Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance

In 2016, the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance estimated the market for sustainable investments to have reached 22.89 trillion USD of assets under management. While financial institutions have embraced the idea of sustainable finance as a business opportunity, they have arguably done little, bu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Michael A. Urban, Dariusz Wójcik
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/pdf
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/
id ftrepec:oai:RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1745-:d:216317
record_format openpolar
spelling ftrepec:oai:RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1745-:d:216317 2024-04-14T08:08:16+00:00 Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance Michael A. Urban Dariusz Wójcik https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/pdf https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/ unknown https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/pdf https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/ article ftrepec 2024-03-19T10:31:50Z In 2016, the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance estimated the market for sustainable investments to have reached 22.89 trillion USD of assets under management. While financial institutions have embraced the idea of sustainable finance as a business opportunity, they have arguably done little, but to piggy-back on investors’ demand. Today, it is not unusual for a single firm to retail fossil free investment funds and concomitantly offer commercial loans towards fracking, coal, and Arctic drilling. This paradox is underpinned by a major gap in the way sustainability has permeated primary and secondary markets which, we argue, calls for a serious rethinking of the sustainability transition in finance. This article proposes two contributions in this direction. First, we develop an original conceptualisation of finance as a socio-technical system to discuss the dynamics that both hinder and promote a transition from mainstream to sustainable finance. Second, we propose to study how investment banks integrate sustainability in their underwriting services. To do so, we filter through close to half a million of debt and equity underwriting deals (2005–2017) using the Government Pension Fund Global of Norway’s list of 153 excluded companies. Our results suggest that investment banks do not shy away from underwriting companies that have been flagged for major environmental, social, and governance misconduct, neither do they restrain from underwriting companies providing contentious products, such as tobacco, coal, and nuclear weapons. Moving forward, we suggest ways to address this problem and call for further research on the responsibility and agency of finance and advanced business services firms in sustainability transitions. sustainable finance; primary markets; investment banking Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) Arctic
institution Open Polar
collection RePEc (Research Papers in Economics)
op_collection_id ftrepec
language unknown
description In 2016, the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance estimated the market for sustainable investments to have reached 22.89 trillion USD of assets under management. While financial institutions have embraced the idea of sustainable finance as a business opportunity, they have arguably done little, but to piggy-back on investors’ demand. Today, it is not unusual for a single firm to retail fossil free investment funds and concomitantly offer commercial loans towards fracking, coal, and Arctic drilling. This paradox is underpinned by a major gap in the way sustainability has permeated primary and secondary markets which, we argue, calls for a serious rethinking of the sustainability transition in finance. This article proposes two contributions in this direction. First, we develop an original conceptualisation of finance as a socio-technical system to discuss the dynamics that both hinder and promote a transition from mainstream to sustainable finance. Second, we propose to study how investment banks integrate sustainability in their underwriting services. To do so, we filter through close to half a million of debt and equity underwriting deals (2005–2017) using the Government Pension Fund Global of Norway’s list of 153 excluded companies. Our results suggest that investment banks do not shy away from underwriting companies that have been flagged for major environmental, social, and governance misconduct, neither do they restrain from underwriting companies providing contentious products, such as tobacco, coal, and nuclear weapons. Moving forward, we suggest ways to address this problem and call for further research on the responsibility and agency of finance and advanced business services firms in sustainability transitions. sustainable finance; primary markets; investment banking
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Michael A. Urban
Dariusz Wójcik
spellingShingle Michael A. Urban
Dariusz Wójcik
Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance
author_facet Michael A. Urban
Dariusz Wójcik
author_sort Michael A. Urban
title Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance
title_short Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance
title_full Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance
title_fullStr Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance
title_full_unstemmed Dirty Banking: Probing the Gap in Sustainable Finance
title_sort dirty banking: probing the gap in sustainable finance
url https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/pdf
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
genre_facet Arctic
op_relation https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/pdf
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1745/
_version_ 1796305712896278528