Ferreira 2016

Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment
ISSN: 2043-0795 (Print) 2043-0809 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsfi20
A systematic review of literature about finance

and sustainability
Maria Carolina Rezende de Carvalho Ferreira, Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro,

Herbert Kimura & Flavio Luiz de Moraes Barboza
To cite this article: Maria Carolina Rezende de Carvalho Ferreira, Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro,
Herbert Kimura & Flavio Luiz de Moraes Barboza (2016): A systematic review of literature
about finance and sustainability, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, DOI:
10.1080/20430795.2016.1177438
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2016.1177438
Published online: 12 May 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsfi20
Download by: [Universite Laval] Date: 13 May 2016, At: 13:17

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FINANCE & INVESTMENT, 2016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2016.1177438
A systematic review of literature about finance and

sustainability
Maria Carolina Rezende de Carvalho Ferreiraa, Vinicius Amorim Sobreiroa,
Herbert Kimuraa and Flavio Luiz de Moraes Barbozab
a
Department of Management, Campus Darcy Ribeiro, University of Brasília, Federal District, Brasília 70910-
900, Brazil; bSchool of Management and Business, Federal University of Uberlândia, Campus Santa Mônica,
Uberlândia, Minas Gerais 03401-000, Brazil
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The relationship between finance and environmental sustainability Received 4 January 2016
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 13:17 13 May 2016
areas has increasingly been attracting the attention of researchers Accepted 8 April 2016
and professionals in this field. However, there are not many
KEYWORDS
studies that gather and systematize the available knowledge Review of literature; finance;
about the issue of financial management and the concern with sustainability
sustainable development. The objective of this paper is to present
the results or main gaps from a systematic review of literature
about the relationship between finance and sustainability. We
have adapted the methods presented by Lage Junior et al. [2010.
“Variations of the Kanban System: Literature Review and
Classification”.International Journal of Production Economics 125 (1),
13–21.], Jabbour [2013. Environmental Training in Organisations:
From a Literature Review to a Framework for Future Research.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 74, 144–155] and Seuring
[2013. A Review of Modeling Approaches for Sustainable Supply
Chain Management. Decision Support Systems 54 (4), 1513–1520],
and we then analysed the articles published between 2011 and
2015 in the main journal of the area, the Journal of Sustainable
Finance & Investment. The method applied allowed us to identify
existing gaps in the literature, such as, for example, a greater focus
on developing countries or the use of empiric studies with a
quantitative approach.
1. Introduction
Although the traditional finance theory highly emphasizes the creation of value for the
shareholder, society has increasingly been demanding companies to have an ethical
concern in regards to their stakeholders, which includes taking care of the environment,
to avoid air and water pollution, and creating awareness in the necessity of providing
environmentally, socially and economically engaged products (Brigham and Ehr-
hardt 2011, p. 11).
In the context of sustainable development (SD), the challenged faced by organizations
lies in how to make this relationship between social and environmental management more
efficient. For instance, the more society shows environmental awareness, the more
CONTACT Amorim Sobreiro Vinicius sobreiro@unb.br

© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 M.C.R. DE CARVALHO FERREIRA ET AL.
organizations will be required to have a better environmental performance. This will

reinforce the importance of having environmental management within the organization
(Jabbour and Jabbour 2013, p. 6).
The Brundtland report defined SD as the search to meet current needs without com-
promising future generations (Brundtland 1988; Waygood 2011, p. 81). According to
Levashova (2011, p. 223), a key aspect in this concept relates to the principle of integration
between economic and social issues, which implies that environmental and economic
development policies and concerns will be assimilated.
A financial manager’s role involves several decisions. However, two issues are the core
of his responsibilities. In terms of corporate finance, the manager must assess which
investments the company should do and how the company will finance them (Brealey,
Myers, and Allen 2011, p. 6). Investment and financing decisions are directly present in
the management of the environment, because an administration must take into account
the allocation of financial resources and their assignment to environmental management
projects and activities, as well as gathering resources to promote environmental improve-
ments (Jabbour and Jabbour 2013, p. 84). The relationship between environmental man-
agement and corporate sustainability is presented by (Jabbour and Jabbour 2013, p. 94).
Environmental management is considered a broader process, having corporate sustain-
ability as one of its goals, through the interaction between a social, economic and environ-
mental perspective.
In overall terms, sustainability leads to responsibility over the preservation of wealth of
society, including natural ecosystems (Haigh 2011a, p. 3). Hitchcock and Willard (2009,
pp. 3–5) affirm that sustainability can be a rather complex topic and that an analysis of
the expanded literature about this subject is necessary to understand it. The authors
show some expected benefits based on previous experiences of other companies and com-
munities, that established sustainability as a target: reduction in the consumption of
energy, waste and, consequently, a decrease in costs; decrease in the exposition to
future regulatory changes; creation of new products or innovating processes; opening
and conquering new markets; saving costs that derive from services hired to reduce
risks such as legal protection insurance, inducing more quality of life; among others.
Although the concern with sustainability in several segments of society is relevant, finan-
cial aspects are crucial to the feasibility of any organization. In a broader context, finance
involves several levels, activities and agents, such as teachers, employers, and public policy-
makers. According to Haigh (2012c, pp. 88–90), sustainable finances can imply a proper
functioning of the ecosystem and the society in which the financial system operates.
The study about the interaction between finances and sustainability has been recently
increasing. The creation of a scientific journal specialized on the subject, such as the
Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment (JSF&I), shows the growing importance of
jointly addressing elements of sustainability and finance. The journal has as its main
goals to pay more attention to financing and investment activities in a modern
economy, allowing us to identify the best solutions for society, through the improvement
of an ecological system (Haigh 2011a, p. 3).
There are countless relationships and possibilities to study the involvement between
finance and sustainability. Among them, we can highlight the institutional links in
capital markets (Gray 2011), the concern with environmental, social and corporate gov-
ernance (ESG) criteria (Nikolakis, Cohen, and Nelson 2012), the impact of investment
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FINANCE & INVESTMENT 3
(Hebb 2013), the concern with climate change and human rights (Alm and Sievänen 2013),
SD (Levashova 2011) and socially responsible investment (SRI) (Vandekerckhove and
Leys 2012). A part from that, Chow’s study (2011, p. 195) suggests that sustainable invest-
ment reflects a concern with the community and the environment. It is not a concept that
refers specifically to culture, but it is an active mechanism for a responsible assignment of
resources.
It is important to highlight that the relationship between finance and sustainability
plays a distinguished role in capital markets. The concerns with an investment portfolio
that takes into account moral values and SRI is a relevant topic among shareholders
and investors (Gray 2011, p. 31). Investments in a company may occur in different
manners. In any society, there are different types of investors such as those that provide
capital in cash, those that buy a product or service, and those that live in the community
and offer resources or work force (Bloxham 2011a, p. 77). Therefore, an important starting
point to understand sustainable finances is recognizing all these different investors. The
definition of the investor must apply the standard nomenclature so we can understand
sustainable finance in its broader context (Bloxham 2011a, p. 77).

Taking into account the previous discussion, this article focuses on the relationship
between the finance and the sustainability areas found in the current specialized literature.
In this context, this paper has as its main objective to show the main gaps from a literature
review of the articles published between 2011 and 2014 in JSF&I about finance and sus-
tainability. JSF&I was chosen because it is the first journal to present an intensive
debate with regard to investment and sustainability, taking into account a perspective
based on financial markets.
The structure of this article is described below. First, we made a brief review of the main
subjects addressed in JSF&I. Afterwards, we present the methods used for carrying out the
literature review. We present the main results or the main gaps of the analysis in the next
section and, finally, the main conclusions and recommendations for future studies.
2. Theoretical frame of reference

Aiming to identify the main themes in the JSF&I, we conducted a thorough analysis of all
papers published by the journal, following the method used in Lage Junior and Godinho
Filho (2010), Jabbour (2013) and Seuring (2013). This method allows one to identify the
main characteristics of the studies and, in particular, to group together papers that explore
the following topics:
. investors in general;
. socially responsible investment;
. governance over sustainable investment;
. institutional investors;
. climate change and human rights;
. non-renewable extractive industry; and
. SD.
Taking into consideration the characteristics of the papers of the JSF&I, we briefly
present these topics in the following sub-sections. It is important to emphasize that the
objective of this section is not to discuss the main topics in finance and sustainability but
rather to present the themes explored by papers already published in the JSF&I.
Since JSF&I is the first journal specifically focused on discussing finance and sustain-
ability, and since the very research field is still incipient, we do not address broad and com-
prehensive themes. Rather, we direct our discussion to the topics explored in the published
papers.
2.1. Investors in general

Within the context of sustainable finances, we must expand the definition of investor to
comprehend all the stakeholders of a company, i.e. characters that somehow invest or
have interests in the results of a company. The company depends on its investors to
survive and grow, since these characters are the ones that chose if and where to invest
(Bloxham 2011a, p. 77).
Investors must invest money and other resources to try to reduce social and environ-
mental risks in the companies they own stocks, because events associated with this risk can
cause substantial damage. Social or environmental problems cannot only compromise the
investors’ financial results but they can also induce harms to their reputation. Strategic
choices used by companies can substantially affect the perception of the company by the
public in regards to social and environmental concerns. Therefore, making a good strategic
choice to maintain a ‘green status’ becomes relevant (Hamilton and Eriksson 2011, p. 44).
Within this perspective, responsible investment may be understood as the ideal appli-
cation of resources based on a philosophy of caring and being concerned with the com-
munity and the environment (Chow 2011, p. 195). Investors are becoming more and
more aware of companies’ social performance (CSP). We can even notice a tendency
in which small investors are attracted to companies whose strengths are associated
with social performance in the community, labour relationship, issues of corporative
governance and human rights (Rakotomavo 2011, p. 101).
Socially and environmentally concerned investment practices have increased
(Cadman 2011, p. 20). Thus, the investment of resources, related to the belief that ESG
factors can improve financial performance, must be integrated into the analyses of invest-
ments and into the decision-making process (Cadman 2011, pp. 20–21).
2.2. Socially responsible investment

SRI is no longer a minor subject and became a latent or crucial issue. SRI seeks to include
non-financial criteria into the investment decision. One of the factors that triggered the
concern for SRI involves the concern of institutional investors, pension funds and insur-
ance companies in analysing the investments taking into account additional elements to
additional financial aspects (Vandekerckhove and Leys 2012, p. 152).
According to the Social Investment Forum (SIF),1 the activities considered a part of the
SRI are: (1) incorporating ESG criteria into investment decisions; (2) defence of share-
holders on ESG issues and criteria; and (3) interaction between projects linked to commu-
nity development. These issues link to the shareholders’ aim to align their values to the
concerns of communities in which companies operate (Nikolakis, Cohen, and
Nelson 2012, p. 137).
Thus, it is important to highlight two key objectives regarding the company/investor

relationship: how the investor obtains information about corporate policies and practices
related to allegations of improper behaviour made by third sector organizations, press and
unions; and how the investor tries to influence these practices by demonstrating to the
administration his concern about certain issues (Vandekerckhove and Leys 2012, p. 152).
The main evolutions of SRI relate to ESG issues. However, despite several positive
changes in the last decades, there still are problems of publicizing, transparency and
accountability in regards to situations, actions and initiatives for ESG. Therefore, it is
important to create more efficient mechanisms to provoke a radical change when it
comes to ESG issues, since they can be used to establish favourable conditions to intelli-
gent accountability (Holland 2011, p. 161).
The concerns with SRI make it possible for individuals to start playing a more signifi-
cant role in a collective context, since investors started to influence corporate policies.
These policies had to adapt themselves to the investor’s personal values and oppose to
the limited responsibility characteristic advocated by many companies. Thus, taking
into account non-financial factors in the investment decision, institutional investors

tend to carry out a more rigorous assessment of the risk related to ESG elements (Niko-
lakis, Cohen, and Nelson 2012, p. 138).
2.3. Impact investment

