands against the development of yet another round of linear exploitation of finite planetary resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Technologies and the Democratisation of Financial Services: a Metatriangulation of Crowdfunding Research
    Information and Organization 26 (2016) 101–115 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Information and Organization journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/infoandorg Emerging technologies and the democratisation of financial services: A metatriangulation of crowdfunding research Rob Gleasure ⁎, Joseph Feller Cork University Business School, University College Cork, Ireland article info abstract Article history: Crowdfunding has grown quickly and attracted significant scholarly attention. However, the di- Received 28 January 2016 verse approaches to crowdfunding that have emerged, as well as the uncertain relationship of Received in revised form 7 September 2016 these approaches to the umbrella concept of crowdsourcing, means it is not clear to what ex- Accepted 7 September 2016 tent crowdfunding presents theoretically novel behaviours, nor what those behaviours may be. Available online xxxx This study addresses this lack of clarity through a metatriangulation of 120 peer-reviewed studies on crowdfunding. These studies are distributed across the four dominant categories Keywords: of crowdfunding, namely crowd lending, crowd equity, crowd patronage, and crowd charity. Crowdfunding Research for each category is analysed separately to determine the topics of interest, the dom- Crowdsourcing inant theoretical perspectives, the methods employed, and the typical focus of analysis. We Metatriangulation Financial services bridge these categories to identify three common variables relating to funding behaviours and three relating to impact. Of these, we argue that two are fundamentally novel and under-researched, namely the ‘erosion of organisations' financial boundaries’ and ‘paying to participate’. The implications of these findings are discussed for crowdfunding and crowdsourcing. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The nature of work, creativity, and innovation has been challenged in recent years with the arrival of the related concepts of peer production (cf.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowd Equity Investors
    CMRXXX10.1177/0008125617738260California Management ReviewCrowd Equity Investors: An Underutilized Asset for Open Innovation in Startups 738260research-article2017 View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Archivio della ricerca- LUISS Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi... California Management Review 1 –28 Crowd Equity © The Regents of the University of California 2017 Reprints and permissions: Investors: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125617738260 10.1177/0008125617738260 journals.sagepub.com/home/cmr AN UNDERUTILIZED ASSET FOR OPEN INNOVATION IN STARTUPS Francesca Di Pietro1, Andrea Prencipe1, and Ann Majchrzak2 SUMMARY Collaborating with investor networks generated in the course of equity-based crowdfunding campaigns can contribute to the success of startup firms. Through a qualitative study of 60 European startups, this article identifies the type of inputs provided by equity investors, how these inputs are related to startups’ and founders’ characteristics, and startups’ later performance. Startups exploiting crowd network are more likely to be successful two years later compared with startups that do not exploit the crowd, or acquire from the crowd product, strategy, or market knowledge. The findings extend existing research on the relationships between open innovation and startups by identifying the inputs provided by the crowd and how the use of crowd equity investors in open innovation platforms is related to later success. KEYWORDS:
    [Show full text]
  • Study to Monitor the Economic Development of the Collaborative Economy at Sector Level in the 28 EU Member States
    Study to Monitor the Economic Development of the Collaborative Economy at sector level in the 28 EU Member States Final Report 23 February 2018 [Written by] [February – 2018] EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs Directorate E — Modernisation of the Single Market Directorate E.3 Digitalisation of the Single Market E-mail: [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels Study to Monitor the Economic Development of the Collaborative Economy at sector level in the 28 EU Member States Final Report The information and views set out in this study are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. Directorate-General for Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs 2018 EN Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission; however, it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use, which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu).
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding – a Modern Way of Acquiring Funding PART 2
    CREATING PROSPERITY BY CONNECTING INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES TO INVESTORS Publication 9. 2020 Crowdfunding – A Modern Way of Acquiring Funding PART 2 In the previous publication we discussed some examples of existing Donation-Based Crowdfunding and Rewards-Based Crowdfunding platforms. Now let us have a look at Equity-Based Crowdfunding and Debt- Based Crowdfunding. Equity-Based Crowdfunding Equity-based crowdfunding allows an investor to partly own the business they are investing in. These investors trade the capital to gain company shares and receive a financial return, such as a dividend on their actual investment. There are often times when the investors also earn a profit in return for their real investment. There are a few popular Equity-based crowdfunding examples we will mention such as Quirky, Invesdor, Symbid, SeedUps, Eureeca, Wefunder and PeerReality (* see Important note at the end of the article): • Quirky is one of the most recent examples of an equity-based funding platform. It enables the inventors, influencers, and the global community to interact with each other, create awareness of the project, and acquire financing. • Invesdor is a digital platform that provides different companies to connect for fundraising and investment opportunities. It is a global platform and has a license to work with 28 counties that are part of the European Economic Area agreement. • Symbid is a Dutch platform that was founded by Korstiaan Zandvleit and Robin Slakhorst. It is one of the first funding platforms -that also has an equity side available- throughout the world. 1 Website: dcsx.cw Email: [email protected] © 2020 Dutch Caribbean Securities Exchange N.V.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding in the U.S. and Abroad: What to Expect When Youâ•Žre
    Cornell International Law Journal Volume 46 Article 6 Issue 2 Spring 2013 Crowdfunding in the U.S. and Abroad: What to Expect When You’re Expecting Ross S. Weinstein Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Weinstein, Ross S. (2013) "Crowdfunding in the U.S. and Abroad: What to Expect When You’re Expecting," Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 46: Iss. 2, Article 6. Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cilj/vol46/iss2/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell International Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Crowdfunding in the U.S. and Abroad: What to Expect When You're Expecting Ross S. Weinsteint I. Origins of Crowdfunding and Governing Challenges ...... 428 A. Origins, The Microfinance Movement .................428 B. Beyond Charitable Giving ....................... 430 C. The Existing Regulatory Regime for Exempt Public Offerings .................................. 431 D. Regulating Crowdfunding ............... ........ 434 II. Equity Crowdfunding Abroad...................... 437 A. The United Kingdom .................................. 437 B. Italy .................................................. 4 4 1 C . France ................................................ 444 D. Elsewhere in the European Union and
    [Show full text]