Skip to main content

Toward a Theory of Sustainable Finance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Designing a Sustainable Financial System

Abstract

There is currently a growing consensus that the financial system falls short of fulfilling its social purpose. This not only poses a practical challenge for the world leaders but also poses a theoretical challenge for contemporary research: to rethink the role of financial markets in society. According to the dominant view of finance, rooted in neoclassical economic theorizing, financial agents should always adopt the practices which maximize the value of the firm. This chapter draws out the reasoning behind this view, which in part consists in an idea of a “division of moral labor ”: social responsibility should be a task for the social services and civil society, whereas the financial system should focus only on raising and maintaining capital. Clarifying this reasoning draws out some flaws of the dominant view, for example, the inherent conflicts between private and public interests and the lack of attention to all-encompassing challenges such as climate change . To address these flaws, a new theory is proposed for a more sustainable role of finance in society. The theory represents an attempt to strike a balance between opposing camps in contemporary business ethics research. Moreover, the chapter discusses implications of the new theory for both public policies and the governance of financial institutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Admati, A., & Hellwig, M. (2013). The bankers’ new clothes. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, J. (2009). The rise and fall of the U.S. mortgage and credit markets. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigham, E., & Ehrhardt, M. (2014). Financial management: Theory & practice (14th ed.). Mason: South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bykvist, K. (2010). Utilitarianism: A guide for the perplexed. London/New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvello, A. (Ed.). (2010). Environmental alpha: Institutional investors and climate change. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowton, C. J., & Sandberg, J. (2012). Socially responsible investment. In R. Chadwick (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied ethics (Vol. 4, 2nd ed., pp. 142–151). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupré, S., & Chenet, H. (2012). Connecting the dots between climate goals, portfolio allocation and financial regulation. Paris: 2° Investing Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evan, M., & Freeman, E. (1988). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In T. Beauchamp & N. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (3rd ed., pp. 97–106). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E. (1997). A stakeholder theory of the corporation. In T. Beauchamp & N. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (6th ed.). Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E., & Phillips, R. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(3), 331–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E., Harrison, J., Wicks, A., Parmar, B., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase profits. New York Times Magazine, pp. 32–33, 122–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S. (2002). Developing stakeholder theory. Journal of Management Studies, 39(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. (1999). Practicability, paradigms, and problems in stakeholder theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 228–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodhart, C., Hartmann, P., Llewellyn, D., Rojas-Suárez, L., & Weisbrod, S. (1998). Financial regulation: Why, how and where now? London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haigh, M., & Hazelton, J. (2004). Financial markets: A tool for social responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 59–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral thinking: Its levels, method, and point. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, J., Hoepner, A., Johnson, K., Sandberg, J., & Waitzer, E. (Eds.). (2014). Cambridge handbook of institutional investment and fiduciary duty. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helgesson, G. (2002). Values, norms & ideology in mainstream economics. Uppsala: Uppsala University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. (2005). Ethical investing: Ethical investors and managers. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(4), 641–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Igan, D., Mishra, P., & Tressel, T. (2009). A fistful of dollars: Lobbying and the financial crisis. IMF Working Paper 09/287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. (2000). A theory of the firm: Governance, residual claims, and organizational forms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeucken, M. (2001). Sustainable finance and banking: The financial sector and the future of the planet. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juravle, C., & Lewis, A. (2008). Identifying impediments to SRI in Europe: A review of the practitioner and academic literature. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(3), 285–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, H. (2009). The road to financial reformation: Warnings, consequences, reforms. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, D., Blackwell, D., Whidbee, D., & Peterson, R. (2012). Financial institutions, markets, and money (11th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiernan, M. (2009). Investing in a sustainable world. Why GREEN is the new color of money on Wall Street. New York: Amacom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, R. (Ed.). (2010). Lessons from the financial crisis: Causes, consequences, and our economic future. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosinsky, C. (Ed.). (2012). Evolutions in sustainable investing. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krugman, P. (2013). End this depression now! New York/London: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebreich, M. (2013). Financial regulation – Biased against clean energy and green infrastructure? Geneva: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malloch, T. R., & Mamorsky, J. (2013). The end of ethics and a way back. Singapore: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter, R. (2010). The moral responsibilities of investment bankers. University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 8(1), 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B. (2008). Socially responsible investment law: Regulating the unseen polluters. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B. K., & Cragg, W. (2010). Being virtuous and prosperous: SRI’s conflicting goals. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(1), 21–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritholtz, B. (2009). Bailout nation. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, J. (2008). The ethics of investing. Making money or making a difference? Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, J. (2014). Socially responsible investment and the conceptual limits of fiduciary duty. In J. Hawley, A. Hoepner, K. Johnson, J. Sandberg, & E. Waitzer (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of institutional investment and fiduciary duty (pp. 300–310). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, M., & Strauss, R. (2013). Wall Street values: Business ethics and the global financial crisis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiller, R. (2008). The subprime solution. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (2010). Freefall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy. New York/London: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warhurst, A. (2001). Corporate citizenship and corporate social investment. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 1, 57–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, A., Gilbert, R., & Freeman, R. (1994). A feminist reinterpretation of the stakeholder concept. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 475–497.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This chapter was presented at the UNEP Inquiry/CIGI Research Convening which took place in Waterloo (Canada) on 2–3 December 2014. A previous version was published online as UNEP Inquiry Working Paper 15/08, October 2015.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sandberg, J. (2018). Toward a Theory of Sustainable Finance. In: Walker, T., Kibsey, S.D., Crichton, R. (eds) Designing a Sustainable Financial System. Palgrave Studies in Sustainable Business In Association with Future Earth. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66387-6_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics