Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Emerging Practices in Sustainable Banking

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Sustainable Banking

Abstract

Environmental concerns are pushing banks toward the development of new products, investment, and communication strategies. From the banks’ point of view, sustainable products may be seen as both a strategic and a commercial opportunity. At the same time, communicating the bank engagement in sustainable approaches may represent a pathway toward new market opportunities in terms of reputation and customer perception. This chapter gives an overview of the most important sustainable products and services developed by the banking industry and describes the role of sustainability disclosure in terms of both opportunities and risks of inactions.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For an overview of microcredit, microfinance, and microcredit guarantee funds, see, among others, Leone and Porretta (2014) and, La Torre and Vento (2008). For information on green microfinance, see: (Forcella 2013), Allet (2014), and Allet and Hudon (2015).

  2. 2.

    At the end of 2016, EIB was the world’s largest issuer of Green Bonds with €15 billion raised.

  3. 3.

    The Green Bond Principles (GBP) have been updated in June 2017 and are voluntary process guidelines that recommend transparency and disclosure and promote integrity in the development of the Green Bond market, by clarifying the approach for issuance of a Green Bond.

  4. 4.

    On the topic of green bond funds’ performance, see, among others, Scholtens (2011), Chang et al. (2012), and Adamo et al. (2014).

  5. 5.

    Indices are a primary investment tool for investment managers and investment owners, as they provide a benchmark or point of reference for the active investment decisions (Inderst et al. 2012).

  6. 6.

    About securitization, see Greenbaum and Thakor (1987), Ashcraft and Schuermann (2008), Maddaloni and Peydró (2011), and Mazzuca (2015).

  7. 7.

    For further details about impact investing, see Vecchi et al. (2015), Rizzello et al. (2016), Weber (2016), and Vecchi et al. (2017), while for more details on impact investment funds, see Stagars (2015) and Chiappini (2017).

  8. 8.

    Many academic works tried to explore the relationship between corporate environmental performance and firm performance. In this vein, Hassel et al. (2005) show that environmental performance has a negative effect on the market value of a Swedish sample of firms. Murray et al. (2006), however, analyzed the value relevance of social and environmental reporting in UK companies, with no conclusive results. Different results are often attributed to the broad range or research methods and to the lack of common environmental performance measures (Konar and Cohen 2001; Al-Tuwaijri et al. 2004). Despite the growing number of works, mixed results have been found and the debate about the relationship between environmental performance and firm performance is still unresolved (Elsayed and Paton 2005; Lee et al. 2016; Nor et al. 2016).

  9. 9.

    The Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (on disclosure of nonfinancial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups (“the Directive”)) entered into force on 6 December 2014 and amends Directive 2013/34/EU (on the annual financial statements, consolidated statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings). Companies concerned will start applying the directive as of 2018, on information relating to the 2017 financial year. The disclosure requirements for nonfinancial information apply to certain large companies with more than 500 employees, as the cost of obliging SMEs to apply them could outweigh the benefits. Companies are required to disclose relevant, useful information that is necessary to understand their development, performance, position and the impact of their activity, rather than an exhaustive, detailed report. The directive also gives companies significant flexibility to disclose relevant information in the way that they consider most useful, including in a separate report. Companies may rely on international, EU-based, or national frameworks.

  10. 10.

    The EC decided on 28 October 2016 to establish a High Level Expert Group on sustainable finance. This builds on the Commission’s goal to develop an overarching and comprehensive EU strategy on sustainable finance as part of the Capital Markets Union.

  11. 11.

    The Global Compact asks companies to embrace, support, and enact, within their sphere of influence, a set of core values in the areas of human rights, labor standards, the environment, and anticorruption. The principles are organized around four main areas: human rights (principles 1 and 2), labor standards (principles 3–6), environment (principles 7–9), and anticorruption (principle 10). The principles are as follows: Principle 1: Businesses should support and respect the protection of internationally proclaimed human rights; Principle 2: Make sure that they are not complicit in human rights abuses; Principle 3: Businesses should uphold the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; Principle 4: The elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labor; Principle 5: The effective abolition of child labor; Principle 6: The elimination of discrimination in respect to employment and occupation; Principle 7: Businesses should support a precautionary approach to environmental challenges; Principle 8: Undertake initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility; Principle 9: encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies; Principle 10: Businesses should work against corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery.

