1. Introduction

1.1. Sustainability Development

The concept of a sustainable development has emerged as a solution to the ever-degrading situation of the economy at large and making both ends meet. With the application of Sustainable development, an effective model for development is created to reduce the adverse impacts on the climate and emission of greenhouse gases (Panjaitan & Penebar, 2015). The concept of 'sustainability' after years of understanding and propositions was finally named in 1987 by the Brundtland Commission as:

'a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’

Brundtland Commission, 1987

It can better be considered as a concept where efforts are made to provide a better standard of living to humans without compromising on nature and its resources or posing any threats to environment resulting into extinction of species and unfavourable changes in environment due to excessive air and water pollution or deforestation (Benaim & Raftis, 2008; Browning & Rigolon, 2019). Over a period of time, as the concept of sustainable development evolved and became familiar with concerned parties around the world, three dimensions of sustainability resulted as three pillars of sustainable development: Environmental, Social and Economic development (Elkington, 1994; Rogers et al., 2008). For ensuring the overall sustainable development of the planet, a mutual balance between these three pillars is essential. Thus, John Elkington (1994) came with a concept of 'Triple Bottom Line' which is a framework for equilibrium sustainability among the three dimensions. Triple Bottom Line depicts an inter-related and dependent correlation of all the dimensions of sustainability. When present in the global world in a balanced order, it can be referred to a 'Sustainabilized World'.

The industrial sector has a significant role in the technological and economic development with serving the society and protecting environment. These responsibilities are precisely referred to as Economic, Social and Governance (ESG) Goals. The UN Global Compact had introduced a new initiative 'Who Cares Wins" which brought the term 'ESG' into practice in June 2004 with the idea of brimming a correlation between environmental, social and governance factors (Nizam et al., 2019). United Nations Sustainable Stock Exchange has asked the listed companies all around the world to provide their environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices and the influence of the same on their businesses by the year 2030 (Sustainable Stock exchange, 2015). Many studies have been performed on ESG goals which suggest that investments made on the basis of ESG present a better approach towards sustainability that is a step forward than only responsible investments (RI) ( Keefe, 2011; Viederman, 2009). As per the statistics of the year 2016, different nations like Japan and China, USA, UK and India had only 12%, 14%, 20% and 30% of 'green instruments' included in the annual amount of bank loans lending (Arkhipova, 2017). Many studies have expressed the need and benefit of reporting of the ESG practices of business houses as it will bring more transparent disclosures to the existing relationship between the ESG factors and their financial impacts (Adams, 2017). With the adverse impacts on the society and environment, the economic development gets hindered and thus, creates a stumbling block for the overall development of a nation (Luo & Wu, 2016; Raberto et al., 2019). Thus, there is a need for re-configuration of the financial sector to achieve the goals of sustainable development.

Figure 1. Triple Bottom Line Framework Source: Created based on Elkington, 1994; Porter & Van der Linde, 1995; OECD, 2000; Dréo, 2006; Brooks 2013.

Figure 1. Triple Bottom Line Framework Source: Created based on Elkington, 1994; Porter & Van der Linde, 1995; OECD, 2000; Dréo, 2006; Brooks 2013.

The practice of introducing ecological initiatives in businesses tend to be the de-growth initiatives which have become necessary in present time to transform the society in reaction to the increasing issues of ecological imbalances, environment degradation, depletion of resources, debt crisis and capitalization problems (Agyeman et al., 2003). However, critics believe that it is only an attempt to bring the economy and environment together and bringing a reconciliation between generating growth through capital formation without environmental degradation and resource depletion (Brand, 2012; Jackson & Victor, 2011).

Figure 2. Country Wise CO2 Emissions, 2020 Source: 2020 Union of Concerned Scientists Data: Earth Systems Science Data 11, 1783-1838, 2019.

Figure 2. Country Wise CO2 Emissions, 2020 Source: 2020 Union of Concerned Scientists Data: Earth Systems Science Data 11, 1783-1838, 2019.

1.2. Sustainable Finance

“Sustainable finance can be referred as any of the financial institution’s practices supporting and facilitating sustainable development”.

