We study the value impact of environmental shareholder proposals (ESPs) for Russell 3000 firms from 2006 to 2021. We distinguish between climate-dedicated ESPs and non-climate ESPs covering other environmental topics. We use two approaches to evaluate management's ability and willingness to select value-enhancing ESPs and reject value-destroying ESPs: (i) cumulative abnormal returns around the final proxy filing date and (ii) a regression discontinuity design around the voting threshold at the annual general meeting. Our results suggest that management has screening ability for ESPs, especially for climate proposals, and that investors and managers share common objectives in environmental activism.

In a sample of U.S. firms, we find strong evidence that firms' implied cost of equity is decreasing in a novel proxy of firm-level climate change sentiments of earnings call participants, supporting prior literature that shows investors demand higher returns from their investments in brown firms and lower returns from that in green firms. This effect, however, is particularly pronounced for the firm-years headquartered in the states experiencing higher than median per-capita energy related CO2 emissions, those headquartered in climate related disaster intensive counties and those headquartered in RED and SWING states, supporting “boomerang hypothesis” that green firms are hedged against potential changes in local climate standards and thus enjoy considerably cheaper financing in the localities marred with greenhouse gas emission concerns, climate related physical disasters, and climate unfriendly political environment. We utilize the variation in regionwide and statewide public beliefs about scientists' beliefs regarding the occurrence of global warming as an instrument to address endogeneity issues, among other tests.

Global warming is the defining challenge of our times. An emerging literature is investigating the interactions between climate change and financial markets. Climate finance is studying the pricing of climate risks across asset classes and the ways to channel public and private capital towards climate mitigation and adaptation investments. In 2019, the Journal of Corporate Finance launched a call for papers on the finance of climate change with the goal of publishing a special volume. In this context, we discuss how finance can help to address climate challenges, the contribution of the papers selected for the Special Issue and what we view as a broader climate finance research program.

The first Global Climate Strike on March 15, 2019, represented a historical turning point in climate activism. We investigate the cross-section of stock price reactions to this event for a large sample of European firms. The strike's unanticipated success caused a decrease in the stock prices of carbon-intensive firms. The effect appears to be driven by the increased public attention to climate activism. Furthermore, after the first Global Climate Strike financial analysts downgraded their longer-term earnings forecasts on carbon-intensive firms.

We predict and confirm that long-term institutional investors (LTIOs) play an important role in mitigating the negative market perceptions of US stocks following mainstream print media coverage of climate change. We observe a stronger effect of LTIOs for companies that lack corporate social responsibility and have less diverse and more co-opted boards. Overall, these findings indicate that the US equity market views LTIOs as effective monitors who can help guide companies facing climate risks toward a more sustainable trajectory.

We match firm-corporate governance characteristics with firm-level carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions over the period 2009–2019 to study the relationship between gender diversity in the workplace and firm carbon emissions. We find that a 1 percentage point increase in the percentage of female managers within the firm leads to a 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions. We document that this effect is statistically significant, also when controlling for institutional differences caused by more patriarchal and hierarchical cultures and religions. At the same time, we show that gender diversity at the managerial level has stronger mitigating effects on climate change if females are also well-represented outside the organization, e.g. in political institutions and civil society organizations. Finally, we find that, after the Paris Agreement, firms with greater gender diversity reduced their CO2 emissions by about 5% more than firms with more male managers.

We examine the effect of voluntary climate risk disclosure on Credit Default Swap (CDS) premiums. We develop a structural model, in which climate-related disclosures serve as an information source reducing climate change uncertainty. The model predicts a negative relation between the informativeness of climate risk disclosure and the CDS premium, and asymmetric effects of positive and negative disclosure tone on the CDS premium. Using climate risk measures quantified from earnings call transcripts, we provide evidence supporting these predictions with causal inference. Our study suggests that climate risk is priced in the CDS market, where investors pay attention to climate risk disclosures.

We analyze how the materialization of physical climate risk in the institutional investors’ portfolios spurs a propagation effect on the information content of stock prices. Institutional investors with a relatively high portfolio exposure to natural disasters divest from disaster-hit stocks, decrease the trading intensity in non-hit stocks, and their trading decisions predict low medium-term returns. At the firm-level, institutional investors propagate the effects of disasters to non-hit stocks through reduced incorporation of firm-specific information, especially when the stocks represent a low portfolio weight. Combined, these results suggest that natural disasters trigger a rational reallocation of information-processing resources by institutional investors.

We find robust empirical evidence that firms in locations with higher exposure to climate change pay significantly higher spreads on their bank loans. To alleviate the concerns related to using firms' headquarters in determining climate risk exposure, we exploit the economic link between a firm and its customers and find that the exposure of a firm's customers to climate risk also adversely affects that firm's cost of borrowing. In the cross-section, we find that the long-term loans of poorly rated firms drive the effect. Overall, our evidence suggests that lenders increasingly view climate change as a relevant risk factor.

Using Iran’s unexpected flood in April 2019 as a natural experiment, we show that local branches bridge the time gap between the disaster and governmental aids by immediately increasing their lending for two months following the flood. Analyzing proprietary information on more than 53,000 farmers, we find that farmers with a stronger relationship with their branch - particularly younger and females - are more likely to receive a recovery loan. Our findings underscore that despite recent technological advancements, relationship-based branch banking is still important for agrarian societies during catastrophic events.