Introduction: Background and purpose of the bibliometric review
This review analyses 1,055 scholarly works published between 1983 and 2021 to map the evolution of shareholder activism research. The study addresses two primary questions: the extent of interdisciplinarity within the field and the trajectory of its key topics, themes, and gaps. Despite the volume of existing literature, a comprehensive, interdisciplinary synthesis has previously been lacking.
Methodology and sample
The authors employed bibliometric analysis, a quantitative method designed to review large datasets objectively. Data was collected from the Web of Science Core Collection, resulting in a final sample of 1,055 outputs. The study utilised performance analysis and knowledge mapping techniques (using VOSviewer) to visualise networks of co-authorship, co-citations, and keyword co-occurrences.
How interdisciplinary is shareholder activism research
Research output has surged, peaking at 134 publications in 2019. While finance journals dominate citations, contributions from management, law, and economics are significant. However, ‘citation silos’ persist, particularly in finance and economics, where scholars predominantly cite within their own discipline. Although multi-discipline journals account for only 28% of publications, they contribute 41% of total citations. Co-authorship has risen, indicating a growing trend towards collaboration.
Exploring the past: Intellectual knowledge base of shareholder activism research, through co-citation analysis
Analysis of cited references reveals five foundational themes:
- Ownership structures: Focuses on monitoring by blockholders and institutional investors (e.g., pension funds).
- Activist strategies: Covers formal and informal tactics, including shareholder proposals and ‘just vote no’ campaigns.
- Hedge fund activism: Examines firm-level effects, revealing that hedge funds often target strategic issues rather than broad governance problems.
- Theoretical foundations: Agency theory remains the cornerstone, though stakeholder theory is increasingly utilised.
- Pension fund activism: A smaller theme, largely historical, focusing on US public pension funds.
The State Of The Art And Evolution Of Shareholder Activism Research, Using Keyword Co-occurrence Analysis
Six thematic clusters define the current landscape. The largest focuses on ‘traditional shareholder activism’ targeting corporate governance. Other clusters highlight the rise of environmental and social (E&S) activism, the dominance of hedge funds, and the role of shareholder proposals. Temporally, research has shifted from Asian markets to broader emerging markets (+265.52% keyword increase for ‘emerging markets’). Quantitative methods have also seen a 56.65% increase in adoption between 2011 and 2021.
Emerging research frontiers and future directions
Bibliographic coupling identifies four nascent frontiers:
- Sustainability: The most significant frontier, moving beyond E&S to ‘sustainability-oriented shareholder activism’.
- Passive investors: Debates the stewardship role of index funds (e.g., the ‘Big Three’) and their potential to influence market-wide issues.
- Broader impacts: Investigates effects beyond firm value, such as impacts on innovation, employees, and creditors.
- Institutional monitoring revisited: Re-evaluates monitoring in global contexts.
A roadmap for future research in shareholder activism: Actors, objectives, strategies and outcomes
The authors advocate for a holistic approach that accounts for new actors (index funds, individual investors) and evolving objectives (sustainability). Future research should examine intra- and inter-coordination among activists and the impact of technology (e.g., blockchain, robo-voting). Policymakers are advised to evaluate outcomes beyond financial metrics, considering non-financial impacts at firm, market, and macro levels.
Conclusion
Shareholder activism research has evolved from a niche financial topic to a complex, interdisciplinary field. While disciplinary silos remain, the trajectory points towards greater diversity in actors and objectives. The study calls for a redefinition of theoretical frameworks to better capture the complex interrelationships between financial and non-financial goals in modern activism.