Impact investment addresses issues related to responsible investment. Thus, impact
investment involves an intention on the part of the investor to generate, a positive
social or environmental impact and not just obtaining financial return. This is a subcate-
gory of responsible investment, which, on its turn, is more comprehensive and includes
concerns related to ESG factors (Hebb 2013, p. 71). Impact investment is more compre-
hensive than micro finance, involving decisions that take into account both financial
returns as well as social and environmental benefits (Hebb 2013, p. 71).
Therefore, impact investment is an essential aspect to reach responsible investment
and its ESG practices. However, in order to go beyond a current micro finance character-
ization, it is necessary to have a coordinated market that, establishing a partnership
with the public sector, will generate the financial returns demanded by investors.
Impact investment must try to reveal new and innovating ways to solve major problems
in the world (Hebb 2013, p. 73), which bring social, environmental and economic
challenges.
It is important to highlight that impact investment is one of the main instruments of the
so-called impact industry that aims to create a volume of private and public capital, which,
through networks, regulations and metrics, can tackle social and environmental concerns
throughout the world (Jackson 2013, p. 97).
2.4. Governance on sustainable investment

Sustainability has been playing a substantial role in the financial segment, in which one
tries to reconcile social equity and improvement of ecological systems with the stability
of financial system. These issues relate to investors’ concerns in facing and managing
the complexity of sustainability issues. However, it becomes difficult to harmonize
results of several dimensions without effective institutional governance (Hachigian and

McGill 2012a, p. 163).
Mechanism to deal with ESG factors in the long term must involve the financial sector.
More specifically, institutional investors that manage assets and liability with a long-term
perspective can contribute to choosing investments that will take opportunities and avoid-
ing threats and future problems (Hachigian and McGill 2012b, p. 168).
It is important to emphasize that long-term investments involve relevant uncertainties,
which can influence the behaviour of investors and the market. In this context, the influ-
ence of sustainable elements in the dynamic of financial market is complex in the long
term. Investors’ skills and capacity building about concepts of sustainability can aid to
avoid unwanted consequences and to mitigate problems in the scope of institutional inves-
tors. Therefore, it becomes very relevant that shareholders assimilate concepts of sustain-
ability (Rook 2012, p. 198).
Although the relationship between long-term investment and the transparency of com-
panies can be positive for society, there is always a tension. On one hand, an excess of
transparency can seem counterproductive. On the other hand, the absence or decrease
in transparency opposes a democratic State, which affects economic results, since investors
are more supported in scenarios where the interests of an organization can be assured.
Thus, we can notice that transparency is important because it makes information avail-
able. Information that later will be transformed into an estimate of financial performance
(Dixon and Monk 2012, p. 275).
2.5. Institutional investors, climate change and human rights

Climate chance is a very complex problem. It implies in all spheres of the planet. It affects
and it is being affected by economic development, social transformation, population
growth and the scarcity of necessary resources for human beings. Thus, the impact of
climate change is very relevant, especially for future generations (Alm and Sievänen 2013,
p. 177).
In this context, human rights can be committed to climate change. The concern about
human rights must be in the institutional investors’ agenda. Concerns about people’s well-
being and workers’ rights in that sector in which they are investing are relevant. This
emphasizes non-financial aspects that need to be taken into account in the decision-
making process for any investment (Alm and Sievänen 2013, p. 177).
2.6. Non-renewable extractive industry – mining, oil and gas

A specific analysis of this sector is based on the substantial impact that can be caused by
the extractive industry of non-renewable resources – mining, oil and gas. On the perspec-
tive of investors and social creditors, although it is related to significant financial values,
this sector is controversial because it generates considerable social and environmental
impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions, pollution or contamination of soil and
water, and the necessity of moving indigenous people to other areas (Richardson 2012,
p. 1). Non-renewable extractive industry sector is, therefore, an important segment to
engage shareholders and stakeholders due to the impacts caused by it.
However, there is a controversy in regards to SRI concerns in the extractive sector. On

one hand, social and economic benefits are overcome by bad sustainability impacts of the
sector. On the other hand, the sector contributes to reduce poverty and fosters economic
development by creating economic value to companies and governments given the global
necessity of products derived from the industry in this segment (Weber and Banks 2012,
p. 80).
2.7. Sustainable development

The concept of SD refers to the search for progress maintained in the long term in a sus-
tainable manner (Levashova 2011; Segger and Newcombe 2011, p. 223). A key element
involves the integration principle, in which the internalization of environmental concerns
relates to economic development: the so-called integration principle. We must highlight
that international society recognizes the importance of SD and it is putting this subject
up for debate on several global agendas (Levashova 2011, p. 223).
In particular, we need to remember that the search for improvement in environmental

and human rights policies at the global level must not compromise the capacity of States to
regulate themselves for the sake of public interest (Levashova 2011, p. 223).
The mechanisms through which capital markets relate to SD issues are based on two
important arguments (Waygood 2011, p. 81): first, shareholders influence the manage-
ment of companies. Thus, companies can avoid not complying with their wills and pre-
ferences. Second, investors have a strong financial influence, which occurs by the
purchase and sales of stocks, therefore, they directly affect the cost of the capital and
the value of negotiated by companies in the stock market. These two arguments influence
the sustainable behaviour of a company (Waygood 2011, p. 81).
Contrary to these arguments, capital markets do not need to understand or compensate
sustainable behaviour for at least two reasons. Taking into account non-efficient markets,
corporate behaviour that is beneficial to society may not be compensated because, while
companies try to be sustainable, some investors may not attribute value to the shareholder.
Thus, initiatives of environmental or social nature do not contribute to reducing costs in
the short term. Therefore, the benefit and consequently the value created by a sustainable
practice must be evident. A part from that, if investors do not need to worry about costs in
the long term because they exceed their investment time horizon, and if there are no coer-
cive mechanisms to propel governments to internalize the costs of companies
(Waygood 2011, p. 82), a socio-environmental concern may be less relevant in the per-
spective of the capital market.
A solution related to the level of disclosures would be improving information available
to the market, so that wide-spreading available data on sustainability would become man-
datory. Besides this, it will be necessary to foster awareness among market participants in
regards to the relevance of sustainability and its impacts in the assessment of companies
(Waygood 2011, p. 86).
3. Methods and research techniques

This research is an integrative and systematic review. It presents a useful analysis to gather
the results of studies on emerging topics (Jabbour 2013, p. 145), dealing more specifically
with papers that relate sustainability to finance. It made it possible to analyse the main
studies about the state of the art and to characterize a research field allowing us to identify
the challenges for the development of future researches in the area (Huisingh 2012, p. 290).
This literature review is based on the works of Lage Junior and Godinho Filho (2010,
p. 14), Seuring (2013, p. 1514) and Jabbour (2013, p. 144), adapting their methods to this
analysis, which focus on articles from a single journal (JSF&I). This research was divided
into the following activities:
. analysing articles previously published on JSF&I;

. providing a brief summary of the contribution made by these articles to an analysis of
the researched subject;
. classifying and coding the different features of the articles;
. describing the strengths and weakness of these studies, based on the available literature;
and
. providing a research agenda and a structure to fill the main gaps related to the relation-
ship between finance and sustainability.
In the following, we detailed the activities, presenting the three first steps of the meth-
odology and the lasts two points in the analysis of results.
3.1. Characterization of the instrument and execution of the research

After we adapted the procedures presented by Lage Junior and Godinho Filho (2010), we
defined that the research would analyse articles published in JSF&I, due to the specific
focus of the journal on finance and sustainability elements. Initially, we carried out an
analysis of the articles in the journal, presenting some overall aspects and gathering
their citations on the Scopus, ISI, Google database, as shown in Table A1. The objective
of the quotation analysis is to identify the contribution and the influence the articles
had over the academic area.
We followed the order and numbering of the articles presented in Table A1 throughout
this paper. Based on this specialisation, we assessed the issues raised by the authors, eval-
uating their impact and contribution to a better understanding of the relationship between
finance and sustainability. In Table A2, we presented a brief summary of each article ana-
lysed in the present research.
Based on the data collected from the analysis of the articles, we classified and coded the
articles to make it possible to have an overall view of the studies about sustainability and
finance. The classification of the articles include nine large subjects, numbered from 1 to 9,
coded by letters that go from A to J, as shown in Table 1. Apart from that, having in mind
the scope of the analysed studies, an article could receive more than just one code.
The first classification involves identifying the context analysed by the articles. We
established codes A, B, and C. Context is important in any study about finance and sustain-
ability, since it helps us to analyse the places where there was a larger incidence of this
relationship, showing the set of places where financial concerns were aligned to sustainable
awareness. Additionally, one of our objectives, by observing context, is to verify whether in
developed countries the concern for principles of sustainability in financial decisions are
more frequently used than in developing countries. Therefore, we separated developed
Table 1. Categories and subcategories used in this paper.

Category Meaning Codes for alternatives
1 Context A – Developed countries
B – Developing countries or emerging economies
C – Non-applicable
2 Geographic Region A – United States of America
B – Asia
D – Emerging markets
E – Oceania
F – Canada
G – Other countries
H – Non-applicable
3 Objective A – Conceptually contributes to the subjects
B – Presents a case study
C – Literature review
D – Non-applicable
4 Main subject A – It is related to the finance
B – It is related to the sustainability
C – It is related to the social issues
5 Method A – Quantitative
B – Qualitative
C – Conceptual
D – Quantitative/Qualitative or Qualitative/Quantitative
E – Survey
F – Case study
G – Non-applicable
6 Sector analysed A – Private
B – Public
C – Public/Private or Private/Public
7 Topics A – Institutional links to stock market
B – Connections between environmental, social and financial security polices
C – Comparative analysis of policies that defend sustainability and finance in an
integrated manner.
D – The sustainability performance indicators
E – Global debts and financial flows
F – Micro finance and community investment programs
G – Sustainability, Venture Capital and Crowdfunding
H – Sustainability and Hedge Investing
I – Definition of the concepts of the area
J – Capital market and carbon credits
L – Non-applicable
8 Results A – New perspectives
B – Consistent with previous literature
C – Previous model with different dataset/time period
D – Comparative study
E – Non-applicable
9 Analysis period A – Less than 3 years
B – Between 3 and 5 years
C – Between 5 and 10 years
D – More than 10 years
E – Non-applicable
countries from developing countries, using the terminology of the contemporary world.
The code ‘non-applicable’ occurs when the studies do not apply to the codes presented.
The second classification refers to identifying the geographic region of the research
countries, codes A to G. This classification complements the first one because it lists, in
a more specific manner, the countries that adopt sustainable practices in their financial
concerns within the verified context.
The third classification presents the objective of the articles, coded by letters A, B, C,
and D. This classification relates to the expanded objective of the articles. For instance,
in this classification, we have assessed if the study was concerned with a conceptual analy-
sis of the theme or if it focused on an analysis of the presented context in a more practical
approach. This classification allows one to identify whether the published papers jointly
analyse sustainability and finance from an empirical perspective or are studies that aim
to theoretically advance knowledge on these themes. We present details of the sub-division
of this classification in Table 1.
The fourth classification analyses the focus or the main topic of the articles in regards to
the subject studied with the research, coded by the letters A, B, and C. In this classification,
the concern directly relates to the research of the present piece, trying to identify what is
the key subject is on the sustainable finance of the analysed articles.
The fifth classification addresses the method applied in the analysed articles, which
received letters A to G. Thus, we verify which method was used the most by authors in
the analysis of the relationship between finance and sustainability. We aim to identify
whether there is a predominant method when sustainability (qualitative methods and

surveys) and finance (quantitative methods) are studied individually.
The sixth classification involves identifying the analysed sector, coded by letters A, B,C,
and D. The focus in this classification is to detect and relate the measures adopted by the
public or private sector, which are connected to sustainable issues. It is important to high-
light that this classification aims to complement the scope of the first classification. We
intend to verify whether the discussion of finance and sustainability is better assessed in
the public or in the private sector, since the public sector does not focus on profit creation
but rather on the generation of the social well-being of the society.
The seventh classification relates to sub-topics addressed by the articles, coded by letters
A to J. The article of the introduction to JSF&I presents the subjects present in the journal
(Haigh 2011a, p. 4). Written by Matthew Haigh, who was then the editor-in-chief, it pro-
poses the subjects that will be developed in the journal. Thus, we tried to verify if the
articles published until now focus on these subjects and to list the subjects that are
studied the most by researchers.
The eighth classification emphasizes the dimension of the results of the articles, classi-
fied with letters from A to E. Thus, we sought to assess the results found in the analysed
articles. This classification aims to analyse whether the published papers begin new
streams of research or seek to answer questions previously presented.
Lastly, the ninth classification analyses the period the articles took into account when
developing the analysis in the articles, coded by letters A to E. This criterion assesses the
scope of the data and historical period developed in the article. It is important to highlight
that all of these classifications and their respective codings were applied to JSF&I analysed
articles until 2015.
4. Results and discussion