References

  • Adamo, R., Federico, D., & Notte, A. (2014). Performance and risk of green funds. Investment Management and Financial Innovation, 11(1), 134–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, C. A., & McNicholas, P. (2007). Making a difference: Sustainability reporting, accountability and organisational change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 382–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aerts, W., Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2006). Intra-industry imitation in corporate environmental reporting: An international perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25(3), 299–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allet, M. (2014). Why do microfinance institutions go green? Journal of Business Ethics, 122(3), 405–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allet, M., & Hudon, M. (2015). Green microfinance: Characteristics of microfinance institutions involved in environmental management. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), 395–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Tuwaijri, S. A., Christensen, T. E., & Hughes, K. E. (2004). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: A simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(5), 447–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. (2015). Environmental finance. InHandbook of environmental and sustainable finance (pp. 307–333). Amsterdam: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arevalo, J. A., Aravind, D., Ayuso, S., & Roca, M. (2013). The global compact: An analysis of the motivations of adoption in the Spanish context. Business Ethics: A European Review, 22(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armendáriz, B., & Morduch, J. (2010). The economics of microfinance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armendáriz, B., & Szafarz, A. (2011). On mission drift in microfinance institutions. In B. Armendáriz & M. Labie (Eds.), The handbook of microfinance (pp. 341–366). London/Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ashcraft, A. B., & Schuermann, T. (2008). Understanding the securitization of subprime mortgage credit. Foundations and Trends® in Finance, 2(3), 191–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bank of America Merrill Lynch. (2017). Bank of America corporation 2016 annual report. Retrieved from https://about.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/BOAML_AR2016.pdf#page=11

  • Barbu, E. M., Dumontier, P., Feleagă, N., & Feleagă, L. (2014). Mandatory environmental disclosures by companies complying with IASs/IFRSs: The cases of France, Germany, and the UK. The International Journal of Accounting, 49(2), 231–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennie, L., Bernhagen, P., & Mitchell, N. J. (2007). The logic of transnational action: The good corporation and the Global Compact. Political Studies, 55(4), 733–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berthelot, S., Coulmont, M., & Serret, V. (2012). Do investors value sustainability reports? A Canadian study. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19(6), 355–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloomberg New Energy Finance. (2016). Clean energy investment trends, 2016. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouma, J. J., Jeucken, M., & Klinkers, L. (Eds.). (2017). Sustainable banking: The greening of finance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braam, G. J., de Weerd, L. U., Hauck, M., & Huijbregts, M. A. (2016). Determinants of corporate environmental reporting: The importance of environmental performance and assurance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 129, 724–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. (2004). A longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of environmental disclosure in UK companies – A research note. The British Accounting Review, 36(1), 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, C., & Mazzuca, M. (2014). Sustainability report and bank valuation: Evidence from European stock markets. Business Ethics: A European Review, 23(1), 69–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. E., Nelson, W. A., & Doug Witte, H. (2012). Do green mutual funds perform well? Management Research Review, 35(8), 693–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, N., Huang, H. H., & Lin, C. H. (2017). Equator principles and bank liquidity. International Review of Economics & Finance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiappini, H. (2017). Social impact funds: Definition, assessment and performance. Cham: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2003). Environmental reporting management: A continental European perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 22(1), 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2007). The revisited contribution of environmental reporting to investors’ valuation of a firm’s earnings: An international perspective. Ecological Economics, 62(3), 613–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D., Ledoux, M. J., & Magnan, M. (2011). The informational contribution of social and environmental disclosures for investors. Management Decision, 49(8), 1276–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Amico, E., Coluccia, D., Fontana, S., & Solimene, S. (2016). Factors influencing corporate environmental disclosure. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(3), 178–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal, S. P., Bonham, C., & Silvani, A. (2015). An investigation on ecosystem services, the role of investment banks, and investment products to foster conservation. In K. Wendt (Ed.), Responsible investment banking. CSR, sustainability, ethics & governance. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers, T., & Packer, F. (2017, September). Green bond finance and certification. BIS Quarterly Review. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3042378

  • Elsayed, K., & Paton, D. (2005). The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: Static and dynamic panel data evidence. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 16(3), 395–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Equator Principles. (2013). The equator principles III. The Equator Principles Assocaition, United Kingdom. Retrieved from http://www.equator-principles.com/resources/equator_principles_iii.pdf

  • Erwin, P. M. (2011). Corporate codes of conduct: The effects of code content and quality on ethical performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 535–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2016). Study on the potential of green bond finance for resource-efficient investments. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/pdf/potential-green-bond.pdf

  • European Commission. (2017). Guidelines on non-financial reporting (methodology for reporting non-financial information). Communication from the commission 2017/C 215/01. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017XC0705(01)&from=EN

  • Finch, N. (2015). Development of sustainability reporting frameworks: The case of Australia. In Corporate social responsibility and governance (pp. 227–239). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flaherty, M., Gevorkyan, A., Radpour, S., & Semmler, W. (2017). Financing climate policies through climate bonds–A three stage model and empirics. Research in International Business and Finance, 42, 468–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forcella, D. (2013). European green microfinance, a first look (EMN research paper). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forcella, D., & Hudon, M. (2016). Green microfinance in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuente, J. A., García-Sánchez, I. M., & Lozano, M. B. (2017). The role of the board of directors in the adoption of GRI guidelines for the disclosure of CSR information. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 737–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galaz, V., Gars, J., Moberg, F., Nykvist, B., & Repinski, C. (2015). Why ecologists should care about financial markets. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 30(10), 571–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamerschlag, R., Möller, K., & Verbeeten, F. (2011). Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: Empirical evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science, 5(2–3), 233–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garayar, A., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., & Boiral, O. (2016). Adoption of the UN Global Compact in Spanish banking: A case study. Journal of Public Affairs, 16(4), 359–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaumnitz, B. R., & Lere, J. C. (2004). A classification scheme for codes of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(4), 329–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiative. (2006). G3 guidelines. Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiatives. (2017). G4 sector disclosure – Financial sector. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golob, U., & Bartlett, J. L. (2007). Communicating about corporate social responsibility: A comparative study of CSR reporting in Australia and Slovenia. Public Relations Review, 33(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995a). Constructing a research database of social and environmental reporting by UK companies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 78–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995b). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Javad, M., Power, D. M., & Sinclair, C. D. (2001). Social and environmental disclosure and corporate characteristics: A research note and extension. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 28(3–4), 327–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, S. I., & Thakor, A. V. (1987). Bank funding modes: Securitization versus deposits. Journal of Banking & Finance, 11(3), 379–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R. (2013). ISO 26000 and the standardization of strategic management processes for sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(7), 442–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R., & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R., Reimsbach, D., & Schiemann, F. (2015). Organizations, climate change, and transparency: Reviewing the literature on carbon disclosure. Organization & Environment, 28(1), 80–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassel, L., Nilsson, H., & Nyquist, S. (2005). The value relevance of environmental performance. European Accounting Review, 14(1), 41–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herciu, M. (2016). ISO 26000 – An integrative approach of corporate social responsibility. Studies in Business and Economics, 11(1), 73–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudon, M. (2009). Should access to credit be a right? Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inderst, G., Kaminker, C., & Stewart, F. (2012). Defining and measuring green investments: Implications for institutional investors’ asset allocations (OECD working papers on finance, insurance and private pensions, no. 24). Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Capital Market Association. (2017). The Green Bond Principles (GBP) 2017. Retrieved from https://www.icmagroup.org/assets/documents/Regulatory/Green-Bonds/GreenBondsBrochure-JUNE2017.pdf

  • International Finance Corporation (IFC). (2007). Banking on sustainability: Financing environmental and social opportunities in emerging markets. Washington, DC: International Finance Corporation (IFC).

