The current study compares motives to invest in accordance with socially responsible criteria among different groups of investors. In total, 60 employees from 19 investment institutions, 453 private investors and 71 institutional investors participated in a questionnaire study. While socially responsible investment (SRI) among private and institutional investors was guided by self-transcendent values (environmental and social values), this was not the case among fund managers working in investment institutions. Fund managers in investment institutions were affected by beliefs about long‐term returns of SRI. Private investors were, in addition, influenced by beliefs about long‐term returns, whereas institutional investors were motivated by an effort to reduce financial risks. Finally, investment institutions tended to overrate the importance of financial returns among their beneficiaries (private and institutional beneficiaries) and underestimate the importance of ethical, environmental and social aspects for beneficiaries. The results indicate that private and institutional investors/beneficiaries give a wider interpretation of fiduciary duty than investment institutions do. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.beliefs , ethical investments , investment decisions , socially responsible investment , values ,

This paper investigates psychological drivers and financial motives that may influence major Swedish investments institutions to adopt socially responsible investment (SRI). Based on an instrument that captures concepts in the Value‐Belief‐Norm theory, and potential financial beliefs that may influence the SRI intentions of investors, a survey was addressed to all major Swedish investments institutions. Fifty‐eight respondents from 17 different investment institutions participated in the survey of whom 31 were conventional (non‐SRI) investors and 27 were socially responsible investors. Our results show that conventional and SRI investors share similar beliefs about short‐term and long‐term performance on SRI investments in that SRI gives less return in the short term but slightly more than conventional investments in the longer term. However, SRI investors express significantly more interest in increasing their future SRI investments than conventional investors do. We discover that future SRI is not influenced by social and environmental concerns. Rather, financial beliefs about risk and beliefs about increased market shares drive SRI forward. The business case for SRI seems therefore to be the only reason for major investment institutions to adopt SRI. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

This study is positioned in a multidisciplinary research field addressing questions of innovation, foresight, risk perception, regulation, and the role of stakeholder experts as regards nanomaterials and nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is an innovative scientific field with many potential societal benefits but also high uncertainty about risks to human health and the environment. This study is based on a survey distributed to a sample of 237 expert stakeholders in Sweden working in the field of nanotechnology innovation and regulation. The sample comprises experts in both industry and government organizations. The paper explores the expert's assessment of benefits, risks, and their views of nanotechnology regulation. The experts generally agreed on the need for further regulation of nanotechnology, although they differed in their support for different regulatory measures. Support for government regulation was increased by greater perceived risk and by ethical concerns, while perceived benefit decreased support for government regulation. If nanotechnology was important for the respondent's organization of affiliation, support for government regulation decreased. Experts in government organizations were more in favor of stronger government regulation, perceived higher risks, and were more concerned about the ethical implications of nanotechnology than were the industry experts. While previous research has discussed views of experts, as well as comparing the attitudes of the general public with experts, this study contributes to the field by analyzing and identifying differences between industry experts and experts working in government.

No abstract

Local governments are bringing previously outsourced services back in‐house. Research into explanations for sourcing decisions in the public sector is growing, however, few researchers have investigated drivers of both outsourcing and backsourcing in local public‐governance organizations. In this study we utilize transaction cost economic theory (TCE) and political ideology to investigate underlying motives of sourcing in local public governance organizations. Based on a 2018 survey of chief financial officers (CEO) in all of Sweden's 290 municipalities, this study shows that backsourcing is strongly associated with outsourcing and that outsourcing and backsourcing should not be understood as opposite phenomena, rather as interdependent phenomena in a dynamic sourcing strategy. Outsourcing and backsourcing are driven in part by different factors: Outsourcing by political ambitions and economic factors relating to TCE, while managerial and pragmatic concerns are foregrounded for backsourcing.