In this section, we are going to present the overall categorization of the articles in regards
to each of the classification and coding, as shown in Table 2. Afterwards, in the sub-sec-
tions, we are going to carry out an analysis of the results we have reached through these
overall classifications.
Table 2. Data classification and categorization for each paper.

Main Sector Analysis
No Context Region Objective subject Method analysed Topics Results period
1 C H D D G D L E E
2 A A;B A A;B C C B;I A A
3 A E B B;C E;F A B;C B A
4 A F B B E;F C A;B B B
5 A B B A;B B;F B B;C B C
6 A A;D B A E;F B A C C
7 C H A A;B C D I A E
8 C H A A;B C A A;I B E
9 C H D D G D L E E
10 C H A A;C C C B C D
11 A;B A;B;C;D;G B A;B E;F C B A D
12 B D B A;B B;F A A C B
13 A;B A;B;C;D;G B A;B F A A;D;J C C
14 C H A A;B C A I C E
15 A B B A;B B;F A A;D A E
16 C H D D G D L E E
17 A A;B B A B;F A A A A
18 A;B A;B;C;D;E B A;B E;F A C B C
19 A B B A;B F A A C A
20 A A;B;F;G A A;B;C C C A;C B E
21 A B A A C C E C E
22 C H A C C D H A B
23 B D;G B A;B F C A B B
25 A F B B;C F A B C C
26 A F B A;B B;F A A;C B B
27 A F A B;C D C B C C
28 A F B A;B F A A C C
32 C H A A;B;C C D I E E
33 B D B A;B F A B;E C D
34 A A;B;E B A;B E;F C A;C A B
35 A A B A;B A A A;C;D D C
36 C H B A;B A A C D D
38 C H A A;B A;C D I D E
39 A B A A;B B B C;I B C
40 C H A A;B B A A;C;I B E
41 C H A A;B B A A;C;I C C
42 C H B A;B;C B;F A B A E
43 C H A A;B;C B;C C A;J A E
44 C H A A;B A;C C A;D C E
45 C E B A;B;C D;E;F C D;F C B
46 C H B A;B D;F A A;D A C
47 B D B A;B D;F A A;D B C
48 A A B A;B D;F A A;D C B
49 C H A D C D L E E
50 C H A A;B B A A;D A E
51 C H A A;B B C A;D B E
52 A B B A;B F C A;J C B
53 B D B A;B;C F C A;J B E
55 C H A A;C B A A;B B E
56 C H A A;C D A A;B;F A E
57 C H A A;C B;C A A;B C E
(Continued)
Table 2. Continued.
Main Sector Analysis
No Context Region Objective subject Method analysed Topics Results period
58 A F B C F A A;B B B
59 C H A A;C B A A;B B E
60 A B B A;B B A A;B C C
62 A B B A;B F C A;B B B
63 A B B A;B;C F A A;B;C E B
64 A B B A;B F A A;D C E
65 A;B A;C;D;F B A;B F A A;D C B
66 A;B A;B;F;G B A;B;C D;F C A;B B B
69 C H A A;B B;C D A;D C E
70 C H A A;B B;C D A;D B E
71 A B B A;B;C A;F A A;B B C
72 C H A A C D I C E
73 A A A A B;C C E;I A E
74 C H B A;B B;C D A;B B D
76 C H B A;C B;F D A;D C E
77 A A A A;B B;F A B;C B B
78 A B B A;B B;F A A;D C B
79 C H B A;B B;F D A;D B E
80 A B B A;B F C A;D B D
82 A B B A;B F A A;B B B
85 A B;C;D B A;B F A A;B C B
86 C H A A;B B;C A I C E
87 A;B A;C;D B A F A A;F A C
88 A A;B B A;B F A A;D C A
89 A B B A;B;C F A A;D B B
90 A;B H B A;B F A A;D B C
91 A B B A;B F A A;D D D
92 A H A A B;C C E;I B D
93 A A;F B A F C J C E
94 A A B A;B F A A;D B C
95 C H A D C D L B E
96 C H A A C D A;D C E
97 C H A A;B C A A;D C E
98 C H C A;B C A A;D B E
99 C H A A;B C A A;D;J B E
100 B C B A;B D C B B;C E
101 B C B A;C A D L C C
102 C G A B;D C D I A E
103 A A B A;B A;C A A C D
104 A A B A;B A A L A C
105 A F B A;B;C A A C A D
106 C A;B;C;D;E; B A;C A D F A;B D
F
107 C C B A;D A C B C D
108 A B C A;B;C B A B;C;E; A E
F
109 C G B;C A;C C;F A C A E
110 C C C A;C D;E D L D D
111 C C C A;C B D L E E
112 C C C A;B;C A;E D L D D
113 A B B A;C A A A B;C C
4.1. Context
The first classification involves the identification of the context analysed by the articles.
The context was divided into letters A–C according to the following: A – Developed
countries; B – Developing countries; C – Non-applicable. The results we obtained after
the analysis of the 113 articles are shown in Figure 1.
Most of the studies focused on developed countries. Afterwards, we analysed developed
countries aligned to developing countries. However, very few articles analysed only the
developing context (≈ 6%). This fact shows that studies about sustainability have
mainly been addressing richer countries, but we need to have in mind that this subject
is an issue that demands global attention. Therefore, emphasizing sustainability studies
in developing countries is also crucial. The results of this literature review of JSF&I articles
indicate a Gap1 that needs to be further explored by literature.
. Gap1 How the relationship between finance, investment and sustainability is seen in
developing countries?
4.2. Geographic region

The second classification relates to identifying the specific geographic region of the
researched countries, coding the articles in the following way: A – United States (USA);
B – Europe; C – Asia; D – emerging markets; E – Oceania; F – Canada; G – Others;
and H – Non applicable. The classification took into account the diversity of the analysis
of the articles. Therefore, it was not defined based on countries or continents. The analysis
of the 113 articles may be better seen in Figure 2.
Regarding the studies concerning geographic region, there was a variety of possibilities.
That is why the data were divided into a large series of code combinations, as shown in
Figure 2. Thus, we noticed that although studies focus more on the context of developed
Figure 1. Context of studies analysed: Category: A – Developed countries; B – Developing countries;

and C – Non-applicable.
Figure 2. Geographic region of studies analysed: Category: A – USA; B – Europe; C – Asia; D – Emerging
markets; E – Oceania; F – Canada; G – Other countries; and H – Non-applicable.
countries, when it comes to the studied geographic region, they did not analyse a single
country alone, but actually several countries. This demonstrates that finance and sustain-
ability studies are relatively wide spread, involving several countries very often in the same
paper.
4.3. Objective
The third classification presents the objectives of the articles. They were coded according to the
letters A–D , in which: A – Conceptually contributes to the subjects; B – Presents a case study;
C – Literature review; and D – Non-applicable. Thus, Figure 3 shows the main results obtained
in this category.
Most articles demonstrate their concerns about sustainability and finance linked to an
analysis of a case study, 58% of the articles. Followed by several studies that have a con-
ceptual concern, in 31% of the articles, whereas only 5% of these articles are classified as
literature review. We have also included ‘fixed articles’ as, for instance, editorials and calls
for papers, which are part of the ‘Non-applicable’ code. Concerning these results, we have
identified Gap2 :
. Gap2 Defining conceptual standards or a specific terminology to the area of finance,

investment and sustainability.
Figure 3. Objective of studies analysed: Category: A – Conceptually contributes to the subjects; B –

Presents a case study; C – Literature review; and D – Non-applicable.
In order to tackle this, the finance, investment and sustainability research community
could expand the debate on these issues by creating a special edition in the main forum or
journal dedicated to this topic.
4.4. Focus or main subject

The fourth classification analyses the main subject of the articles in regards to the topic
studied in the research, coded by letters from A to D, in which: A – Related to finance;
B – Related to Sustainability; C – related to Social Issues; and D – Non-applicable, as
shown in Figure 4.
The analysis of this category indicates the necessity of having debates at a theoretical
level, which would establish the link between several broad topics related to finance, sus-
tainability, and social aspects. It is interesting to observe that it is mandatory to advance in
terms of theory so we can further debate conceptual innovations.
Regarding the focus or main subject, according to the concern of the present research
in verifying the relationship between finance and sustainability areas, most studies pre-
sented concern to both of these subjects, 49% of the articles contemplate these subjects in
a joint manner. The other articles had variable concerns, 8% related to financial issues,
1% related to sustainability, and 2% related to social issues. The other combinations
were: 11% of articles were concerned about finance and social issues; 12% articles
related to the three concerns, and 3% concerned about sustainability and social issues.
Based on these data, we can notice that there is an interest on the part of scholars in
linking sustainability to financial environment and that the research area is still open
and has many possibilities to grow, mainly when categories A, B, and C are performed
jointly.
Figure 4. Main subject of studies analysed: Category: A – It is related to the finance; B – It is related to
the sustainability; C – It is related to the social issues; and D – Non-applicable.
4.5. Method
The fifth classification explores the method applied in the analysed articles, having the
letters A–F as code, in which: A – Quantitative; B – Qualitative; C – Conceptual; D –
Qualitative/Quantitative or Quantitative/Qualitative; E – Survey; F – Case study; and G
– Non-applicable. The results will be shown in Figure 5.
The method used in the articles has also presented different results, because many articles
applied more than one analysis method in the same study. However, a large figure of the studies
focuses on case studies, 23% of them. There are also studies that joined case studies to other
mechanisms of analysis. For example, there are case studies that use a qualitative, qualitat-
ive/quantitative and survey approach, all three at the same time. The second coding that
presented a large quantity of articles was associated with conceptual studies, 17 articles.
Thus, we can notice the importance of theoretical pieces, taking into account scientific
methods and statistical analysis of the research, which, on its turns, constitutes the following gap:
. Gap3 The necessity of having new studies in the area of finance, investment and sustain-
ability that seek to use quantitative methods allowing generalizations of the impacts of
this dimension in social or organizational context.
4.6. Analysed sector