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization. (2010). Project overview. Geneve: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization. (2016). ISO and SDGS. Geneve: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, A., Keneley, M., & Thomson, D. (2015). Voluntary CSR disclosure works! Evidence from Asia-Pacific banks. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(1), 2–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janney, J. J., Dess, G., & Forlani, V. (2009). Glass houses? Market reactions to firms joining the UN global compact. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(3), 407–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, R. (2001). Corporate codes of conduct: Self-regulation in a global economy (Technology, Business and Society, Programme Paper Number 2). New York: UN Research Institute for Social Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeucken, M. (2010). Sustainable finance and banking: The financial sector and the future of the planet. Sterling: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jizi, M. I., Salama, A., Dixon, R., & Stratling, R. (2014). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosure: Evidence from the US banking sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 601–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, H. U. Z. (2010). The effect of corporate governance elements on corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting: Empirical evidence from private commercial banks of Bangladesh. International Journal of Law and Management, 52(2), 82–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, H. U. Z., Halabi, A. K., & Samy, M. (2009). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting: A study of selected banking companies in Bangladesh. Social Responsibility Journal, 5(3), 344–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, H. U. Z., Azizul Islam, M., Kayeser Fatima, J., & Ahmed, K. (2011). Corporate sustainability reporting of major commercial banks in line with GRI: Bangladesh evidence. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(3), 347–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konar, S., & Cohen, M. A. (2001). Does the market value environmental performance? The Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(2), 281–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2017). The KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2017. New York: KPMG Global Sustainability Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Torre, M., & Vento, G. (2008). Banks in the microfinance market. InFrontiers of banks in a global economy (Vol. 131). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labatt, S., & White, R. R. (2003). Environmental finance: A guide to environmental risk assessment and financial products. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labatt, S., & White, R. R. (2011). Carbon finance: The financial implications of climate change (Vol. 362). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. H., Cin, B. C., & Lee, E. Y. (2016). Environmental responsibility and firm performance: The application of an environmental, social and governance model. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(1), 40–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leone, P., & Porretta, P. (2014). Microcredit guarantee funds in the mediterranean: A comparative analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maddaloni, A., & Peydró, J. L. (2011). Bank risk-taking, securitization, supervision, and low interest rates: Evidence from the Euro-area and the US lending standards. The Review of Financial Studies, 24(6), 2121–2165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D. (2003). Symbolic politics in environmental regulation: Corporate strategic responses. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12(4), 215–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzuca, M. (2015). Cartolarizzazioni bancarie in Italia: nuove frontiere dopo la crisi. Milan: EGEA spa.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey & Company. (2007). UN Global Compact CEO participant survey. New York: McKinsey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerstein, A. (2015). Are the equator principles greenwash or game changers? Effectiveness, transparency and future challenges. In Responsible investment banking (pp. 267–284). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. P., & Covin, J. G. (2000). Environmental marketing: A source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moratis, L., & Brandt, S. (2017). Corporate stakeholder responsiveness? Exploring the state and quality of GRI-based stakeholder engagement disclosures of European firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(4), 312–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, A., Sinclair, D., Power, D., & Gray, R. (2006). Do financial markets care about social and environmental disclosure? Further evidence and exploration from the UK. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(2), 228–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nobanee, H., & Ellili, N. (2016). Corporate sustainability disclosure in annual reports: Evidence from UAE banks: Islamic versus conventional. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55, 1336–1341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nor, N. M., Bahari, N. A. S., Adnan, N. A., Kamal, S. M. Q. A. S., & Ali, I. M. (2016). The effects of environmental disclosure on financial performance in Malaysia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, W., & MacDonald, C. (2004). Getting to the bottom of “triple bottom line”. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), 243–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2016). A quantitative framework for analysing potential bond contributions in a low-carbon transition. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/cgfi/quantitative-framework-bond-contributions-in-a-low-carbon-transition.pdf

