The financial community suggests it increasingly accounts for the environmental and social performance of the companies it invests in. To investigate this claim, we study how stock market participants and credit rating agencies respond to environmental and health controversies with internationally operating companies. Stock returns and rating changes are the most prominent financial signals regarding the appreciation of news by the financial community. The actions of numerous investors who trade on public information determine firm value. Credit rating agencies produce ratings based on private information, in part to support these evaluations. Ratings focus directly on a firm’s default and business risk which itself is increasingly associated with global environmental and health controversies. Financial investors show a timely and significant response to measures of such controversies, but this response is highly generic and is small from an economic point of view. Credit ratings do not immediately respond in a significant way. Thus, markets and raters respond in a different way to the controversies. We conclude that the response of the financial community to global environmental and health controversies is limited. Therefore, the financial community seems unable to discipline the economic agents behind the controversies.

金融界认为，它越来越多地考虑了所投资公司的环境和社会绩效。为调查这一说法，我们研究了股票市场参与者和信用评级机构如何应对国际经营公司的环境和健康争议。股票回报和评级变化是有关金融界对新闻增值的最重要的财务信号。通过公共信息进行交易的众多投资者的行为决定了公司的价值。信用评级机构根据私人信息产生评级，部分是为了支持这些评估。评级直接关注公司的违约和商业风险，而自身的违约和商业风险与全球环境和健康方面的争议越来越相关。金融投资者对此类争议的措施表现出及时而重要的反应，但是这种反应是高度通用的，从经济角度来看很小。信用等级不会立即做出重大反应。因此，市场和评估者以不同的方式回应争议。我们得出的结论是，金融界对全球环境和健康争议的回应是有限的。因此，金融界似乎无法约束争议背后的经济主体。我们得出的结论是，金融界对全球环境和健康争议的回应是有限的。因此，金融界似乎无法约束争议背后的经济主体。我们得出的结论是，金融界对全球环境和健康争议的回应是有限的。因此，金融界似乎无法约束争议背后的经济主体。