de Gier, A; Gottlieb, S C; Koch, C and Frederiksen, N (2022) EU taxonomy on sustainable financing: A new paradigm for the building field? In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 38th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2022, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
As part of the effort at making a climate neutral economy, the EU has developed a sustainable finance taxonomy to steer capital flows towards sustainable activities, connecting financial and environmental elements of sustainability in a new way. Here we study how the taxonomy regulation, affects the field of construction. The research builds on institutional theory and empirical material from interviews and annual reports. This is done to establish a broad understanding of the field structure, and how the organisations in the field respond. The taxonomy presents new challenges and barriers. It is concluded that even though the purpose of the regulation is to motivate companies to document their sustainable activities and develop more sustainable businesses, the company responses have so far been diverse, to some extent reluctant and for some even evasive. The taxonomy will change notions of sustainability, but it is likely that it will enter a heterogeneous rather than a uniform direction.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; EU taxonomy; sustainable finance; regulation |
| Index terms: | annual report, institutional theory, interview, construction industry, taxonomy, financing, paradigm, regulation, capital flow |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, data analysis and analytics, business, data collection methods, sociology, political science, industry analysis, education and knowledge transfer |
| Topics: | Governance, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here