The sixth classification involves identifying the analysed sector in the studies, coded by
letters A–D, in the following terms: A – Private; B – Public; C – Private/Public or
Figure 5. Methods of studies analysed: Category: A – Quantitative; B – Qualitative; C – Conceptual; D –

Quantitative/Qualitative or Qualitative/Quantitative; E – Survey; F – Case study; and G – Non-applicable.
Public/Private, and D – Non-applicable. Thus, we present the results of this category in

Figure 6.
The great majority of articles address the private sector, with a smaller quantity focus-
ing only on the public sector. The latter is mostly analysed when compared to the private
sector, as shown in Figure 6. There is also the ‘Non-applicable’ class, which includes other
articles that do not focus on an analysis of a specific sector and articles that have a mainly
conceptual approach.
Considering that most studies focus on the private sector, it became evident that we
need more scientific articles that offer a better understanding and a better perspective
of governmental organizations in regards to the subject of finance and sustainability. Con-
sequently, this points out a gap that can be defined as:
. Gap4 How is the public sector dealing with the relationship between finance, invest-
ment and sustainability? Can the remarks already identified in the private sector
assist the public sector?
Within this context, it is important to highlight the possibility of bringing ideas adapted
from the private sector accompanied by similar analysis in other contexts that can be very
fruitful for society as a whole.
Figure 6. Sector analysed by studies considered: Category: A – Private; B – Public; C – Public/Private or

Private/Public; and D – Non-applicable.
4.7. Approached topics

The seventh classification relates to the subjects approached by the articles, coded in the
following way: A – Institutional links to capital market; B – Connections between environ-
mental, social and financial security polices; C – Comparative analysis of policies that
defend sustainability and finance in an integrated manner; D – The sustainability perform-
ance indicators; E – Global debts and financial flows; F – Micro finance and community
investment programs; G – Sustainability, Venture Capital, and Crowdfunding; H – Sustain-
ability and Hedge Investing; I – Definition of the concepts of the area; and J – Capital market
and carbon credit; L – Non-applicable. The results are presented in Figure 7.
This classification and geographic region were the ones that showed that the data were
widespread. Concerning the approached topics, there are several suggestions based on the
possibility of different combinations of subjects to study, because each article deals with
different contents for discussion.
The topics that appeared the most in the articles were the union of two subjects such as:
institutional links in capital market/sustainability performance indicators, 21% of the
articles, and institutional links in capital market/connections between environmental,
social, and financial security policies, 13%. All the other topics and combinations appeared
in a smaller quantity of articles, in average 1% for each code.
4.8. Results of the articles

The eighth classification presents the results of the articles and was classified with letters
A–E : A – New perspectives; B – Consistent compared to other articles; C – Previous model
with different dataset/time period; D – Comparison; and E – Non-applicable. The results
obtained are seen in Figure 8.
Figure 7. Topics analysed by studies considered: Category: A – Institutional links to stock market; B –
Connections between environmental, social and financial security polices; C – Comparative analysis of
policies that defend sustainability and finance in an integrated manner; D – The sustainability perform-
ance indicators; E – Global debts and financial flows; F – Micro finance and community investment pro-
grams; G – Sustainability, Venture Capital and Crowdfunding; H – Sustainability and Hedge Investing; I
– Definition of the concepts of the area; J – Capital market and carbon credits; and L – Non-applicable.
The category ‘consistent compared to other articles’ presented a larger quantity of

articles, 31% of articles, and related to ‘previous model with different dataset/time
period’, with 30% of the articles. However, it is valid to highlight that few articles had as
their main characteristic the ‘comparison’ process, 5%, and ‘new perspectives’ had 17%
of articles. There was also the ‘non-applicable’ category composed only by ‘fixed articles’.
Thus, there is a difficulty when it comes to renovation or creation of new techniques
that aim to tackle the problems involving finance, investment and sustainability jointly.
Such absence confirms Gap5 , which can be summarized in the following:
. Gap5 Are the tools usually used in the area of finance and investment capable of
answering or helping to solve problems when they include sustainability aspects?
Could we or should we develop new methods exclusively to meet this purpose?
4.9. Period of the analysis

Lastly, the ninth category analyses the period in which the analysis were developed in the
articles, coded by letters A–E , in which: A – Less than 3 years; B – Between 3 and 5 years; C
Figure 8. Results found by studies considered: Category: A – New perspectives; B – Consistent with
previous literature; C – Previous model with different dataset/time period; D – Comparative study;
and E – Non-applicable.
– Between 5 and 10 years; D – More than 10 years; and E – Non applicable. The results are
presented in Figure 9.
A large number of articles had their analysis based on a 3–5 years period, 19% of the
articles, and 5–10 years, 18% of the articles. There was a smaller quantity in the less
than 3 years and more than 10 years categories, 4% and 12% of the articles, respectively.
Figure 9. Analysis period of studies considered: Category: A – Less than 3 years; B – Between 3 and 5
years; C – Between 5 and 10 years; D – More than 10 years; and E – Non-applicable.
There is a high number of articles in the ‘non-applicable’ category. Apart from the ‘fixed
articles’, this occurred because several pieces were not oriented by an historical approach
of the data presented in the articles nor did they take into account a specific period. Fur-
thermore, as previously seen, there is in the JSF&I literature a large number of conceptual
articles. Thus, the necessity of studies that will try to understand a larger period of analysis
to verify the concerns related to finance, investment and sustainability becomes very rel-
evant. Especially, it is important to analyse if the impact of the relationship between this
subjects is consistent throughout time.
. Gap6 There is the need for studies that take into account larger periods of analysis.
5. Conclusions and recommendations

The research developed in this article had as its central subject the analysis of the relation-
ship between finance and sustainability areas. This is a recent discussion and, conse-
quently, there are many possibilities of opportunities for new researches including the
gaps identified in this study. The JSF&I articles indicate that society’s concern about sus-
tainability is growing. This results into a larger pressure towards companies and the public
sector to present frequent debates, particularly related to the issue of financial feasibility.
Having in mind that companies focus on increasing their financial value, it becomes
mandatory for them to adopt sustainable practices in the organizational culture. In
order to address this issue, a journal dedicated to present in depth the subjects of
finance and sustainability, with different perspectives of analysis, becomes crucial. The
JSF&I fills an important gap in this context, bringing a multidisciplinary approach and fol-
lowing different investigations methods and different perspectives of analysis.
Observing the material published in this debate forum until 2015, this article was struc-
tured trying to present the main subjects addressed in the journal and, consequently, the
gaps that can be considered an opportunity for future studies. Our method to identify the
articles was based on the propositions made by Lage Junior and Godinho Filho (2010),
adapting it to analyse a single journal. The analysis established nine categories, which
allowed us to highlight six gaps in the literature.
After the analysis of all classifications and coding and, mainly, the gaps we identified,
we were able to notice that there still is a research agenda that need to be further developed
in new studies involving the areas of finance, investment, and sustainability.
We can remark some limitations of our study. First, the present research analysed only
one journal focusing on the relationship between finance and sustainability. This choice
was made because it is a pioneer journal, the first to address both subjects jointly, but
also due to its relevance, having its insertion and influence in mind. However, other
articles about finance and sustainability are published in other journals. There are also
special editions in journals about investment, finance, and business, as mentioned by
Haigh (2012a). This can contribute to the discovery of new gaps in the knowledge we
have about finance and sustainability. Although the gaps we have identified in this
article were specifically noticed in JSF&I, these gaps of knowledge are common when
one explores the issues of finance and sustainability simultaneously. We noticed that
the study allowed us to introduce an overall perspective of the articles published in
JSF&I, as well as the existing gaps to be further explored, which allows researchers to
establish an agenda that promotes the development of researches in the finance and sus-
tainability area. Future researches could call our attention to works published in other
journals, which would allow us to match these approaches, subjects and gaps.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Note
1. Leading Association in the United States of America. More information can be found on
http://www.ussif.org/.
References
Allen R., H. Letourneau, and T. Hebb. 2012. “Shareholder Engagement in the Extractive Sector.”
The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (1): 3–25.
Alm K. 2013. “‘The Dark Side of the Moon’: A Theoretical Framework of Complicity Applied to the
Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment
3 (3): 184–203.
Alm K., and R. Sievänen. 2013. “Institutional Investors, Climate Change and Human Rights.” The
Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (3): 177–183.
Ang W. R. 2015. “Sustainable Investment in Korea Does Not Catch a Cold When the United States
Sneezes.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (1–2): 16–26.
Baumann S., O. M. Lehner, and H. Losbichler. 2015. “A Push-and-Pull Factor Model for
Environmental Management Accounting: a Contingency Perspective.” The Journal of
Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (3): 155–177.
Benijts T. 2014. “Socially Responsible Investment and Financial Institution’s Response to Secondary
Stakeholder Requests.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (4): 321–336.
Benjamin E. O. 2013. “Credit Risk Modelling and Sustainable Agriculture: Asset Evaluation and
Rural Carbon Revenue.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (1): 57–69.
Beyhaghi M., and J. P. Hawley. 2013. “Modern Portfolio Theory and Risk Management:
Assumptions and Unintended Consequences.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 3 (1): 17–37.
Bianchi R. J., and M. E. Drew. 2012. “Susta Inable Stock Indices and Long-Term Portfolio
Decisions.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4): 303–317.
Biau C. 2011. “The ‘Governance Gap’, Or Missing Links in Transnational Chains of Accountability
for Extractive Industry Investment.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (3–4):
251–260.
Bloxham E. 2011a. “Corporate Governance and Sustainability: New and Old Models of Thinking.”
Bloxham E. 2011b. “The Knowledge Gap Between Investors and Companies.” The Journal of
Branker K., E. Shackles, and J. M. Pearce. 2011. “Peer-to-Peer Financing Mechanisms to Accelerate
Renewable Energy Deployment.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (2): 138–
155.
Brealey R. A., S. C. Myers, and F. Allen. 2011. Principles of Corporate Finance (10th ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill (No. 0073530735).
Brigham E. F., and M. C. Ehrhardt. 2011. Financial Management: Theory & Practice (13th ed.).
Mason: Cengage Learning. (No. 978-1-4390-7809-9).
Brundtland G. 1988. Our Common Future (W. C. on Environment & Development, Eds.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Byrd J., and E. S. Cooperman. 2014. “Let’s Talk: An Analysis of the ‘Vote Vs. Negotiated Withdraw’
Decision for Social Activist Environmental Health Shareholder Resolutions.” The Journal of
Cadman T. 2011. “Evaluating the Governance of Responsible Investment Institutions: An
Environmental and Social Perspective.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1
(1): 20–29.
Cadman T. 2014. “Climate Finance in an Age of Uncertainty.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 4 (4): 351–356.
Calderon F., and L. C. Chong. 2014. “Dilemma of Sustainable Lending.” The Journal of Sustainable
Finance & Investment 4 (2): 192–209.
Chow C. 2011. “Establishing a Corporate Sustainability Monitoring Tool Using the Shareholder
Engagement Commitment Indicator.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (3–
4): 195–208.
Clark G. L. 2014. “Information, Knowledge, and Investing in Offshore Financial Markets.” The
Clarvis M. H., M. Halle, I. Mulder, and M. Yarime. 2014. “Towards a New Framework to Account
for Environmental Risk in Sovereign Credit Risk Analysis.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 4 (2): 147–160.
Cook J. 2012. “Political Action Through Environmental Shareholder Resolution Filing:
Applicability to Canadian Oil Sands?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (1):
26–43.
Coumans C. 2012. “Mining, Human Rights and the Socially Responsible Investment Industry:
Considering Community Opposition to Shareholder Resolutions and Implications of
Collaboration.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (1): 44–63.
Crespo R. F., and I. van Staveren. 2011. “Would We Have Had This Crisis If Women Had Been
Running the Financial Sector?.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (3–4):
241–250.
Dijk-de M. v. G., and A. H. J. Nijhof. 2015. “Socially Responsible Investment Funds: A Review of
Research Priorities and Strategic Options.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5
(3): 178–204.
Dixon A. D., and A. H. Monk. 2012. “Recon Ciling Transparency and Long-Term Investing within
Sovereign Funds.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4): 275–286.
Dragos B., and I. Wilkins. 2014. “An Ecological/Evolutionary Perspective on High-Frequency
Trading.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (2): 161–175.
Eccles N. 2013. “Sustainable Investment, Dickens, Malthus and Marx.” The Journal of Sustainable
Evans M. 2013. “Meeting the Challenge of Impact Investing: How Can Contracting Practices Secure
Social Impact Without Sacrificing Performance?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 3 (2): 138–154.
Florek N. E. 2013. “Enabling Social Enterprise Through Regulatory Innovation: A Case Study from
the United Kingdom.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (2): 155–175.
Francis H. 2012. “Developing a Self-Sustaining Protected Area System: A Feasibility Study of
National Tourism Fee and Green Infrastructure in the Solomon Islands.” The Journal of
Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4): 287–302.
Friede G., T. Busch, and A. Bassen. 2015. “ESG and Financial Performance: Aggregated Evidence
from More than 2000 Empirical Studies.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (4):
210–233.
Gendron Y. 2013. “Learning from Mistakes: Can the Global Financial Crisis Translate Into Social
Progress?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (4): 333–343.
Geobey S., and O. Weber. 2013. “Lessons in Operationalizing Social Finance: the Case of Vancouver
City Savings Credit Union.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (2): 124–137.
Giamporcaro S. 2011. “Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Emerging Markets: Integrating

