2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2013.11.031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Synthetic indicators of mutual funds’ environmental responsibility: An application of the Reference Point Method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
20
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Both, academics and practitioners, have become conscious of this and have incorporated social responsibility as a decision criterion in their portfolio selection models. Hallerbach, Ning, Soppe, and Spronk (2004), Steuer et al (2007), Drut (2010), Ballestero, Bravo, Pérez-Gladish, Arenas-Parra, and Pla-Santamaria (2012), Dorfleitner, Leidl, and Reeder (2012), Dorfleitner and Utz (2012), Cañal (2012a, 2012b), Bilbao-Terol, ArenasParra, Cañal-Fernández, and Bilbao-Terol (2013), Cabello, Ruiz, Pérez-Gladish, and Méndez-Rodrguez (2014), Utz et al (2014) and Calvo et al (2014) acknowledge that MCDM models for portfolio selection including not only the two classical financial criteria (return and risk) but also environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues are more flexible and more likely to better represent the individual and subjective preferences of a large number of nowadays investors.…”
Section: The Classical Portfolio Selection Problemmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Both, academics and practitioners, have become conscious of this and have incorporated social responsibility as a decision criterion in their portfolio selection models. Hallerbach, Ning, Soppe, and Spronk (2004), Steuer et al (2007), Drut (2010), Ballestero, Bravo, Pérez-Gladish, Arenas-Parra, and Pla-Santamaria (2012), Dorfleitner, Leidl, and Reeder (2012), Dorfleitner and Utz (2012), Cañal (2012a, 2012b), Bilbao-Terol, ArenasParra, Cañal-Fernández, and Bilbao-Terol (2013), Cabello, Ruiz, Pérez-Gladish, and Méndez-Rodrguez (2014), Utz et al (2014) and Calvo et al (2014) acknowledge that MCDM models for portfolio selection including not only the two classical financial criteria (return and risk) but also environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues are more flexible and more likely to better represent the individual and subjective preferences of a large number of nowadays investors.…”
Section: The Classical Portfolio Selection Problemmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In this sense, the first term of the achievement function (13.3) can be regarded as an aggregation that follows the strong paradigm, while the second term can be considered to follow the weak paradigm. These facts have led us to adapt this double reference point scheme to our problem, as described next (see Cabello et al (2014)). This scheme is based on the one described in Ruiz et al (2010) for the determination of synthetic sustainability indicators.…”
Section: The Reference Point Based Approachmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Weighting scheme. Different approaches can be followed in order to establish particular and subjective weights for the criteria (see for example Perez-Gladish and M'Zali 2010; Cabello et al (2014). In this work equal weights have been used for all the dimensions, but we can also let experts or the investor to give these weights.…”
Section: Synthetic Indicators Of Stocks' Social Responsibilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, most recently, the additional criterion that seems to be receiving the most consideration is social responsibility [42,57]. Over the past few years numerous papers on social responsibility in portfolio selection have been published [51,52,54,[58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69]. One of the most recent works on this subject comes from Utz et al [52] who extended the Markowitz model by complementing it with a social responsibility objective, in addition to the portfolio return and variance, thereby making the traditional efficient frontier a surface.…”
Section: The Application Of Multi-criteria Decision-making Methods Inmentioning
confidence: 99%