We combine a large-scale field experiment with a customized survey to study how consumers use and respond to ESG disclosure. In a sample of over 24,000 U.S. households, we first establish that while consumers moderately prefer to purchase from ESG-responsible firms, they rarely consult corporate reporting directly and face various frictions in learning about firm-level activities. In our field experiment, we then inform households about real firm-disclosed activities through several randomized information treatments. Consumers increase their purchase intent when exogenously presented with positive signals about environmental, social, and—to a lesser extent—governance activities. Full ESG reports increase purchase intentions only for consumers who choose to view them. After the experiment, consumers increase their actual purchases, but these effects are small, short-lived, and only materialize for social signals and viewed ESG reports. Through a follow-up survey, we provide explanations for why consumers (do not) change their behavior after our experiment.

I study disclosure choices in job postings and the following tradeoff: detailed postings inform and attract optimal job applicants (labor market channel) but could simultaneously inform competitors in labor and product markets (proprietary costs channel). First, I provide evidence consistent with a proprietary costs channel. Conditional on a set of labor demand characteristics, private firms and redacting firms write shorter postings (i.e., less contextual specificity), and postings are more often anonymous in high-secrecy industries. Then, I exploit the implementation of federal trade secrecy protections as a shock to both innovation and opacity incentives to assess the balance between the two channels. After implementation, firms demand higher skill levels for innovative jobs, consistent with protections spurring innovation. However, contextual specificity decreases, in line with the proprietary costs channel, as protections are maximized when firms remain opaque regarding innovation. This decrease is attenuated in tight labor markets, consistent with the proposed tradeoff.

We study the capital market effects of information centralization by exploiting the staggered implementation of digital storage and access platforms for regulated financial information (Officially Appointed Mechanisms, or OAMs) in the European Union. We find that the implementation of OAMs results in significant improvements in capital market liquidity, consistent with the notion that OAMs lower investors’ processing costs. The findings are more pronounced when processing costs are high to begin with, that is, when firms (i) are small and receive low business press coverage and (ii) have high levels of retail ownership. We then identify a mechanism through which centralization facilitates capital market effects: information spillovers. First, we find that liquidity improvements are larger when OAMs have features that easily allow investors to search for peer firm information. Second, liquidity improvements are larger for firms with a high share of industry peers operating on the same OAM and for firms with a high share of small, low-coverage peers on that OAM. Third, around the annual report release dates of peer firms, focal-firm liquidity improves and focal-peer stock return synchronicity increases. Overall, our evidence suggests that, even in a modern information age, information centralization improves capital market liquidity and facilitates the acquisition and use of peer firm information.

We study whether banks are riskier if managers have less liability. We focus on New England between 1867 and 1880 and consider the introduction of marital property laws that limited liability for newly wedded bankers. We find that banks with managers who married after a law had higher leverage, delayed loss recognition, made more risky and fraudulent loans, and lost more capital and deposits in the Long Depression of 1873 to 1878. These effects were most pronounced for bankers with the largest reduction in liability. We find no evidence that limiting liability increased firm investment at the county level.

US Customs and Border Protection allows firms to request redaction of their own (and their suppliers') identifying information in transaction-level shipment records. We find that about 16% of shipment records from 2013 through 2023 have redacted identities, with significant variation across time, origin regions, and other shipment characteristics. Along with examining proprietary costs as a motive for firms to redact identities, we focus on an important but understudied force: supply chain scrutiny costs related to forced labor risks. Consistent with such costs, shipments from countries with forced labor vulnerabilities and weak government responses to forced labor are more likely to have redacted identities. We then exploit a series of events related to forced labor allegations in international cotton and apparel production that intensified supply chain scrutiny related to forced labor risks. Using a difference-in-difference-in-differences design, we find an increase in redactions for affected cotton and apparel shipments after these events. Overall, our evidence suggests that importers redact identities from shipment records in the presence of supply chain scrutiny costs introduced by public and regulatory attention to corporate social responsibility.

Recently, multiple US localities have banned employer access to the pay history of job applicants, limiting the information available to employers. We study the effects of these pay history inquiry bans on employers’ hiring practices at various stages of the hiring process and provide three main findings. First, pay offers in job postings are lower after the implementation of pay history inquiry bans, consistent with employers facing greater information asymmetry, inferring adverse selection in the job applicant pool, and offering lower initial pay. Second, the number of job postings increases, consistent with higher search costs and more intensive searches as a result of the loss of information. Third, we highlight an important trade-off for realized labor market outcomes: while there is a modest closing in gender pay disparity for new hires, the number of new hires declines.