Trading energy stocks turns skeptics into supporters of climate action – MIT Sloan

Get MIT Sloan's latest expert insights in your inbox. Sign up for the MIT Sloan Thinking Forward newsletter.
A full-time, two-year MBA program.
A two-year, dual-degree program awarding an MBA from MIT Sloan and an SM from MIT School of Engineering.
Deferred admission program; candidates work two to five years before enrolling in the MBA program.
An MBA program designed for working professionals.
A 12- or 18-month graduate program in finance.
A 12-month graduate program in business analytics.
A doctoral program that researches management science, economics, finance, marketing, operations, strategy, and other business disciplines.
Undergraduate degrees offered in management, business analytics, and finance.
Combine an international MBA with a graduate degree in management science; available to partner and affiliate school students only.
A 20-month executive MBA program for mid-career professionals.
A one-year, full-time MBA program for mid-career professionals.
A master's degree program combining engineering and management for mid-career professionals.
Non-degree programs for senior executives and high-potential managers.
A non-degree, customizable program for mid-career professionals.
Ideas Made to Matter
Climate Change
By
What you’ll learn: 
In an increasingly polarized political environment, messaging about the impact of climate change doesn’t always have lasting power. For those looking to build policy support for large-scale climate action, it may pay to encourage people to boost their financial literacy.
A recent paper co-authored by three professors from the MIT Sloan School of Management — Michelle Hanlon, Namrata Kala, and Nemit Shroff — shows that giving people the opportunity to trade energy stocks can increase their support for government and business actions to counter climate change. This was especially true for those who were self-described climate skeptics before participating in the trading.
The key, according to the paper, is giving people a mechanism and motivation for educating themselves using financial news outlets, rather than simply telling them about the benefits of green energy.
“Even an investment incentive as low as $50 focused people toward learning about energy markets,” Kala said. “Their financial literacy improved, and their knowledge of climate change and companies’ environmental impact improved. That’s why we think their support for green policies changed.”
Over the past decade, there’s been a growing body of academic research forecasting how climate change will impact the world economy. Some models are optimistic, but most predictions point to GDP losses ranging from those experienced during a typical recession to those of the Great Depression.
Nonetheless, messaging about climate change and its impact — whether scientific, theoretical, or moral — hasn’t increased support for mitigation policies. Most of the positive effects of such messaging are short-lived, according to the paper’s meta-analysis, and even “contextually sound” messages can contribute to backlash against climate policies.
Kala and her co-authors, who also include Saumitra Jha from Stanford University and Chagai M. Weiss from the University of Toronto, sought a complementary approach to engagement. The aim was to avoid paternalistic interventions and policy debates —approaches that tend to emphasize telling people what to do.
Instead, they turned to financial markets. “We weren’t telling people what to believe. We were giving them stakes that would motivate them to learn,” Kala said.
The researchers surveyed more than 3,800 Americans about their beliefs regarding humans’ role in causing climate change, their financial literacy, and their media consumption habits. All told, participants were surveyed four times: at the study’s outset, three weeks later, seven weeks later, and eight months later.
A subset of more than 2,400 people were selected to use a stock-trading module for six weeks, with 80% receiving either $50 or $100 to trade. Another set of respondents was given access to the trading platform and $100 in a “fantasy condition” with no actual value, to simulate access to the same environment but with no financial stake. 
Roughly half of the people in the stock-trading program were given access to portfolios of “green” stocks (primarily solar energy companies), and the other half had access to “brown” stocks (companies dependent on fossil fuels). After three weeks, all of the traders could choose either type of stock for the remaining three weeks.
The survey results showed that people trading stocks were more likely than nontraders (the control group, who only completed the surveys) to shift their behavior in three ways:
These results were consistent regardless of the type of stock in participants’ portfolios. “Trading both green [and] brown stock made people read more and change policy support, which was surprising but consistent with changes to their media consumption,” Kala said.
The results also showed that investing on a small scale — as little as $50 — was enough to prompt people to learn, Kala continued. This means that removing barriers to participation in financial markets could have the added benefit of increasing support for mitigation policies, particularly in communities vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
Live Online
Register now
Two trends in the data did fade between the seven-week and eight-month surveys: Support for mitigation policies and consumption of financial news fell by about half, though neither average returned to its baseline from the initial survey. “Continued financial market participation might matter here,” Kala said, noting that the trading experiment lasted for just six weeks. 
Data on support for personal action also showed some quirks, with study subjects showing a preference for systemic actions rather than day-to-day behavior modifications. Specifically, people were more likely to reconsider their investment decisions, donate to climate change causes, or even rethink where they live and work than they were to make day-to-day green adjustments, such as switching to reusable grocery bags. 
Kala suggested that that may have been an unintended consequence of consuming more financial news: “They may have learned that systemic change is more important. When you’re talking about business and government policies and a willingness to donate to environmental causes” — which the research studied specifically — “that’s real money on the table.”
Kala said that as a next step, she hopes to explore how investors respond to corporate climate disclosures. Explaining sustainability goals and initiatives in familiar terminology may have a more lasting impact, she said — especially as more investors with green energy on their minds enter the financial market.
“Seeing Green: The Effects of Financial Exposures on Support for Climate Action” was written by Michelle Hanlon, Saumitra Jha, Namrata Kala, Nemit Shroff, and Chagai M. Weiss. 
Namrata Kala is an associate professor in applied economics at the MIT Sloan School of Management, with research interests in environmental and development economics. Her current research projects include studying how firms and households learn about and adapt to environmental change and regulation, and the financial returns of environmental technologies and of worker training and incentives.
The mission of the MIT Sloan School of Management is to develop principled, innovative leaders who improve the world and to generate ideas that advance management practice.

source
This article was autogenerated from a news feed from CDO TIMES selected high quality news and research sources. There was no editorial review conducted beyond that by CDO TIMES staff. Need help with any of the topics in our articles? Schedule your free CDO TIMES Tech Navigator call today to stay ahead of the curve and gain insider advantages to propel your business!