~ (UNEPFI 2015)

Academic research has witnessed a surge in interest and popularity with respect to the field of Sustainable Finance (Carolina Rezende De Carvalho Ferrei et al., 2016; Cunha et al., 2021; Fatemi & Fooladi, 2013; Migliorelli, 2021; Thistlethwaite, 2014). Numerous scholarly investigations have defined the concept of Sustainable Finance within the existing body of academic literature. For instance, Sustainable finance is defined as finance that contributes to sustainable development across three interrelated dimensions: Economic, Environmental, and Social dimension (Ryszawska, 2016). According to (Migliorelli, 2021) Sustainable Finance can be defined as a form of financial support that is directed towards sectors or activities that actively contribute to the attainment of one or more of the key sustainability dimensions. Based on (Ozili, 2021) the concept of Sustainable Finance comprises the integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors into investment decision-making within the field of finance. (Sommer 2020), defines sustainable finance can be defined as the process of mobilising and allocating capital in order to facilitate the transition towards a more sustainable economy.

Sustainable finance is a correlation of ESG factors; environment, Social and Governance to have a long-term agenda to integrate the performances of financial agendas with the performance of social and environmental agendas (Keefe, 2011; Soppe, 2009). Contrary the general social welfare idea of 'social impact investment', it is strategic in nature with the objective of funding projects that not only bring profits but also provide value to society (Bayandina & Voronin, 2015).

Figure 3. Initiatives formulated globally over the years Source: Author's Creation.

Figure 3. Initiatives formulated globally over the years Source: Author's Creation.

1.3. Current Scenario of Green Financing in the Global World

Human beings have infected their own world by making investments into carbon intensive products and practises. The subsequent impact of such practises has been disturbing and are expected to go worse in future, if reverse technique is not adopted. It is expected that with the current ongoing pace of the use of fossil fuels and release of greenhouse gases, the death count would be 45 to 53 million every year for the time period of 2010 to the year 2030. It is true that there cannot be a clear and definite measure of the harmful impacts of carbon practises, however, in the monetary terms, it has been found that these practices can bring the global gross domestic product GDP to fell at a rate of 1.7% to 3.2% every year from 2010 to 2020, as estimated to be the worst hit on the nations which are least developed and where a higher number of people are under the poverty line (cefc, 2016). The foremost reason for the deteriorating position is the excessive emission of greenhouse gases into the environment and every nation to a less or more extent is responsible for it.

Figure 4. CO2 Emissions from Global fossil fuel combustion and Industrial processes from 1758 to 2020 (in billion metric tons) Source: Statista, 2021.

Figure 4. CO2 Emissions from Global fossil fuel combustion and Industrial processes from 1758 to 2020 (in billion metric tons) Source: Statista, 2021.

The above graph clearly states the uncontrolling and ever increasing level of carbon emissions. It is an alarming situation for governments and international bodies to take action against this threatening situation. Sustainable development goals (SDGs) are the most adopted targets for the nations around the world to obtain and acquire sustainability in their nations. It is not easy to prove that precisely obtain calculative figures of nations on SDGs as varied considerations have been made by the nations according to their approach in achieving these goals (IPCC, 2014).

Table 1. Indian banks and financial Institutions as signatories of International Standards.

Table 1. Indian banks and financial Institutions as signatories of International Standards.

Name of Bank	International and National Standards adopted
YES Bank	Signatory for Principle for Responsible Banking (PRB) United Nations Environment Principles - Finance Initiative (UNEP FI)
Insurance Institute of India	Signatory of Principles for Sustainable Insurance
Indus Environmental Services Pvt. Ltd. Equicap Asia Management Private Limited SBI Funds Management Private Limited ECube Investment Advisors Malabar Investments 3one4 Capital Advisors LLP UTI Asset Management Company Ltd. True North	Signatories of Principles for Responsible Investment
Indian Banking Association	Member of Sustainable Banking Network
Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI)	Member of International Development Finance Club (IDFC)

Source: Created based on Accelerating Green Finance in India: Definition and Beyond, CPI Discussion Brief, June, 2020.

2. Literature Review and Development of Hypothesis

The phases are elaborated in the figure 5.1 below:

Statement of Purpose

The research has been undertaken with the major purpose of determining the antecedents of green financing practices in the banking sector for sustainable development. In context to this, the study aims to evaluate the factors that affect green financing in the banking sector. Knowing the reasons or the factors affecting, the study further makes an attempt to understand the impact of green financing practices on the performance of the banks. As evident from the literature, there is a lack of literature between green financing practices and performance of banks. Finally, the study proposes to make an in-depth exploration of the difference in the performance of public and private sector banks in adoption of green financing by the banking sector. Thus, this study makes an overall study of the aspects of green financing to explore the concerning issues in green financing in order to support the growth of green practices in banking sector in Punjab.