Environmental Risks in the South African Investment Industry.” The Journal of Sustainable
Gleicher D. 2013. “Rethinking Money and the State: a Semiotic Turn.” The Journal of Sustainable
Gray T. R. 2011. “Mapping a Corporate Governance Exchange: a Survey of Canadian Shareholder
Resolutions 2000–2009.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (1): 30–43.
Haan M. d., L. Dam, and B. Scholtens. 2012. “The Drivers of the Relationship Between Corporate
Environmental Performance and Stock Market Returns.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 2 (3–4): 338–375.
Hachigian H., and S. M. McGill. 2012a. “Introduction.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment2 (3–4): 163–165.
Hachigian H., and S. M. McGill. 2012b. “Reframing the Governance Challenge for Sustainable
Investment.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4): 166–178.
Haigh M. 2011a. “The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment.” The Journal of Sustainable
Haigh M. 2011b. “The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment.” The Journal of Sustainable

Haigh M. 2011c. “Dialectics in Sustainability.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1
(34): 179.
Haigh M. 2012a. “Publishing and Defining Sustainable Finance and Investment.” The Journal of
Haigh M. 2012b. “Fiduciary Finance ≠ Stakeholder Management: A Reply to Cadman’s
Governance Theory.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (2): 119–135.
Haigh M. 2012c. “Connecting Sustainability Goals to Financing Activity.” The Journal of
Haigh M. 2014. “Finance and Ethics.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (2): 91–92.
Hamilton I., and J. Eriksson. 2011. “Influence Strategies in Shareholder Engagement: A Case Study
of All Swedish National Pension Funds.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (1):
44–61.
Hebb T. 2013. “Impact Investing and Responsible Investing: What Does it Mean?” The Journal of
Hitchcock D., and M. Willard. 2009. The Business Guide to Sustainability: Practical Strategies and
Tools for Organizations (2nd ed.). London: Earthscan (No. 1138786195).
Ho M. 2013. “The Social Construction Perspective on ESG Issues in SRI Indices.” The Journal of
Hogarth J. R. 2012. “The Role of Climate Finance in Innovation Systems.” The Journal of
Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4): 257–274.
Holland J. 2011. “A Conceptual Framework for Changes in Fund Management and Accountability
Relative to ESG Issues.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (2): 159–177.
Huisingh D. 2012. “Invitation to Authors to Prepare & Submit, Comprehensive/Integrative Review
Articles.” Journal of Cleaner Production 29–30 (1): 290.
Huppé G. A., and P. Bala-Miller. 2011. “Shareholder Passivity: A Viable Explanation for Corporate
Governance Failures at Newscorp?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (3–4):
180–194.
Huppé G. A., and T. Hebb. 2011. “The Virtue of CalPERS’ Emerging Equity Markets Principles.”
Jabbour A. B. L. d. S., and C. J. C. Jabbour. 2013. Gestão ambiental nas organizações: Fundamentos e
tendências (1st ed.). São Paulo: Atlas (No. 8522477167).
Jabbour C. J. C. 2013. “Environmental Training in Organisations: From a Literature Review to a
Framework for Future Research.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 74, 144–155.
Jackson E. T. 2013. “Interrogating the Theory of Change: Evaluating Impact Investing Where it
Matters Most.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (2): 95–110.
Jansson M., J. Sandberg, A. Biel, and T. Gärling. 2014. “Should Pension Funds’ Fiduciary Duty be
Extended to Include Social, Ethical and Environmental Concerns? A Study of Beneficiaries’
Preferences.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (3): 213–229.
Jensen O. A., and P. Seele. 2013. “An Analysis of Sovereign Wealth and Pension Funds’ Ethical
Investment Guidelines and their Commitment Thereto.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 3 (3): 264–282.
JSF&I. 2013. “The Crazy Ideas Edition.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4):
376–378.
Kaufer K. 2014. “Social Responsibility as a Core Business Model in Banking: A Case Study in the
Financial Sector.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (1): 76–89.
Krosinsky C. 2014. “The Long and Necessary Death of Socially Responsible Investing.” The Journal
of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (3): 297–298.
Lage Junior M., and M. Godinho Filho. 2010. “Variations of the Kanban System: Literature Review
and Classification.” International Journal of Production Economics 125 (1): 13–21.
Levashova Y. 2011. “Role of Sustainable Development in Bilateral Investment Treaties: Recent
Trends and Developments.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (3–4): 222–229.
McElroy C. A. 2012. “Corpo Rate Foundations in the Mining Industry: The Relationship Between
Responsible Investment and Social Investment.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 2 (3–4): 240–256.
McGill S. M. 2012. “‘Peak’ Phosphorus? The Implications of Phosphate Scarcity for Sustainable
Investors.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (3–4): 222–239.
McGoun E., and J. Makansi. 2013. “Markets, Metaphors, and Mania.” The Journal of Sustainable
Mendell M., and E. Barbosa. 2013. “Impact Investing: A Preliminary Analysis of Emergent Primary
and Secondary Exchange Platforms.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (2):
111–123.
Mervelskemper L., D. Kaltofen, and S. Stein. 2014. “Are Sustainable Investment Funds Worth the
Effort?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (2): 127–146.
Michelfelder R. A. 2014. “Asset Characteristics of Solar Renewable Energy Certificates: Market
Solution to Encourage Environmental Sustainability.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 4 (3): 280–296.
Michelfelder R. A. 2015. “Electric Utility Regulation and Investment in Green Energy Resources.”
The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (1–2): 48–64.
Mulder I., and T. Koellner. 2011. “Hardwiring Green: How Banks Account for Biodiversity Risks
and Opportunities.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (2): 103–120.
Nathwani J., and A. W. Ng. 2014. “Investing in the Next Generation of Infrastructure for
Sustainable Energy in Canada.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (3): 272–279.
Niblock S. J., and J. L. Harrison. 2013. “Carbon Markets in Times of VUCA: A Weak-Form
Efficiency Investigation of the Phase II EU ETS.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Nielsen K. P., and R. W. Noergaard. 2011. “Csr and Mainstream Investing: A New Match? – an
Analysis of the Existing ESG Integration Methods in Theory and Practice and the Way
Forward.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (3–4): 209–221.
Nikolakis W., D. H. Cohen, and H. W. Nelson. 2012. “What Matters for Socially Responsible
Investment (SRI) in the Natural Resources Sectors? SRI Mutual Funds and Forestry in North
America.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (2): 136–151.
Nikolaou I. E., G. Kourouklaris, and T. A. Tsalis. 2014. “A Framework to Assist the Financial
Community in Incorporating Water Risks Into their Investment Decisions.” The Journal of
Nitani M., B. Carriere, and A. Bleackley. 2015. “Recognizing Corporate Citizenship: Market
Reactions.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (1–2): 85–102.
Nkurunziza J. D. 2012. “Respo Nsible Lending: Credit May Precipitate Firm Failure in Volatile
Macroeconomic Environments.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (2): 95–118.
Pathania R., and A. Bose. 2014. “An Analysis of the Role of Finance in Energy Transitions.” The
Peylo B. T., and S. Schaltegger. 2014. “An Equation with Many Variables: Unhiding the
Relationship Between Sustainability and Investment Performance.” The Journal of Sustainable
Quak S., J. Heilbron, and J. Meijer. 2014. “The Rise and Spread of Sustainable Investing in the
Netherlands.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (3): 249–265.
Rakotomavo M. T. J. 2011. “Preferences of Retail Investors and Institutions for Corporate Social
Performance.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (2): 93–102.
Ramin K., and S. Lew. 2015. “A Model for Integrated Capital Disclosure and Performance
Reporting: Separating Objects from Value.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment
5 (1–2): 27–47.
Reeder N., A. Colantonio, J. Loder, and G. R. Jones. 2015. “Measuring Impact in Impact Investing:
An Analysis of the Predominant Strength that is Also Its Greatest Weakness.” The Journal of
Rees W., and T. Rodionova. 2013. “What Type of Controlling Investors Impact on Which Elements
of Corporate Social Responsibility?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3 (3): 238–
263.
Richardson B. J. 2011. “From Fiduciary Duties to Fiduciary Relationships for Socially Responsible
Investing: Responding to the Will of Beneficiaries.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Richardson B. J. 2012. “SRI and Extractive Industries.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Richardson B. J. 2013. “Fiduciary Responsibility in Retail Funds: Clarifying the Prospects for SRI.”
Rook D. P. 2012. “How Can We Know if Investors are Coherently Linking Sustainability
Concepts?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (34): 198–221.
Saeed M. S. 2014. “A Cross-Country Analysis to Investigate the True Role of Microfinance
Institutions in Developed and Developing Economies.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 4 (2): 176–191.
Saito Y. 2012. “Corpo Rate Governance and Active Engagement in Japan: Transformation in the
Face of Incremental Shareholder Value?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2
(3–4): 179–197.
Schröder M. 2014. “Financial Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Literature Review.” The
Segger M.-C. C., and A. Newcombe. 2011. Sustainable development in world investment law. In M.-
C. C. Segger, M. W. Gehring, and A. Newcombe (Eds.), (pp. 99–142). Alphen aan den Rijn:
Kluwer Law International.
Seuring S. 2013. “A Review of Modeling Approaches for Sustainable Supply Chain Management.”
Decision Support Systems 54 (4): 1513–1520.
Shahid A., H. Saeed, and S. M. A. Tirmizi. 2015. “Economic Development and Banking Sector
Growth in Pakistan.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (3): 121–135.
Shevchenko K., R. McManus, and J. Haddock-Fraser. 2015. “UK Pension Sustainability and Fund
Manager Governance: Agent Duties to the Principal.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 5 (4): 205–209.
Shrivastava P., and A. Addas. 2014. “The Impact of Corporate Governance on Sustainability
Performance.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (1): 21–37.
Sievänen R. 2013. “The Non-Response of Pension Funds to Climate Change and Human Rights.”
Sorsa V.-P. 2013. “Social Responsibility and the Political: Studying the Politics of Social
Responsibility in Institutional Investment.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 3
(3): 223–237.
Spiess-Knafl W., and J. Aschari-Lincoln. 2015. “Understanding Mechanisms in the Social

Investment Market: What are Venture Philanthropy Funds Financing and How?” The Journal
of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (3): 103–120.
Steiauf T., and H. Schäfer. 2014. “From Integration to Impact – a New Investment Climate for
Germany’s SRI Landscape.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (1): 38–60.
Szumilo N., and F. Fuerst. 2015. “Who Captures the ‘Green Value’ in the US Office Market?” The
Szymańska A., S. V. Puyvelde, and M. Jegers. 2015. “Capital Structure of Social Purpose Companies
– a Panel Data Analysis.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (4): 234–254.
Thistlethwaite J. 2014. “Private Governance and Sustainable Finance.” The Journal of Sustainable
Tischer D. 2013. “Swimming Against the Tide: Ethical Banks as Countermovement.” The Journal of
Vandekerckhove W., and J. Leys. 2012. “Dear Sir, We are Not an NGO.” The Journal of Sustainable
Vives A., and B. Wadhwa. 2012. “Susta Inability Indices in Emerging Markets: Impact on
Responsible Practices and Financial Market Development.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance
& Investment 2 (3–4): 318–337.

