Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

 

Search Results

Syed Abul Basher and Perry Sadorsky (2024). "Do Climate Change Risks Affect The Systemic Risk Between The Stocks Of Clean Energy, Electric Vehicles, And Critical Minerals? Analysis Under Changing Market Conditions", Energy Economics, 138, 107832.

View Paper

Abstract This paper analyzes the impact of climate change risks—specifically from natural disasters, global warming, international summits, and U.S. climate policy—on the return connectedness (systemic risk) of a network consisting of the stocks of clean energy, electric vehicles, and critical minerals in bear, bull, and normal market conditions. Employing a quantile vector autoregression (QVAR) approach, we find significant temporal variations in the total connectedness index, with notable spikes during the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war. Total connectedness is higher but less variable under bear and bull market conditions. Concerns about global warming has a positive and significant impact on systemic risk during bear and normal market conditions while international summits have a negative impact during normal market conditions. However, the effects of these climate change risks are small in magnitude. Economic policy uncertainty and stock market volatility have the largest positive impacts on systemic risk under most market conditions. Our results reveal a nonlinear (inverted U-shaped) relationship between variable importance and systemic risk quantile, showing that the impact on connectedness is largest in magnitude under normal market conditions.

Muhammad Abubakr Naeem, Perry Sadorsky, Sitara Karim (2023). "Sailing across climate-friendly bonds and clean energy stocks: An asymmetric analysis with the Gulf Cooperation Council Stock markets", Energy Economics, 126, 106911.

View Paper

Abstract This study endeavors to identify the extreme quantile dependence between clean energy stocks and climate-friendly (or green) bonds with GCC stock markets for the period encompassing September 1, 2014 to September 17, 2021. Employing the cross-quantilogram technique, we report higher dependencies between clean energy stocks and the stocks of United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, whereas moderate to lower dependencies exist between clean energy stocks and the stocks of Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman. Climate-friendly bonds reveal an insignificant correlation with all GCC stocks except the UAE, indicating the diversification benefits of these climate-friendly bonds for GCC stock markets. The recursive cross-quantilogram emphasizes time-varying features where two significant crisis events are spotted as the shale oil crisis and COVID-19 pandemic with a sharp increase in the lower, median, and upper quantiles. Comparing clean energy stocks with climate bonds, clean energy stocks have substantial comovement with GCC stocks while climate bonds have little comovement. Climate friendly bonds are useful for diversifying investments in GCC stocks. Our findings are of particular interest to policymakers, regulators, investors, and portfolio managers who need to understand the relationship between clean energy stocks, green bonds, and GCC stocks.

Henriques, I. and Sadorsky, P. (2018). "Investor Implications of Divesting from Fossil Fuels", Global Finance Journal, 38, 30-44.

View Paper

Abstract There is a growing movement for both individual investors and large institutions to divest from oil companies, and from fossil fuel producers in general. This paper investigates the implications of doing so, by comparing three portfolios: (1) a portfolio that includes fossil fuel producing companies and utilities, (2) a portfolio that replaces fossil fuel producing companies and utilities with clean energy companies, and (3) a portfolio without fossil fuel producing companies, utilities, or clean energy companies. Using a range of measures, we find that portfolios that divest from fossil fuels and utilities and invest in clean energy perform better than those with fossil fuels and utilities. We also find that risk-averse investors would be willing to pay a fee to make this switch, even when trading costs are included.