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

Avis Devine, Andrew Sanderford & Chongyu Wang (2024). "Sustainability and Private Equity Real Estate Returns", The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 68, 161–18.

View Paper

Abstract This paper explores private equity real estate fund performance and voluntary environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures. Using data from the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF), it examines the relationship between performance for funds in the Open Ended Diversified Core Equity (ODCE) Index and reporting to the Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB), a platform for disclosure about fund/firm-level ESG strategies and performance. The empirical analyses suggest four conclusions. First, there has been substantial adoption of and reporting to GRESB in the last 5 years, suggesting that reporting to GRESB is a form of table stakes for ODCE members. Second, GRESB participation and performance are both significant predictors of cross-sectional fund returns. Third, GRESB participation and performance are associated with the price appreciation component of fund total returns but not with the income component. Fourth, the relationships between fund returns and GRESB participation and scores are independent of local economic conditions. These results close an important gap in the literature about private equity real estate fund performance and ESG/climate change mitigation efforts in commercial real estate markets.

Panpan Fu, Yi-Shuai Ren, Yonggang Tian, Seema Wati Narayan, Olaf Weber (2024). "Reexamining the Relationship Between ESG and Firm Performance: Evidence from the Role of Buddhism", Borsa Istanbul Review, 24(1), 47-60.

Open Access Download

Abstract This study examines the relationship between environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) and firm performance, with a focus on the impact of Buddhism. Our findings suggest the following: (1) The local Buddhism environment weakens the positive relationship between ESG and firm performance, indicating that ESG practices motivated by internal altruism may not contribute to firm performance. (2) The moderating effect of Buddhism is more pronounced in firms with stronger alignment or monitoring, in which ESG practices are more likely to be motivated by the desire for profitability, i.e., privately owned firms and those with higher institutional ownership and media attention. (3) The attenuating effect of Buddhism's moderating role is observed in two categories of firms: those with heightened exposure to ESG-related risks and those operating in recent eras with a greater focus on ESG, which are more likely to benefit from ESG practices with greater external utility.

Avis Devine, Nils Kok and Chongyu Wang (2023). "Sustainability Disclosure and Financial Performance: The Case of Private and Public Real Estate", The Journal of Portfolio Management, Real Estate, 49(10), 119 – 133.

View Paper

Abstract The built environment carries an outsized environmental footprint, and aspects like energy consumption impact the bottom line of commercial real estate (CRE) investors. A large portion of commercial real estate assets are owned and operated by both private equity real estate (PERE) funds and listed property companies (REITs). Therefore, the extent to which these public and private entities integrate sustainability considerations into their investment and operating decisions may impact both the environmental and financial performance for the organizations as well as the environmental performance of the broader market. We provide a comprehensive analysis comparing the sustainability performance of REITs and PERE firms/funds, as well as an analysis of the relationship between sustainability and the financial performance of REITs. Results indicate that private and public CRE entities now seem on par in their integration of sustainability into firm management and policies. However, the performance aspect of sustainability is stronger for REITs. Examining REIT financial performance, results indicate that higher levels of sustainability disclosure are associated with enhanced operating performance and firm valuation, as well as a higher propensity for holding environmentally-certified buildings.

Pashang, S., & Weber, O. (2023). "AI for Sustainable Finance: Governance Mechanisms for Institutional and Societal Approaches", The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence for the Sustainable Development Goals, 203-229.

View Paper

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) for sustainable finance has been increasingly employed over the past several years to address the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Two major approaches have emerged: institutional and societal AI for sustainable finance. Broadly described, institutional AI for sustainable finance is used for activities such as environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, while societal AI for sustainable finance is used to support underbanked and unbanked individuals through financial inclusion initiatives. Despite the growing reliance on such digital tools, particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, governance mechanisms and regulatory frameworks remain fragmented and underutilized or inhibit progress toward the 17 UN SDGs. While major proposals and reports were released by standard-setting and regulatory bodies leading up to 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic indeed caused major setbacks to adoption and implementation, which in turn have also resulted in inconclusive data and lessons learned. As the global community begins to navigate out of the pandemic, policy makers, through multilateral and cross-sector agreements, are looking to renew governance mechanisms that mitigate new and pre-existing risks while cultivating sustainability and facilitating innovation.