Waygood S. 2011. “How do the Capital Markets Undermine Sustainable Development? What Can
be Done to Correct This?” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 1 (1): 81–87.
Weber O. 2014. “The Financial Sector’s Impact on Sustainable Development.” The Journal of
Weber O., and Y. Banks. 2012. “Corporate Sustainability Assessment in Financing the Extractive
Sector.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2 (1): 64–81.
Weber O., A. Hoque, and M. A. Islam. 2015. “Incorporating Environmental Criteria Into Credit
Risk Management in Bangladeshi Banks.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5
(1–2): 1–15.
Wiek A., and O. Weber. 2014. “Sustainability Challenges and the Ambivalent Role of the Financial
Sector.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 4 (1): 9–20.
Wonneberger E. T., and H. A. Mieg. 2011. “Trust in Money: Hard, Soft and Idealistic Factors in
Euro, Gold and German Community Currencies.” The Journal of Sustainable Finance &
Investment 1 (3–4): 230–240.
Wood D., B. Thornley, and K. Grace. 2013. “Institutional Impact Investing: Practice and Policy.”
28
Appendix
Table A.1. Studies analysed and citations considering the Scopus, Web of Science (ISI) and Scholar Google until 25 March 2016.
M.C.R. DE CARVALHO FERREIRA ET AL.

Citation
No Authors Title Scopus ISI Google
1 Haigh (2011a) The JSF&I 0 0 0
2 Richardson (2011) From fiduciary duties to fiduciary relationships for socially responsible investing: responding to the will of 0 0 31
beneficiaries
3 Cadman (2011) Evaluating the governance of responsible investment institutions: an environmental and social perspective 0 0 12
4 Gray (2011). Mapping a corporate governance exchange: a survey of Canadian shareholder resolutions 2000–2009. 0 0 6
5 Hamilton and Eriksson. Influence strategies in shareholder engagement: a case study of all Swedish national pension funds. 0 0 2
6 Huppé and Hebb (2011). The virtue of California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS)’ Emerging Equity Markets Principles. 0 0 3
7 Bloxham (2011a). Corporate governance and sustainability: new and old models of thinking. 0 0 1
8 Waygood (2011). How do the capital markets undermine SD? What can be done to correct this? 0 0 16
9 Haigh (2011b). The Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment. 0 0 1
10 Rakotomavo (2011). Preferences of retail investors and institutions for corporate social performance. 0 0 1
11 Mulder and Koellner (2011). Hardwiring green: how banks account for biodiversity risks and opportunities. 0 0 1
12 Giamporcaro (2011). Sustainable and responsible investment in emerging markets: integrating environmental risks in the South African 0 0 5
investment industry.
13 Branker, Shackles, and Pearce (2011). Peer-to-peer financing mechanisms to accelerate renewable energy deployment. 0 0 7
14 Bloxham (2011b). The knowledge gap between investors and companies. 0 0 1
15 Holland (2011). A conceptual framework for changes in fund management and accountability relative to ESG issues. 0 0 3
16 Haigh (2011c). Dialectics in sustainability. 0 0 0
17 Huppé and Bala-Miller (2011). Shareholder passivity: a viable explanation for corporate governance failures at NewsCorp? 0 0 1
18 Chow (2011). Establishing a corporate sustainability monitoring tool using the shareholder engagement commitment indicator. 0 0 0
19 Nielsen and Noergaard (2011). CSR and mainstream investing: a new match? — an analysis of the existing ESG integration methods in theory and 0 0 3
practice and the way forward.
20 Levashova (2011). Role of SD in Bilateral Investment Treaties (BIT): recent trends and developments. 0 0 1
21 Wonneberger and Mieg (2011). Trust in money: hard, soft and idealistic factors in Euro, gold and German community currencies. 0 0 0
22 Crespo and van Staveren (2011). Would we have had this crisis if women had been running the financial sector? 0 0 6
23 Biau (2011). The ‘Governance Gap’, or missing links in transnational chains of accountability for extractive industry investment. 0 0 1
24 Richardson (2012). SRI and extractive industries. 0 0 2
25 Allen, Letourneau, and Hebb (2012). Shareholder engagement in the extractive sector. 0 0 7
26 Cook (2012). Political action through environmental shareholder resolution filing: applicability to Canadian Oil Sands? 0 0 2
27 Coumans (2012). Mining, human rights and the SRI industry: considering community opposition to shareholder resolutions and 0 0 5
implications of collaboration.
28 Weber and Banks (2012). Corporate sustainability assessment in financing the extractive sector. 0 0 3
29 - Climate change and human rights. 0 0 0
30 - Financialization in an era of globalization. 0 0 0
31 Haigh (2012c). Connecting sustainability goals to financing activity. 0 0 1
32 Haigh (2012a). Publishing and defining sustainable finance and investment. 0 0 2
33 Nkurunziza (2012). Responsible lending: credit may precipitate firm failure in volatile macroeconomic environments. 0 0 2
34 Haigh (2012b). Fiduciary finance ≠ stakeholder management: a reply to Cadman’s governance theory. 0 0 0
35 Nikolakis, Cohen, and Nelson (2012). What matters for SRI in the natural resources sectors? SRI mutual funds and forestry in North America. 0 0 1
36 Vandekerckhove and Leys (2012). Dear Sir, we are not an NGO. 0 0 0
37 Hachigian and McGill (2012a). Introduction. 0 0 0
38 Hachigian and McGill (2012b) Reframing the governance challenge for sustainable investment 0 0 2
39 Saito (2012) Corporate governance and active engagement in Japan: transformation in the face of incremental shareholder 0 0 0
value?
40 Rook (2012) How can we know if investors are coherently linking sustainability concepts? 0 0 2
41 McGill (2012) ‘Peak’ phosphorus? The implications of phosphate scarcity for sustainable investors 0 0 6
42 McElroy (2012) Corporate foundations in the mining industry: the relationship between responsible investment and social 0 0 2
investment
43 Hogarth (2012) The role of climate finance in innovation systems 0 0 0
44 Dixon and Monk (2012) Reconciling transparency and long-term investing within sovereign funds 0 0 3
45 Francis (2012) Developing a self-sustaining protected area system: a feasibility study of national tourism fee and green 0 0 0
infrastructure in the Solomon Islands
46 Bianchi and Drew (2012) Sustainable stock indices and long-term portfolio decisions 0 0 3
47 Vives and Wadhwa (2012) Sustainability indices in emerging markets: impact on responsible practices and financial market development 0 0 3
48 Haan, Dam, and Scholtens (2012) The drivers of the relationship between corporate environmental performance and stock market returns. 0 0 2
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FINANCE & INVESTMENT

49 JSF&I (2013) The crazy ideas edition 0 0 0
50 Richardson (2013) Fiduciary responsibility in retail funds 0 0 0
51 Beyhaghi and Hawley (2013) Modern portfolio theory and risk management: assumptions and unintended consequences 0 0 11
52 Niblock and Harrison (2013) Carbon markets in times of VUCA: a weak-form efficiency investigation of the phase II EU ETS 0 0 3
53 Benjamin (2013) Credit risk modelling and sustainable agriculture: asset evaluation and rural carbon revenue 0 0 2
54 Hebb (2013) Impact investing and responsible investing: what does it mean? 0 0 2
55 Wood, Thornley, and Grace (2013) Institutional impact investing: practice and policy 0 0 5
56 Jackson (2013) Interrogating the theory of change: evaluating impact investing where it matters most 0 0 8
57 Mendell and Barbosa (2013) Impact investing: a preliminary analysis of emergent primary and secondary exchange platforms 0 0 4
58 Geobey and Weber (2013) Lessons in operationalizing social finance: the case of Vancouver City Savings Credit Union 0 0 1
59 Evans (2013) Meeting the challenge of impact investing: how can contracting practices secure social impact without sacrificing 0 0 0
performance?
60 Florek (2013) Enabling social enterprise through regulatory innovation: a case study from the United Kingdom 0 0 0
61 Alm and Sievänen (2013) Institutional investors, climate change and human rights 0 0 1
62 Alm (2013) ‘The dark side of the moon’: a theoretical framework of complicity applied to the Norwegian Government Pension 0 0 3
Fund Global
63 Sievänen (2013) The non-response of pension funds to climate change and human rights 0 0 2
64 Sorsa (2013) Social responsibility and the political: studying the politics of social responsibility in institutional investment 0 0 3
65 Rees and Rodionova (2013) What type of controlling investors impact on which elements of corporate social responsibility (CSR)? 0 0 3
66 Jensen and Seele (2013) An analysis of sovereign wealth and pension funds’ ethical investment guidelines and their commitment thereto 0 0 2
29
(Continued)
Table A.1. Continued.
30
Citation
No Authors Title Scopus ISI Google

