ESG investing under political backlash
ESG investing appears on 56 recent papers in the finance journals, but only 3 of 81 papers on responsible investing carry a backlash, political or polarization keyword. Several US states now restrict ESG in public funds, and some asset managers have stopped using the label. Did fund flows, fees and holdings change?
What prompted this#
Since October 2025, 81 papers carry an ESG-investing, responsible-investing or sustainable-fund keyword (60 in finance journals); "ESG investing" alone appears on 56. Only 3 of the 81 also carry a backlash, anti-ESG, political, polarization or partisan keyword, although "political polarization" appears on 26 papers in the archive.
Questions#
- After a state restricted ESG considerations in its public funds, did the funds' holdings and returns change, or only the words in their reports?
- Did asset managers that dropped the ESG label change their voting and engagement, or only their marketing?
- Did investors in states with restrictions pull money from ESG funds, and did fees change?
Data that could help#
Fund flows and holdings (Morningstar, CRSP Mutual Fund Database), state legislation dates, and fund voting records.
Next step#
List the US state anti-ESG laws with their dates and compare flows into ESG-labelled funds held by investors in those states with flows elsewhere.