In this paper, we use granular trading data from Taiwan between 2012 and 2016 to examine how local social capital influences retail investor behavior during corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) events. Therefore, we are responding to longstanding calls in the international finance literature to explore investor behavior in non-US markets with distinct institutional and cultural characteristics. We find that investors residing in cities with higher social capital are less likely to purchase underpriced stocks following the announcements of negative events despite the potential for positive abnormal returns. This norm-driven restraint reflects a form of socially responsible investing motivated by community-based values rather than economic rationality. By documenting this behavior in an East Asian market, we extend the external validity of social norm theories developed in Western settings and contribute to a more nuanced understanding of how localized social preferences can influence asset pricing and capital allocation in a global context.

This field experiment investigates the causal impact of mothers’ perceptions of gender norms on their employment attitudes and labor-supply expectations. We provide mothers of young children in Germany with information about the prevailing gender norm regarding maternal employment in their city. At baseline, over 70% of mothers incorrectly perceive this gender norm as too conservative – the most pronounced misperception among the various gender norms we examine. Our randomized information treatment improves the accuracy of these perceptions, significantly reducing the share of mothers who perceive gender norms as overly conservative. The treatment also shifts mothers’ own labormarket attitudes in a more liberal direction. Leveraging the fact that we assessed attitudes in a prior survey, we show that specifically the shifted attitude is a strong predictor of mothers’ future labor-market participation. Consistently, treated mothers are more likely to plan an increase in their working hours, particularly those with existing support to facilitate their employment.

Why do cities differ so much in productivity? A long literature has sought out systematic sources, such as inherent productivity advantages, market access, agglomeration forces, or sorting. We document that up to three quarters of the measured regional productivity dispersion is spurious, reflecting the “luck of the draw” of finite counts of idiosyncratically heterogeneous plants that happen to operate in a given location. The patterns are even more pronounced for new plants, hold for alternative productivity measures, and broadly extend to European countries. This large role for individual plants suggests a smaller role for places in driving regional differences.