Mapping sustainable finance (dis)agreements

Diverse actors, ranging from traditional financial entities to social private equity firms and philanthropists, bring disparate viewpoints to sustainable finance. The lack of common understanding raises critical questions about coherence and justification of sustainable finance practices. The primary goal of this study is to map experts’ divergent perspectives on sustainable finance and the points of agreement and disagreement on the matter.

Using Q-methodology with an original cohort of 85 experts in sustainable finance, we delineate three coexisting perspectives within sustainable finance: one emphasising urgency, another highlighting the business imperative, and a third emphasising engagement and advocacy. Disagreements gravitate around greenwashing claims, poor incentives and the relative importance of financial objectives or sustainability objectives. Agreements, while less common, point to useful negotiable points of convergence. They include the need to explicitly define and deliver positive environmental and social impact, the expected future growth of ESG, the equal importance of E, S, and G factors, the positive role that digitalization can play in developing sustainable finance and the exclusion of the defense sector. By delving into these perspectives, our study aims to highlight the points of convergence as common ground to build the future of sustainable finance.