Sample Selection And Data Sources

The collection is based on two major types of data, that is, primary data and secondary data (Eriksson and Paul, 1997). Primary data is the collection of data at 'first hand' directly from the source of response. It is raw data that does not have any structure for a meaningful interpretation, applied in case of descriptive, exploratory and causal research (Hair et al., 2008). Secondary data, on the other hand, is collected from an already existing source which can be any organization, body or agency. The data is originally collected from other studies and can be used for a research study for any other purpose. For the analysis of the present research, primary data in quantitative manner has been used in accordance with the requirement set for the objectives. For data collection, structured questionnaire has been prepared with inclusion of dichotomous data type and 5-point Likert scale. The responses recorded through Likert scale were indicated with 1 as strongly disagree and 5 is indicated as strongly agree (Likert, 1932). The data has been collected through multistage sampling method. First, Judgmental Sampling has been used to define the banks from which data will be collected. On the basis of the Green Credit Directive, 2016 of the RBI, the study has selected 5 public sector banks and 5 private sector banks based on the asset value of the banks. The study undertakes only 10 public and private banks. After selecting the banks, the study has applied quota sampling technique. Under the quota sampling technique, the study has divided all the branches in Punjab on the basis of region. The study, then, selected the branches randomly from the list of branches in every region. Again, in the branches, the data has been collected from the employees of the bank through judgement sampling. The employees engaged in credit lending as per their job role were selected for filling the questionnaire. The whole population is divided into 3 sections. Punjab can be divided into 3 regions ie. Majha, Malwa and Doaba. The number of branches of banks from different districts have been considered and almost equal data has been collected from all the regions. Further, in the region, the data is collected through convenience sampling as it is collected from the branches visited through the districts. It is found that there are 390 branches of Axis Bank, 217 branches of Bank of Baroda, 165 branches of Bank of India, 309 branches of Canara Bank, 1210 branches of Punjab National Bank, 602 branches of HDFC Bank, 285 branches of ICICI Bank, 125 branches of IndusInd Bank, 135 branches of Kotak Mahindra Bank, 1200 branches of SBI Bank in Punjab (Prokerela.com). There is scarce literature available on the related topic of the study in India and thus, the dimensions of the study are derived from the literature of the studies performed globally.

A small survey was conducted before the collection of the whole data for pre-testing the reliability and validity of the questionnaire. The pilot study was performed on a data set of 130 collected from the respondents. The reliability values and Cronbach alpha values were found to test the reliability of the research questionnaire. A total of 23 statements have been included in the study for the purpose of analysis, based on the review of existing studies. All 23 items were undertaken for the analysis of the study. First, the reliability analysis for all the statements has been done through IBM SPSS Version 26. The reliability of these 23 statements was found to be 0.883 which is higher than the acceptable limit of 0.7 and more (Kline, 1999). Based on this reliability value, the dataset was found to be feasible to conduct the further analysis. The reliability analysis of all the 23 items as obtained from the software is provided as below:

Table 2. Reliability Statistics.

Table 2. Reliability Statistics.

Cronbach's Alpha	No. of Items
0.883	23

Source: Compiled from IBM SPSS Version 26 Output.

Table 3. Scale Statistics.

Table 3. Scale Statistics.

Mean	Variance	Std. Deviation	N of Items
112.0422	281.359	16.77377	23

Source: (Source: Compiled from IBM SPSS Version 26 Output).

The scale statistics measured for the dataset after the deletion of the items which were not feasible for the study, are reported as stated in the above table. It shows that the Mean value is found to be 112.0422. The Variance for the dataset is 281.359 while the Standard Deviation is 16.77377.

The reliability analysis of all the items individually has been measured and shown in table 3.4, provided below:

Table 4. Reliability Analysis.

Table 4. Reliability Analysis.

Item-Total Statistics	Scale Mean	Scale Variance	Corrected Item - Total Correlation	Cronbach's Alpha
Employee incentive programs are conducted frequently in the bank for environmental suggestions.	109.3052	260.984	0.465	0.879
My bank promotes environmental oriented enterprises through special grants.	109.5785	253.316	0.608	0.875
My bank promotes environmental oriented enterprises through loans.	109.2631	261.388	0.509	0.878
My bank promotes environmental oriented enterprises through guidance.	109.1032	258.829	0.549	0.877
I believe my bank is donating its part profits to green growth organizations.	109.1817	256.955	0.564	0.876
Bank offers donations to credit cardholders participating in green activities	109.5785	257.799	0.534	0.877
Bank offers discounts to credit cardholders participating in green activities	109.1977	259.128	0.543	0.877
Bank offers mileage accruals to credit cardholders participating in green activities	109.1613	257.355	0.572	0.876
I believe my bank offers insurances at discounted fee to the customers involving in eco-friendly activities	109.3052	260.044	0.525	0.877
My bank provides increased investments into fire burnt brick manufacturing firms which can withstand high temperatures, making them sustainable	109.1788	260.493	0.526	0.878
The investment in green brick manufacturing businesses to build green infrastructure is increasing in the bank	109.1788	257.326	0.562	0.877
In the bank, more financing is being provided for projects enhancing green establishments/ buildings	109.2791	256.947	0.607	0.876
Extending loans to green marketing and other green practices has increased in my bank	109.1468	256.661	0.611	0.876
Green practices significantly reduce energy consumption in our bank.	107.8765	275.41	0.172	0.884
Green practices significantly reduce carbon emission in our bank.	107.8881	273.75	0.216	0.883
My bank is improving knowledge and understanding of staff on environmental protection, energy saving, etc.	107.8837	275	0.17	0.884
Green practices have positive effect on the image of our bank.	108.016	272.54	0.232	0.883
Green practices of bank result in better relationship between community and stake holders.	108.0131	272.147	0.24	0.883
Green practices result in increased compliance with applicable social laws and regulations.	108.0174	270.981	0.279	0.882
Green practices significantly improve revenue of our bank.	107.9084	275.487	0.171	0.884
Green practices significantly improve market share of our bank.	108.0814	274.5	0.187	0.884
Green practices highly decrease operational expenditure of our bank.	107.9927	274.022	0.215	0.883
Green practices improve resource management efficiency in our bank.	107.9913	274.044	0.193	0.884

For further analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted. Items with factor loadings greater than 0.6 were considered. However, on applying exploratory factor analysis, few of the factors were not having required factor loading and not forming any factors and thus, were deleted. After deleting the inappropriate items from the data, 23 items were found acceptable. For the first variable related to green financing practices, 13 items were retained. While for the sustainability performance of banks, 10 items were accepted. The reliability analysis for these items was again performed through SPSS. The reliability for the 23 items was found to be 0.883. The reliability of the scale was found to be feasible which is higher than 0.7 acceptable level. Based on the reliability analysis, it can be stated that the data is suitable for conducting the further analysis.

Universe Of The Study And Sample Design

The questionnaire is framed and distributed among the employees of banks and responses were collected. The study is focused on the banking sector of Punjab. The study considers both public sector and private sector banks. The population of the study are the employees working at all levels of banks in Punjab. The data was collected from a total of 688 respondents.

For the collection of primary data, 5 banks from each category (public and private banks) have been undertaken. The banks have been selected on the basis of asset value of the banks. The top five private banks selected, based on asset value include: HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Axis Bank, Kotak Mahindra and IndusInd Bank. The top five public banks selected, based on asset value include: SBI Bank, Bank of Baroda, Punjab National Bank (PNB), Canara Bank and Bank of India. To accomplish the objectives of the study, the data has been collected from the employees of the banks of Punjab around all the three regions. These three regions of Punjab include: Majha, Malwa and Doaba. Though a total of 900 questionnaires were distributed, 688 responses were retained for the study with a response rate of 76.44%.

3. Research Question and Theoretical Framework of the Study

• What are the key determinants of Green Financing Practices (GFP) within the banking sector?
• How does Green Finance Practices (GFP) influence the Sustainability Performance of Banks (SPB)?

Figure 5. Theoretical Framework: Green Finance Assessment Model of Banks (Source: Author’s Creation).

Figure 5. Theoretical Framework: Green Finance Assessment Model of Banks (Source: Author’s Creation).

Table 5. Determinants of Green Financing Practices Identified.

Table 6. Determinants of Environment Performance of Banks Identified.

Table 7. Determinants of Social Performance of Banks Identified.

Table 8. Determinants of Economic Performance of Banks Identified.

Table 9. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Barlett's Test.

Table 10. Factor Naming, Variance Explained and Eigenvalue.

4. Factor Loadings

Table 11. Rotated Component Matrix.

The Measurement Model in SEM is created to formulate the connection between observed variables. A measurement model has been constructed below in order to measure the relationship with the observed variables. The first latent variable is GFP (Green Financing Practices) representing 13 items; GFP1, GFP2, GFP3, GFP4, GFP5, GFP6, GFP7, GFP8, GFP9, GFP10, GFP11, GFP12, GFP13. Further, ENVPB (Environment Performance of Banks) is the second latent variable having 3 observed items, namely; ENVPB1, ENVPB2, ENVPB3. SOCPB (Social Performance of Banks) is the third latent variable with 3 items; SOCPB1, SOCPB2, SOCPB3. Next, ECOPB (Economic Performance of Banks) is the fourth latent variable having 4 items; ECOPB1, ECOPB2, ECOPB3, ECOPB4. Various studies have measured the impact of green financing; however, studies have been considering the impacts on environment, social and economic performance of banks individually. If the impact of the 3 aspects is found to be significant, the overall impact of green financing is considered significant on sustainability performance of banks. However, there has been contraction in this approach as some studies propose that environment, social and economic aspects together form sustainability and thus, these 3 aspects should be considered as a second-order variable under sustainability performance of the banks (Zhang et al., 2022). The study, first, identifies the impact on green financing practices (GFP) individually on environment, social and economic performance and then, measures the impact through second-order approach in order to accept, reject, or strengthen the contradictory assertions. The measurement model has been created as shown below in the figure 4.1:

Table 12. Model fit estimation.

5. Testing the Hypothesis & Findings of the Study

6. Conclusions

References

1. Adams, C.A. The Sustainable Development Goals, integrated thinking and the integrated report. Integrated Reporting (IR) 2017, 1–52. [Google Scholar]
2. Adams, C.A. , & Abhayawansa, S. Connecting the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing and calls for ‘harmonisation’of sustainability reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2022, 82, 102309. [Google Scholar]
3. Adopted, I.P.C.C. Climate change 2014 synthesis report. IPCC: Geneva, Szwitzerland 2014, 1059-1072.
4. Agyeman, J. , Bullard, R.D., & Evans, B. (Eds.). (2003). Just sustainabilities: Development in an unequal world. MIT press.
5. Arkhipov, A. , Arkhipova, N., & Karminsky, A. (2021). Peculiarities and Trends of Banking Systems Development. In Risk Assessment and Financial Regulation in Emerging Markets' Banking: Trends and Prospects (pp. 3-31). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
6. Arkhipova, V. " Green Finance" as Recipe for Solving Global Problems. HSE economic journal 2017, 21, 312–332. [Google Scholar]
7. Bassanini, A. , Scarpetta, S., & Visco, I. (2000). Knowledge technology and economic growth: Recent evidence from OECD countries. National Bank of Belgium Working Paper, (6).
8. Bayandina, V.A. , & Voronin, D. M. Methods of analysis of investment projects for the purposes of the Bank project financing. Perm University Bulletin 2015, 1, 57–63. [Google Scholar]
9. Benaim, A. , Collins, A., & Raftis, L. (2008). Social dimension of sustainable development: Guidance and application.
10. Bouma, J. , Jeucken, M., & Klinkers, L. (2001). The greening of finance.
11. Brand, U. Green economy–the next oxymoron? No lessons learned from failures of implementing sustainable development. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 2012, 21, 28–32. [Google Scholar]
12. Browning, M.H. , & Rigolon, A. School green space and its impact on academic performance: A systematic literature review. International journal of environmental research and public health 2019, 16, 429. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
13. Carolina Rezende De Carvalho Ferrei, M. , Amorim Sobreiro, V. , Kimura, H., & Luiz De Moraes Barboza, F. A systematic review of literature about finance and sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2016, 6, Article 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Carter, C.R. , & Rogers, D. S. A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International journal of physical distribution & logistics management 2008, 38, 360–387. [Google Scholar]
15. Carter, C.R. , & Rogers, D. S. A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International journal of physical distribution & logistics management 2008, 38, 360–387. [Google Scholar]
16. Cunha, F.A. F. D. S. , Meira, E. , & Orsato, R.J. Sustainable finance and investment: Review and research agenda. Business Strategy and the Environment 2021, 30, 3821–3838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Dréo, J. File: Sustainable development. svg. Retrieved May 2006, 1, 2013. [Google Scholar]
18. Elkington, J. Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California management review 1994, 36, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Fatemi, A.M. , & Fooladi, I. J. Sustainable finance: A new paradigm. Global Finance Journal 2013, 24, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Hassan, R. , Marimuthu, M. , & Kaur Johl, S. Diversity, corporate governance and implication on firm financial performance. Diversity, Corporate Governance and Implication on Firm Financial Performance 2015, 7, 28–35. [Google Scholar]
21. Ivory, S.B. , & Brooks, S. B. Managing corporate sustainability with a paradoxical lens: Lessons from strategic agility. Journal of business ethics 2018, 148, 347–361. [Google Scholar]
22. Jackson, T. , & Victor, P. Productivity and work in the ‘green economy’: Some theoretical reflections and empirical tests. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2011, 1, 101–108. [Google Scholar]
23. Jackson, T. , & Victor, P. Productivity and work in the ‘green economy’: Some theoretical reflections and empirical tests. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2011, 1, 101–108. [Google Scholar]
24. Keefe, J.F. (2011). Gender Equality as an Investment Concept. Portsmouth: Pax World Investments.
25. Kennedy, I. Sample size determination in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimates. British Journal of Contemporary Education 2022, 2, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Meier, G.M. Biography of a subject: An evolution of development economics. Oxford University Press.
27. Migliorelli, M. (2021). What Do We Mean by Sustainable Finance? Assessing Existing Frameworks and Policy Risks. Sustainability 2004, 13, 975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Monasterolo, I. , & Raberto, M. The impact of phasing out fossil fuel subsidies on the low-carbon transition. Energy Policy 2019, 124, 355–370. [Google Scholar]
29. Nizam, E. , Ng, A. , Dewandaru, G., Nagayev, R., & Nkoba, M.A. The impact of social and environmental sustainability on financial performance: A global analysis of the banking sector. Journal of Multinational Financial Management 2019, 49, 35–53. [Google Scholar]
30. Öner Kaya, E. The effects of firm-specific factors on the profitability of non-life insurance companies in Turkey. International Journal of Financial Studies 2015, 3, 510–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Ongore, V.O. , & Kusa, G. B. Determinants of financial performance of commercial banks in Kenya. International journal of economics and financial issues 2013, 3, 237–252. [Google Scholar]
32. Özçelik, F. , & AVCI ÖZTÜRK, B. (2014). Evaluation of Banks' Sustainability Performance in Turkey with Grey Relational Analysis. Journal of Accounting & Finance/Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (63).
33. Ozili, P.K. (2021). Making Sustainable Finance Sustainable. SSRN Electronic Journal. [CrossRef]
34. Panjaitan, L.T. , Sos, S., & MT, C. (2015). Bank Ramah Lingkungan. Penebar Swadaya Grup.
35. Porter, M.E. , & Linde, C. V. D. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of economic perspectives 1995, 9, 97–118. [Google Scholar]
36. Raberto, M. , Ozel, B. , Ponta, L., Teglio, A., & Cincotti, S. From financial instability to green finance: The role of banking and credit market regulation in the Eurace model. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 2019, 29, 429–465. [Google Scholar]
37. Roca, L.C. , & Searcy, C. An analysis of indicators disclosed in corporate sustainability reports. Journal of cleaner production 2012, 20, 103–118. [Google Scholar]
38. Ryszawska, B. Sustainability transition needs sustainable finance. Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting 2016, 5, 185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Seers, D. A Step towards a Political Economy of Development (Illustrated by the case of Trinidad/Tobago). Social and Economic Studies 1969, 217–253. [Google Scholar]
40. Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities. OUP Catalogue.
41. Soppe, A. Sustainable finance as a connection between corporate social responsibility and social responsible investing. Indian School of Business WP Indian Management Research Journal 2009, 1, 13–23. [Google Scholar]
42. Sun, W. , Louche, C., & Pérez, R. (2011). Finance and sustainability: Exploring the reality we are making. In Finance and sustainability: Towards a new paradigm? A post-crisis agenda (Vol. 2, pp. 3–15). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
43. Swan, W. Financing sustainable development What can we learn from the Australian experience of reform? Asia-Pacific Development Journal 2016, 22, 135–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
44. Thistlethwaite, J. Private governance and sustainable finance. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 2014, 4, 61–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
45. Todaro, M.P. , & Smith, S.C. (2012). Economic development 11th edition.
46. Viederman, S. (2009). The semantics of responsible investing. FA Green, September.
47. WCED, S.W. S. World commission on environment and development. Our common future 1987, 17, 1–91. [Google Scholar]
48. Zheng, G.-W. , Siddik, A. B., Masukujjaman, M., Fatema, N., & Alam, S.S. Green Finance Development in Bangladesh: The Role of Private Commercial Banks (PCBs). Sustainability 2021, 13, 795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]