67 JSF&I (2013) The Crazy Ideas Edition 0 0 2
68 – A Theological Solution to the Debt Crisis 0 0 0
69 Eccles (2013) Sustainable investment, Dickens, Malthus and Marx 0 0 0
70 McGoun and Makansi (2013) Markets, metaphors, and mania 0 0 0
71 Tischer (2013) Swimming against the tide: ethical banks as counter movement 0 0 1
72 Gendron (2013) Learning from mistakes: can the Global Financial Crisis translate into social progress? 0 0 0
73 Gleicher (2013) Rethinking money and the state: a semiotic turn 0 0 0
74 Ho (2013) The social construction perspective on ESG issues in SRI indices 0 0 2
75 Weber (2014) The financial sector’s impact on SD 0 0 1
76 Wiek and Weber (2014) Sustainability challenges and the ambivalent role of the financial sector 0 0 1
77 Shrivastava and Addas (2014) The impact of corporate governance on sustainability performance 0 0 0
78 Steiauf and Schäfer (2014) From integration to impact – a new investment climate for Germany’s SRI landscape 0 0 1
79 Thistlethwaite (2014) Private governance and sustainable finance 0 0 0
80 Kaufer (2014) Social responsibility as a core business model in banking: a case study in the financial sector 0 0 0
81 Haigh (2014) Finance and ethics 0 0 0
82 Nikolaou, Kourouklaris, and Tsalis (2014) A framework to assist the financial community in incorporating water risks into their investment decisions 0 0 1
83 Peylo and Schaltegger (2014) An equation with many variables: unhiding the relationship between sustainability and investment performance 0 0 2
84 Mervelskemper, Kaltofen, and Stein (2014) Are sustainable investment funds worth the effort? 0 0 1
85 Clarvis et al. (2014) Towards a new framework to account for environmental risk in sovereign credit risk analysis 0 0 2
86 Dragos and Wilkins (2014) An ecological/evolutionary perspective on high-frequency trading 0 0 0
87 Saeed (2014) A cross-country analysis to investigate the true role of microfinance institutions in developed and developing 0 0 0
economies
88 Calderon and Chong (2014) Dilemma of sustainable lending. 0 0 0
89 Jansson et al. (2014) Should pension funds’ fiduciary duty be extended to include social, ethical and environmental concerns? 0 0 0
90 Byrd and Cooperman (2014) Let’s talk: an analysis of the ‘vote vs. negotiated withdrawal’ decision for social activist environmental health 0 0 2
shareholder resolutions.
91 Quak, Heilbron, and Meijer (2014) The rise and spread of sustainable investing in the Netherlands 0 0 0
92 Pathania and Bose (2014) An analysis of the role of finance in energy transitions 0 0 0
93 Nathwani and Ng (2014) Investing in the next generation of infrastructure for sustainable energy in Canada 0 0 0
94 Michelfelder (2014) Asset characteristics of solar renewable energy certificates: market solution to encourage environmental 0 0 0
sustainability
95 Krosinsky (2014) The long and necessary death of socially responsible investing 0 0 0
96 Clark (2014) Information, knowledge, and investing in offshore financial markets 0 0 0
97 Benijts (2014) SRI and financial institution’s response to secondary stakeholder requests 0 0 0
98 Schröder (2014) Financial effects of CSR: a literature review 0 0 0
99 Cadman (2014) Climate finance in an age of uncertainty 0 0 0
100 Weber, Hoque, and Islam (2015) Incorporating environmental criteria into credit risk management in Bangladesh banks 0 0 0
101 Ang (2015) Sustainable investment in Korea does not catch a cold when the United States sneezes 0 0 2
102 Ramin and Lew (2015) A model for integrated capital disclosure and performance reporting: separating objects from value 0 0 0
103 Michelfelder (2015) Electric utility regulation and investment in green energy resources 0 0 0
104 Szumilo and Fuerst (2015) Who captures the ‘green value’ in the US office market? 0 0 0
105 Nitani, Carriere, and Bleackley (2015) Recognizing corporate citizenship: market reactions 0 0 0
106 Spiess-Knafl and Aschari-Lincoln (2015) Understanding mechanisms in the social investment market: what are venture philanthropy funds financing and 0 0 0
how?

107 Shahid, Saeed, and Tirmizi (2015) Economic development and banking sector growth in Pakistan 0 0 0
108 Reeder et al. (2015) Measuring impact in impact investing: an analysis of the predominant strength that is also its greatest weakness 0 0 0
109 Baumann, Lehner, and Losbichler (2015) A push-and-pull factor model for environmental management accounting: a contingency perspective 0 0 0
110 Dijk-de and Nijhof (2015) SRI Funds: a review of research priorities and strategic options 0 0 1
111 Shevchenko, McManus, and Haddock- UK pension sustainability and fund manager governance: agent duties to the principal 0 0 0
Fraser (2015)
112 Friede, Busch, and Bassen (2015) ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies 0 0 0
113 Szymańska, Puyvelde, and Jegers (2015) Capital structure of social purpose companies: a panel data analysis 0 0 0
31
32
Table A.2. Objectives of studies analysed.
No Objective of the Article
1 Presenting the journal, its objectives and its contribution to the study in the area of finance and sustainability.

2 The article addresses the issue of SRI and it analyses if SRI can be legally allowed if it complies with beneficiaries’ aims in a fiduciary relationship, besides considering potential legal reforms
to provide a better effect to beneficiaries’ interests.
3 This article addresses three problems associated to the integration of ESG values in the activities of responsible investment institutions.
4 The article is structured based on a case study of a Canadian company, in which addresses the issue of resolution of shareholders.
5 The article has the goal of presenting the strategies used by pension funds in their interaction with companies of the portfolio by exploring underlying factors in the choice of the influence
strategies deriving the reputation and risk management in the analysis of the target public.
6 The article analysis the new approach used by CalPERS, based on investment principles in emerging markets.
7 The article is concerned with a model of robust corporate governance to help assess the companies chosen for investment, which can be used as an answers to the issue of existence or not of
corporate governance, loyalty and sustainability to be implemented by companies.
8 This article establishes the way capital markets relate to issues of SD through two main paths: the financial influence by means of purchase and sale of stocks and the cost of capital for
companies, besides the influence in defense of the investor.
9 Presenting the objectives of the second edition of the journal, with concepts and subjects addressed by the article.
10 The author examines the investors’ preference for CSP.
11 This article seeks to provide a better perspective on the way banks nowadays deal with biodiversity in its operations, which are their underlying motivations to do so and if the banking
system sees biodiversity as a risk or a business opportunity.
12 This article analyses the opinions of South-African investment organizations on the likelihood of commercialization of environmental risks in their investment decision-making process.
13 This article critically analysis and considers the political, financial and logistical risks of an innovating peer-to-peer (P2P) financial mechanism to help the reduction of greenhouse effect
emissions, which is not accessible due to the lack of proper financing and, therefore, is limiting the implementation of renewable energy technology.
14 The article tries to analyse the concerns related to sustainable finances, which play an important role in the reduction of gaps in the knowledge between companies and investors.
15 The main evolution in SRI regarding ESG issues for funds managers took place in the last decade, but there still are problems related to publicizing, transparency, and accountability of
companies.
16 Makes a brief introduction to the third and fourth edition of the first volume.
17 The article analyses a quantitative case of Newscorp investors’ behaviour in order to examine the shareholders’ passivity. To do so, it addresses contemporary debates on the investor’s role as
a follow-up to ensure that companies can maximize the value for shareholders and comply with high standards of corporate governance.
18 This article explains the creation of a shareholders’ participation commitment indicator (SEC) that allows one to compare shareholders’ engagement activities to ensure investment
responsibility from the perspective of the company.
19 Companies and investors become aware of the value of CSR in a different way: companies make an effort to obtain a competitive advantage and create value, using an strategy that
considers social-environmental aspects relevant, at the same time, investors ‘see large barriers in ESG factor’ (p. 209). Thus the article proposes a ‘integrated decision model’, which
considers financial concerns and ESG, but with a new assessment method so it is not based on an existing assessment method.
20 The article analyses ‘important tendencies about the role of SD in the international investment law’ (p. 222), due to the increase in the last decade of BIT and a growing number of arbitrary
investment treaties.
21 The article has the goal of proportioning ‘trust’ in Money. The word trust is crucial for sustainable money systems. The author creates a scale of 12 aspects related to reliability in Money,
which measures liquidity, stability, support, eminent’ credit quality, security of the system, image, management and idealistic aspects such as justice, region, ecology and excitement.
22 The article presents a debate on the application of ethical approaches in the financial crisis. It analyses the crises on the perspective of its causal behaviour attitudes and institutions. The two
main approaches utilitarianism and deontology, according to the authors ‘was not enough to prevent some underlying behaviour during the financial crisis’ (p. 241). Therefore, a third
approach, the ethics of care, ‘could have been more effective than the other two in the prevention of the last financial crisis’ (p. 241), because it is more concerned about relationships.
23 The article introduces the urgent need of emergent economies in facing Companies’ Social-environmental responsibility (SER).
24 The article presents the first and second edition of the volume, which is a especial edition dedicated to: Extractive industry - mining, oil and gas.
25 Extractive industry is one of the most important segments for the engagement of shareholder, due to environmental, social and global nature impacts caused by it, the operations in the
sector are inclined to have reputation risks. Large investors are worried with ESG issues, consequently, with the reputation risk of their investments. That is why companies are more and
more adopting methods to execute, assist and follow-up companies. The objective of the article is to assess this involvement results at company level, specifically in the extractive sector.
26 It develops a discussion on shareholders’ participation, observing governance and strategic value in the scope of rules and legislations with which companies have to comply.
27 The proposal of this article is to investigate a Canadian mining company accused of violating human rights and the consequences of adopting sustainable practices, particularly Sustainable
Responsible Investment (SRI).
28 This article aims to check the connection between two metrics: financial development and sustainability. The idea is based on a doubt over this connection in the extractive sector, which is
made through a confrontation of arguments.
29 Call for paper on climate and culture.

30 Call for paper about financial sustainability.
31 The text introduces the subjects of the articles in the second edition of the second volume, about sustainable finance, which tries to address financing activities with sustainable goals.
32 It provides an overall perspective of the objectives and scope of journals and magazines that publish the results of responsible investment researches. It debates in integrated terms, such as
responsibility, sustainability, ecology, financing and investment and presents some of the debate on finance and sustainability in other journals.
33 The article presents a case study of a Kenyan manufacturing company, emphasizing the effect of credit in companies resilience aiming at determining how this companies surviving in a
challenging economic environment.
34 This article’s goal is to verify the importance of climate change in investment decisions.
35 It analyses the occurrence of SRI made by multiple funds since the authors noticed the activities of such funds in incentives to the application of sustainable attitudes.
36 There are two objectives in this article: 1) to verify if ‘the investor hopes to obtain more information on corporate policies and practices in regards to the allegations of improper behaviour’
(p. 152) made by third parties; and 2) verify if ‘the investor tries to influence these practices demonstrating investors’ concern to the administration over specific issues’ (p.152).

37 The editorial introduces the subjects of articles of the third and fourth edition of the second volume, which lead to the study of sustainable investment focusing governance.
38 The authors present a perspective on the reasons that lead the institutional investor to care for a governance approach that deals with sustainability issues.
39 The relationship between property structure and corporate governance is the purpose of this paper. The method presents an assessment of shareholders’ activism when it comes to reforms
in governance requirements, checking the main aspects present in Japanese companies.
40 This article tries to measure the investors’ coherency associated to sustainability concepts, because investors’ skills to connect themselves in a coherent way to sustainability concepts in
different domains can reach the success of long-term investments.
41 The article concerns the possibility of running out of one mineral resource used to make fertilizers, such as phosphorus that contributes nowadays to put an end to global hunger.
42 The idea behind this article is to analyse the presence of responsible investment in capital markets, considering dada provided by credit institutions aiming at pinpointing the participation of
investments in social area as a practice of CSR in the mining sector.
43 This article addresses issues about the function and financial institutional arrangements for climate based on a perspective of innovating systems.
44 The article presents a conceptual structure to rethink through different types of transparency in sovereign funds related to investment procedures in a financial performance relationship.
45 This research studies how the notion of efficiency could held to translate environmental policies into practices to reach political goals.
46 The article analysis long-term behaviour of the returns of sustainable stock indexes and benefits of additions to diversification portfolios, to do so, it analyses sustainable stock indexes from
1927 to 2010.
47 The article analyses sustainable indexes, which ‘are created as a reference point for SD’, by the means of a case study in BM&F Bovespa Sustainability index, in Brazil.
48 The article tries to verify if there is a relationship between companies’ environmental performance and the returns of stocks.
49 The article is a call for papers on ‘What is the financing and sustainable investment thesis?’ (p. 376).
50 The purpose of this article is to discuss the specific rulings of SRI.
51 This article presents an overview in the assumptions and non-intentional consequences of generally adopting Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), in the context of large institutional investors’
growth.
33
(Continued )
34
52 The study examines the weak efficiency in European carbon credit Market.
53 The article presents a case study in Sub-Saharan Africa about small rural farmers’ access to credit, assessing the necessity of guarantees and the asymmetry of information.

