IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/harjfk/rwp18-037.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Stock Price Rewards to Climate Saints and Sinners: Evidence from the Trump Election

Author

Listed:
  • Ramelli, Stefano

    (University of Zurich)

  • Wagner, Alexander F.

    (University of Zurich)

  • Zeckhauser, Richard J.

    (Harvard Kennedy School)

  • Ziegler, Alexandre

    (University of Zurich)

Abstract

Donald Trump's 2016 election and the subsequent nomination of Scott Pruitt, a climate skeptic and self-proclaimed opponent of the Environmental Protection Agency's "activist agenda," to lead the EPA drastically shifted expectations on US climate change policy. Firms' stock-price reactions to these events reveal whether their climate strategies affected their valuations. As widely reported, firms in industries with high carbon intensity benefited, at least briefly. It might be expected that companies with "responsible" strategies on climate change would have lost value. In fact, investors actually rewarded such firms. The analysis shows that this observed climate responsibility premium is due, at least in part, to the strategic behavior of long horizon investors who look into the future to assess the valuation of corporations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramelli, Stefano & Wagner, Alexander F. & Zeckhauser, Richard J. & Ziegler, Alexandre, 2018. "Stock Price Rewards to Climate Saints and Sinners: Evidence from the Trump Election," Working Paper Series rwp18-037, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:rwp18-037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1716
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Curcio, Domenico & Gianfrancesco, Igor & Vioto, Davide, 2023. "Climate change and financial systemic risk: Evidence from US banks and insurers," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Stefano Battiston & Petr Jakubik & Irene Monasterolo & Keywan Riahi & Bas van Ruijven, 2019. "Climate Risk Assessment of the Sovereign Bond Portfolio of European Insurers," EIOPA Financial Stability Report - Thematic Articles 15, EIOPA, Risks and Financial Stability Department.
    3. Garel, Alexandre & Petit-Romec, Arthur, 2021. "Investor rewards to environmental responsibility: Evidence from the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    4. Billio, Monica & Costola, Michele & Hristova, Iva & Latino, Carmelo & Pelizzon, Loriana, 2022. "Sustainable finance: A journey toward ESG and climate risk," SAFE Working Paper Series 349, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    5. Dorman,Peter, 2022. "Alligators in the Arctic and How to Avoid Them," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781316516270, October.
    6. Khaled Alsaifi & Marwa Elnahass & Abdullah M. Al-Awadhi & Aly Salama, 2022. "Carbon disclosure and firm risk: evidence from the UK corporate responses to climate change," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 505-526, September.
    7. Monasterolo, Irene & de Angelis, Luca, 2020. "Blind to carbon risk? An analysis of stock market reaction to the Paris Agreement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    8. Alexandre Garel & Arthur Petit-Romec, 2021. "Investor rewards to environmental responsibility: Evidence from the COVID-19 crisis," Post-Print hal-03204216, HAL.
    9. Azar, José & Duro, Miguel & Kadach, Igor & Ormazabal, Gaizka, 2021. "The Big Three and corporate carbon emissions around the world," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 674-696.
    10. Bogmans, Christian & Pescatori, Andrea & Prifti, Ervin, 2024. "The impact of climate policy on oil and gas investment: Evidence from firm-level data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G38 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:rwp18-037. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ksharus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.