  • OECD. (2017). Mobilising bond markets for a low-carbon transition. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/Green%20bonds%20PP%20[f3]%20[lr].pdf

  • Rasche, A., & Kell, G. (Eds.). (2010). The United Nations global compact: Achievements, trends and challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resor, J. P. (1997). Debt-for-nature swaps: A decade of experience and new directions for the future. Unasylva (FAO), 48(188), 15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B. J. (2005). Equator principles: The voluntary approach to environmentally sustainable finance. The European Environmental Law Review, 14, 280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzello, A., Caré, R., Migliazza, M. C., & Trotta, A. (2016). Social impact investing: A model and research agenda. In O. Lehner (Ed.), Routledge handbook of social and sustainable finance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robins, N. (2008). The emergence of sustainable investing. In Sustainable investing: The art of long-term performance (pp. 3–18). London/Sterling: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runhaar, H., & Lafferty, H. (2009). Governing corporate social responsibility: An assessment of the contribution of the UN Global Compact to CSR strategies in the telecommunications industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(4), 479–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santander. (2017). 2016 sustainability report. Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens, B. (2006). Finance as a driver of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(1), 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens, B. (2008). A note on the interaction between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Ecological Economics, 68(1), 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens, B. (2011, August). The sustainability of green funds. In Natural resources forum (Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 223–232). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenker, J. C., & Colletta, A. J. (1990). Asset securitization: Evolution, current issues and new frontiers. Texas Law Review, 69, 1369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simone Byrd, L. (2009). Collaborative corporate social responsibility: A case study examination of the international public relations agency involvement in the United Nations Global Compact. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 14(3), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skouloudis, A., Jones, N., Malesios, C., & Evangelinos, K. (2014). Trends and determinants of corporate non-financial disclosure in Greece. Journal of Cleaner Production, 68, 174–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stagars, M. (2015). Impact investment funds for frontier markets in Southeast Asia: Creating a platform for institutional capital, high-quality foreign direct investment, and proactive policy making. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, R., & Gouldson, A. (2012). Does voluntary carbon reporting meet investors’ needs? Journal of Cleaner Production, 36, 60–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sully, R. (2012). ISO 26000: The business guide to the new standard on social responsibility. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(3), 214–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). Bringing the environment into bank lending: Implications for environmental reporting. The British Accounting Review, 36(2), 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP FI. (2016). Guide to banking and sustainability. Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP FI & United Nations Environmental Programme Finance Initiative. (2007). Green financial products and services. Current trends and future opportunities in North America (A report of the North American Task Force (NATF) of the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative August). Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Global Compact. (2017). Sustainable development goals: From promise to practice. Retrieved from http://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/publications/UNA-UK%20SDGS%202017.pdf

  • Van der Laan, S. (2009). The role of theory in explaining motivation for corporate social disclosures: Voluntary disclosures vs ‘solicited’disclosures. Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal, 3(4), 15A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vecchi, V., Casalini, F., Balbo, L., & Caselli, S. (2015). Impact investing: A new asset class or a societal refocus of venture capital? In S. Caselli, G. Corbetta, & V. Vecchi (Eds.), Public private partnerships for infrastructure and business development (pp. 275–293). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vecchi, V., Balbo, L., Brusoni, M., & Caselli, S. (Eds.). (2017). Principles and practice of impact investing: A catalytic revolution. Abingdon/ New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, O. (2016). Impact investing. In O. M. Lehner (Ed.), Routledge handbook of social and sustainable finance. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, O., & Feltmate, B. (2016). Sustainable banking: Managing the social and environmental impact of financial institutions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C., & Rwabizambuga, A. (2006). Institutional pressures, corporate reputation, and voluntary codes of conduct: An examination of the equator principles. Business and Society Review, 111(1), 89–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DSGSES, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy

    Rosella Carè

Authors
  1. Rosella Carè
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

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

Carè, R. (2018). Emerging Practices in Sustainable Banking. In: Sustainable Banking. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73389-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation