Loading…
Evaluating Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria and Green Finance Investment Strategies Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy WASPAS
The evaluation and prioritization of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are critical for green finance investment strategies. However, ESG criteria are complex and varied concepts that call for a systematic and reliable ranking system to handle ambiguity and uncertainty in decision-...
Saved in:
Published in: | Sustainability 2023-04, Vol.15 (8), p.6786 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 6786 |
container_title | Sustainability |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Meng, Xiaokai Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad |
description | The evaluation and prioritization of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are critical for green finance investment strategies. However, ESG criteria are complex and varied concepts that call for a systematic and reliable ranking system to handle ambiguity and uncertainty in decision-makers’ preferences and assessments. The objective of this study was to examine and prioritize environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors and investment strategies for the development of green finance. Although ESG criteria have gained importance recently, some research gaps still need to be filled. For this purpose, evaluating ESG criteria and integrating them with green finance investment strategies is imperative. This study employed the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method to assess and rank ESG criteria and sub-criteria and the fuzzy weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) method to assess and prioritize the key investment strategies for the development of green finance. According to the fuzzy AHP findings, governance and social factors are secondary to environmental considerations in the creation of green finance. Green bonds, ESG integration, and renewable energy funds are essential to green finance methods, according to the fuzzy WASPAS data. This research provides information on creating sustainable and ethical investment strategies for green finance and successfully including ESG factors in investment decision-making processes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/su15086786 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2806592792</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A747540495</galeid><sourcerecordid>A747540495</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkd9LwzAQx4soOKYv_gUFnxQ306ZN2scy9gsEh1V8LGd7GRldOpN06B79y02toLt7uNzd53vkOM-7CsiY0pTcmzaIScJ4wk68QUh4MApITE7_vc-9S2M2xBmlQRqwgfc13UPdgpVq7U_VXupGbVFZqO_8vCllF0FV_rzZo1agSvQnWlrUEvq6RlT-TPatpdqjsZ3ez60Gi2uJxn8x3fBZezh8-tli9aPrs9csX2X5hXcmoDZ4-RuH3sts-jxZjB4e58tJ9jAqKUvsSPAoxIBDBJDGQJARKFklsHoTqQAeMZKEFML0DQknoowxgkSEjLCKUmRA6dC77ufudPPeuo8Wm6Z1S9WmCBPC4jTkaeiocU-tocZCKtG4TUrnFW5l2SgU0tUzHvE4IlEaO8HNkcAxFj_sGlpjimX-dMze9mypG2M0imKn5Rb0ZxGQorth8XdD-g0Tao3v</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2806592792</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria and Green Finance Investment Strategies Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy WASPAS</title><source>ProQuest - Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>Coronavirus Research Database</source><creator>Meng, Xiaokai ; Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</creator><creatorcontrib>Meng, Xiaokai ; Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</creatorcontrib><description>The evaluation and prioritization of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are critical for green finance investment strategies. However, ESG criteria are complex and varied concepts that call for a systematic and reliable ranking system to handle ambiguity and uncertainty in decision-makers’ preferences and assessments. The objective of this study was to examine and prioritize environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors and investment strategies for the development of green finance. Although ESG criteria have gained importance recently, some research gaps still need to be filled. For this purpose, evaluating ESG criteria and integrating them with green finance investment strategies is imperative. This study employed the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method to assess and rank ESG criteria and sub-criteria and the fuzzy weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) method to assess and prioritize the key investment strategies for the development of green finance. According to the fuzzy AHP findings, governance and social factors are secondary to environmental considerations in the creation of green finance. Green bonds, ESG integration, and renewable energy funds are essential to green finance methods, according to the fuzzy WASPAS data. This research provides information on creating sustainable and ethical investment strategies for green finance and successfully including ESG factors in investment decision-making processes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su15086786</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Banking industry ; Business ; Carbon ; Climate change ; Corporate governance ; Corporate social responsibility ; Corporate sustainability ; Criteria ; Decision making ; Environmental policy ; Evaluation ; Financial institutions ; Fuzzy algorithms ; Fuzzy logic ; Fuzzy systems ; International finance ; Investment advisors ; Investment policy ; Investments ; Literature reviews ; Management ; Performance evaluation ; Rankings ; Social aspects ; Social factors ; Socially responsible investments ; Sustainability ; Sustainable development</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2023-04, Vol.15 (8), p.6786</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7296-2052</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2806592792/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2806592792?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,25731,27901,27902,36989,38493,43871,44566,74155,74869</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Meng, Xiaokai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria and Green Finance Investment Strategies Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy WASPAS</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>The evaluation and prioritization of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are critical for green finance investment strategies. However, ESG criteria are complex and varied concepts that call for a systematic and reliable ranking system to handle ambiguity and uncertainty in decision-makers’ preferences and assessments. The objective of this study was to examine and prioritize environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors and investment strategies for the development of green finance. Although ESG criteria have gained importance recently, some research gaps still need to be filled. For this purpose, evaluating ESG criteria and integrating them with green finance investment strategies is imperative. This study employed the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method to assess and rank ESG criteria and sub-criteria and the fuzzy weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) method to assess and prioritize the key investment strategies for the development of green finance. According to the fuzzy AHP findings, governance and social factors are secondary to environmental considerations in the creation of green finance. Green bonds, ESG integration, and renewable energy funds are essential to green finance methods, according to the fuzzy WASPAS data. This research provides information on creating sustainable and ethical investment strategies for green finance and successfully including ESG factors in investment decision-making processes.</description><subject>Banking industry</subject><subject>Business</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Corporate governance</subject><subject>Corporate social responsibility</subject><subject>Corporate sustainability</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Financial institutions</subject><subject>Fuzzy algorithms</subject><subject>Fuzzy logic</subject><subject>Fuzzy systems</subject><subject>International finance</subject><subject>Investment advisors</subject><subject>Investment policy</subject><subject>Investments</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Rankings</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Social factors</subject><subject>Socially responsible investments</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>COVID</sourceid><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkd9LwzAQx4soOKYv_gUFnxQ306ZN2scy9gsEh1V8LGd7GRldOpN06B79y02toLt7uNzd53vkOM-7CsiY0pTcmzaIScJ4wk68QUh4MApITE7_vc-9S2M2xBmlQRqwgfc13UPdgpVq7U_VXupGbVFZqO_8vCllF0FV_rzZo1agSvQnWlrUEvq6RlT-TPatpdqjsZ3ez60Gi2uJxn8x3fBZezh8-tli9aPrs9csX2X5hXcmoDZ4-RuH3sts-jxZjB4e58tJ9jAqKUvsSPAoxIBDBJDGQJARKFklsHoTqQAeMZKEFML0DQknoowxgkSEjLCKUmRA6dC77ufudPPeuo8Wm6Z1S9WmCBPC4jTkaeiocU-tocZCKtG4TUrnFW5l2SgU0tUzHvE4IlEaO8HNkcAxFj_sGlpjimX-dMze9mypG2M0imKn5Rb0ZxGQorth8XdD-g0Tao3v</recordid><startdate>20230401</startdate><enddate>20230401</enddate><creator>Meng, Xiaokai</creator><creator>Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>COVID</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7296-2052</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230401</creationdate><title>Evaluating Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria and Green Finance Investment Strategies Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy WASPAS</title><author>Meng, Xiaokai ; Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Banking industry</topic><topic>Business</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Corporate governance</topic><topic>Corporate social responsibility</topic><topic>Corporate sustainability</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Financial institutions</topic><topic>Fuzzy algorithms</topic><topic>Fuzzy logic</topic><topic>Fuzzy systems</topic><topic>International finance</topic><topic>Investment advisors</topic><topic>Investment policy</topic><topic>Investments</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Rankings</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Social factors</topic><topic>Socially responsible investments</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Meng, Xiaokai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Coronavirus Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest - Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Meng, Xiaokai</au><au>Shaikh, Ghulam Muhammad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria and Green Finance Investment Strategies Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy WASPAS</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2023-04-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>6786</spage><pages>6786-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>The evaluation and prioritization of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are critical for green finance investment strategies. However, ESG criteria are complex and varied concepts that call for a systematic and reliable ranking system to handle ambiguity and uncertainty in decision-makers’ preferences and assessments. The objective of this study was to examine and prioritize environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors and investment strategies for the development of green finance. Although ESG criteria have gained importance recently, some research gaps still need to be filled. For this purpose, evaluating ESG criteria and integrating them with green finance investment strategies is imperative. This study employed the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method to assess and rank ESG criteria and sub-criteria and the fuzzy weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) method to assess and prioritize the key investment strategies for the development of green finance. According to the fuzzy AHP findings, governance and social factors are secondary to environmental considerations in the creation of green finance. Green bonds, ESG integration, and renewable energy funds are essential to green finance methods, according to the fuzzy WASPAS data. This research provides information on creating sustainable and ethical investment strategies for green finance and successfully including ESG factors in investment decision-making processes.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su15086786</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7296-2052</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2071-1050 |
ispartof | Sustainability, 2023-04, Vol.15 (8), p.6786 |
issn | 2071-1050 2071-1050 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2806592792 |
source | ProQuest - Publicly Available Content Database; Coronavirus Research Database |
subjects | Banking industry Business Carbon Climate change Corporate governance Corporate social responsibility Corporate sustainability Criteria Decision making Environmental policy Evaluation Financial institutions Fuzzy algorithms Fuzzy logic Fuzzy systems International finance Investment advisors Investment policy Investments Literature reviews Management Performance evaluation Rankings Social aspects Social factors Socially responsible investments Sustainability Sustainable development |
title | Evaluating Environmental, Social, and Governance Criteria and Green Finance Investment Strategies Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy WASPAS |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T06%3A54%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating%20Environmental,%20Social,%20and%20Governance%20Criteria%20and%20Green%20Finance%20Investment%20Strategies%20Using%20Fuzzy%20AHP%20and%20Fuzzy%20WASPAS&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Meng,%20Xiaokai&rft.date=2023-04-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=6786&rft.pages=6786-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su15086786&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA747540495%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-f742e17a4aa95a0e60ac6dfedbf9fa7460823a29be070fc5e4a8f2606d33e6a33%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2806592792&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A747540495&rfr_iscdi=true |