We study the procurement patterns of non-listed firms and examine how these often-overlooked, yet pivotal players in global supply chains adjust their sourcing when they anticipate accountability for externalities beyond their organizational boundaries. Using granular customs data and a surprise information release about the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act, product-level regressions reveal that importing firms are 3.5 percentage points less likely to source a product from countries where the relevant production sector exhibits elevated ESG-related risks, suggesting that firms tend to cut ties with higher-risk suppliers. The effects are concentrated among firms with well-diversified supplier networks for a product and higher profitability, suggesting they have the necessary flexibility to respond quickly to anticipated regulatory pressure. Our findings suggest that mandates requiring firms to incorporate broad sustainability considerations into their operational decisions may have limits, particularly for non-listed firms.

Agency theory holds that managerial discretion over stakeholder decisions creates agency costs through altruistic redistribution. We test this claim in a principalagent experiment where agents choose effort and transfers affecting a third party under unenforceable flat-wage contracts. We find that principals set ethically constrained targets and wages that track fairness benchmarks. Agents, however, do not divert resources to stakeholders: transfers are negative on average, and prosocial traits do not increase giving. Instead, contract terms, though unenforceable, systematically shape effort, transfers, and returns. Notably, prosocial agents generate higher total returns. Prosociality appears to mitigate rather than create efficiency losses, suggesting that discretion channels norm-sensitive loyalty rather than stakeholder redistribution.

This paper examines how firms adjust the number and types of workers they hire in response to increased biodiversity transition risk. Using the adoption of the Key Biodiversity Areas Standard of 2016 as a source of variation that increases the risk of future land-use restrictions, we find that firms reduce job postings in affected areas and reallocate labor to less exposed regions. This effect is concentrated among firms that make negative impacts on biodiversity. Cuts are stronger among production roles, while hiring in green and adaptive occupations increases. The effect is not driven by changes in capital investment or workers’ labor supply decisions. Our findings contribute to the ongoing debate on the costs and benefits of biodiversity conservation policies and their implications for labor market outcomes.

This study estimates the firm-level employment effects of investment grants in Germany. In addition to the average treatment effect on the treated, we examine discrimination in the funding rules as a potential source of effect heterogeneity. We combine a staggered difference-in-differences approach with a matching procedure at the cohort level. The findings reveal a positive effect of investment grants on employment development. The subsample analyses yield strong evidence for heterogeneous effects based on firm characteristics and the economic environment. They highlight the responsibility of the local funding authorities to clarify ex ante which goals of a funding programme are most important in their regions.

We exploit an information shock related to the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act and use detailed customs data to analyze how smaller, non-listed firms respond when expecting accountability for externalities beyond their organizational boundaries. Product-level regressions reveal a substantial reduction in imports from high ESG-risk production sectors. Adjustments occur mainly at the extensive margin, indicating that firms cut ties with high-risk suppliers. The product-level results translate into meaningful changes in overall international procurement for firms with Big Four auditors. Our findings suggest potential limits to mandates requiring firms to integrate broad sustainability considerations into operational decisions.