54 The editorial presents the second edition of the third volume, in which the title introduces the content: ‘Investment impact and investment responsibility: what does it mean?’
55 This article examines how public policies play an important role in making impact investment feasible by the means of North-Americans owners of institutional assets.
56 This article analysis the cases in which change theory would have been used achieving good results in several levels of the impact investment industry.
57 The objective of the article is presenting a brief synthesis of impact investment Market when it comes to barriers to a full development of this Market. Thus, the article examines some
developments that came up to face these barriers. Furthermore, it presents a brief overview of the field of impact investment in the current outlook of social companies.
58 The article analyses financing of social issues conducted by The City Savings Credit Union Vancouver (Vancity) and the dissemination of the social impact of products and services. They have
the largest asset base in the Global Alliance for Banking and Values, a global association of ethical banks that has the largest asset base of credit cooperatives in Canada.
59 The author tries to present multitask main agent relationship based on the contract theory and the analysis of incentives.
60 The article focus on social companies that are defined as an innovating way of using resources to reach social objectives, which is commonly named third sector because it is neither a
business/government institution nor a non-profit company.
61 This editorial derives from a workshop carried out in the European Business Ethics Network research conference in Newcastle, in the United Kingdom, on July 7–9th 2012.
62 The article analysis the risk associated to shareholders’ complicity. It develops a theoretical framework about investors’ complicity. The article applies the complicity of several empiric
phenomena that characterizes micro and macro level to this theoretical framework.
63 It verifies if pension funds face challenges when they apply in practice the common definition of responsible investment concerned about ESG issues in the investment decision-making
process.
64 The article has two objectives: 1) Presenting an overview over the post-foundational politician and institutionalist for social responsibility (SR) approaches; and 2) demonstrate how using the
SR argument shapes activities in organizations.
65 The main subject of the article is shareholders’ strategic participation in different elements of CSR.
66 It seeks to check if social-environmental aspects (ethical) are taken into account in sovereign funds.
67 The editorial presents the fourth edition of the third volume, whose main topic is the introduction of a new approach and ideas on financing and sustainable investment.
68 It is not a scientific article but a sequel of the editorial.
69 The article focuses on the issues of the definition given to SD. It analyses this aspect based on different authors, from Dickens, Malthus, Marx, to contemporaneity.
70 The authors try to show how financial markets can affect the balance of economy.
71 The article presents a concern related to banking ethics, social movements and engagement of interested parties. This movement for an ethical bank is understood as a counter movement
towards financialisation.
72 The article is contrary to the idea that contemporary society necessarily learns from its mistakes. The analysis is based on theoretical models, in which the authors criticize the argument that
global financial crisis somehow would translate into progress for the finance area.
73 The text addresses the issue of a new concept of Money that came up after the golden age. It analysis a series of elements related to this concept throughout the article.
74 The study focuses on SRI and ESG factors, by the means of an analysis of the theory of social construction.
75 The editorial presents the first edition of the fourth volume, whose main topic is the analysis of the impact of finance sector for SD.
76 The authors try to present the main contributions of finance sector to SD.
77 The objective of the article is to present the existing relationship between corporate governance and sustainability, based on an analysis of ESG factors.
78 The article analysis the current situation and the tendencies in regards to the German market of SRI.
79 The authors try to demonstrate how private environmental governance (PEG) can aid sustainable financial practices.
80 The main objective of this paper is presenting a case study carried out in a bank that uses a business model that considers sustainability in their activities and products.
81 The editorial presents the second edition of the fourth volume, whose main subject is the practices of ethical attitudes in financial sector.
82 The authors present a framework to assess the risk of business that are associated to the use of water as a natural resource.
83 The article shows how sustainability levels of different portfolios influence the return over investment when other known influence factor are neutralized, based on the usage of a new
quantitative model to streamline the portfolio.
84 The article addresses eco-efficiency, which suggests value for the shareholder that surpasses sustainable investments, having risk results that are more efficient and management of
resources that is better accepted by the consumer as well as legitimization, besides less conflict of interest. This creates a larger level of satisfaction at work and a higher innovation rate.
85 The objective of the study is present environmental risk through financial logic, in particularly, the market of sovereign bonds.
86 The article proposes a framework in which financing can be better understood as a complex technical system linked to other social and economic systems.
87 The article focuses on micro finance, which reaches millions of people by providing easy access to loans, with better and smaller rates. Thus, the objective is carry out a comparison between
three Asian developing countries Bangladesh, Pakistan and India, and two developed economies, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, in order to assess the effectiveness
of applying micro finances to deal with low income people.
88 The study tries to show how sustainable credit banks monitor the performance of small and medium entrepreneurs (Borrowers) regarding environmental issues (p. 192).
89 The study focuses on the responsibility of pension funds to manage assets searching for the best interest of beneficiaries, who has social, ethical and environmental concerns in their
investments.
90 The study has as its main topic the shareholders’ resolution and concerns involving social governance of companies. To do so, it carries out a study with 70 companies in the period of 2006-
2011.
91 The study tries to analyse sustainable investment, considering the practices adopted in Holland since 1960.
92 The article focuses on energy transition. It tries to assess the impact finance and finance innovation in this transition. It carries out an analysis in three energy transitions: from the steam
engine to oil, from oil to oil refinery and from oil to water electricity and the efficient usage of electrical power.
93 The article has the purpose of assessing the abundance of energy resources in Canada.
94 The article analyses the green certificate, in other words, the renewable solar certificate, considered a subsidy in the production of renewable energy and an asset.
95 The main topic of this study is the concern over SRI. Investors are increasingly concerned over environmental, social, and corporate governance ( IESG) issues.

96 The author defends the importance of information and knowledge in the global financial service industry.
97 The study arguments that SRI can be seen as the characteristic of a financial institution.
98 The article focuses on a literature review about the performance of SRI and its connection to practices of a CSR.
99 The article examines the decrease in carbon emissions based on the debate over a new convention that was slated to take place in 2015.
100 The article investigates whether the incorporation of environmental, social and sustainability criteria in credit risk analysis is beneficial to lenders. The study analyses sustainability elements
in the credit risk management process in Bangladeshi banks.
101 The paper studies the performance of SRIs in Korea. By analysing a portfolio of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index Korea, the author identifies that SRI in Korea serves as an important
alternative for investors seeking diversification, as the paper shows little sensitivity of the index to international crises.
102 This study discusses a theoretical model that integrates the disclosure of capital and performance reporting, presenting a taxonomy that encodes and integrates financial and sustainability
disclosure.
103 The paper studies electric utility investments in renewable energy sources and technology efficiency to end users, taking into account a model that includes taxes and subsidies designed to
encourage the allocation of resources in green energy initiatives.
104 This research investigates the influence of different levels of energy efficiency certification on office rental rates and structures, seeking to verify whether the benefits of green buildings are
absorbed by tenants or landlords.
105 The study analyses whether the interaction mechanisms among environmental, social and governance (ESG) dimensions creates or destroys value to the shareholder. The article examines
stock returns before and after the exclusion of companies from an index based on ESG practices.
106 This article studies the role of venture philanthropy funds as financial intermediaries, using a sample of social investments in five continents. In the paper, investees’ characteristics are used
to predict outcomes associated with grants or commercial financing.
107 The paper discusses the banking sector in Pakistan, seeking to evaluate relationships between economic growth and the level of financial development.
108 The article aims to make explicit the subjective interpretation of social and environmental returns arising from impact investing.
35
(Continued )
36

109 The paper follows a contingency perspective to analyse environmental management accounting, taking into consideration internalities and externalities. The article uses an approach based
on the triangulation of two case studies through interviews with representatives and the discourse analysis of media releases.
110 The paper reviews the literature on SRI funds. The study identifies that research in the SRI field generally focuses on financial performance, giving less attention to social performance and to
the principles underlying the investment funds.
111 The article analyses the relationship between the principal and agent in sustainable investing, studying the application of a screening process, based on environmental social and governance
criteria, of institutional investors who make resource-allocation decisions.
112 Using primary and secondary data from previous academic studies, the paper provides a comprehensive overview of the relationship between ESG criteria and corporate financial
performance.
113 The paper studies the determinants of the capital structure of social purpose firms. By analysing Belgium social enterprises, the study identifies that the capital structure of social enterprises
encompasses literatures from both for-profit and not-for-profit companies.

Ferreira 2016

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ferreira 2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment

ISSN: 2043-0795 (Print) 2043-0809 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsfi20

A systematic review of literature about finance

Maria Carolina Rezende de Carvalho Ferreira, Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro,

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2016.1177438

Published online: 12 May 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Download by: [Universite Laval] Date: 13 May 2016, At: 13:17

A systematic review of literature about ﬁnance and

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

CONTACT Amorim Sobreiro Vinicius sobreiro@unb.br

organizations will be required to have a better environmental performance. This will

sustainable ﬁnance in its broader context (Bloxham 2011a, p. 77).

2. Theoretical frame of reference

2.1. Investors in general

2.2. Socially responsible investment

Thus, it is important to highlight two key objectives regarding the company/investor

into account non-ﬁnancial factors in the investment decision, institutional investors

2.3. Impact investment

2.4. Governance on sustainable investment

results of several dimensions without effective institutional governance (Hachigian and

2.5. Institutional investors, climate change and human rights

2.6. Non-renewable extractive industry – mining, oil and gas

However, there is a controversy in regards to SRI concerns in the extractive sector. On

2.7. Sustainable development

In particular, we need to remember that the search for improvement in environmental

3. Methods and research techniques

. analysing articles previously published on JSF&I;

ship between ﬁnance and sustainability.

3.1. Characterization of the instrument and execution of the research

Table 1. Categories and subcategories used in this paper.

whether there is a predominant method when sustainability (qualitative methods and

4. Results and discussion

Table 2. Data classiﬁcation and categorization for each paper.

4.2. Geographic region

Figure 1. Context of studies analysed: Category: A – Developed countries; B – Developing countries;

. Gap2 Defining conceptual standards or a specific terminology to the area of finance,

Figure 3. Objective of studies analysed: Category: A – Conceptually contributes to the subjects; B –

4.4. Focus or main subject

4.6. Analysed sector

Figure 5. Methods of studies analysed: Category: A – Quantitative; B – Qualitative; C – Conceptual; D –

Public/Private, and D – Non-applicable. Thus, we present the results of this category in

Figure 6. Sector analysed by studies considered: Category: A – Private; B – Public; C – Public/Private or

4.7. Approached topics

4.8. Results of the articles

The category ‘consistent compared to other articles’ presented a larger quantity of

4.9. Period of the analysis

5. Conclusions and recommendations

Giamporcaro S. 2011. “Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Emerging Markets: Integrating

Finance & Investment 1 (2): 91–92.

Spiess-Knaﬂ W., and J. Aschari-Lincoln. 2015. “Understanding Mechanisms in the Social

& Investment 2 (3–4): 318–337.

M.C.R. DE CARVALHO FERREIRA ET AL.

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FINANCE & INVESTMENT

M.C.R. DE CARVALHO FERREIRA ET AL.

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FINANCE & INVESTMENT

M.C.R. DE CARVALHO FERREIRA ET AL.

29 Call for paper on climate and culture.

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE FINANCE & INVESTMENT

M.C.R. DE CARVALHO FERREIRA ET AL.