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: Urban, M, Wojcik, D
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: MDPI 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b
id ftuloxford:oai:ora.ox.ac.uk:uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b
record_format openpolar
spelling ftuloxford:oai:ora.ox.ac.uk:uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b 2023-05-15T15:10:42+02:00 Dirty banking: probing the gap in sustainable finance Urban, M Wojcik, D 2019-04-18 https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b unknown MDPI https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess CC Attribution (CC BY) CC-BY Journal article 2019 ftuloxford 2022-06-28T20:21:52Z 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 Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic ORA - Oxford University Research Archive Arctic
institution Open Polar
collection ORA - Oxford University Research Archive
op_collection_id ftuloxford
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
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Urban, M
Wojcik, D
spellingShingle Urban, M
Wojcik, D
Dirty banking: probing the gap in sustainable finance
author_facet Urban, M
Wojcik, D
author_sort Urban, M
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
publisher MDPI
publishDate 2019
url https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
genre_facet Arctic
op_relation https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b55ca0ec-922e-4523-8a0b-db1b3ac4115b
op_rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
CC Attribution (CC BY)
op_rightsnorm CC-BY
_version_ 1766341676667764736