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

Weber, O. (2016). "Equator Principles Reporting: Factors Influencing the Quality of Reports", International Journal of Corporate Strategy and Social Responsibility, 1(2), 141-160.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract This study analyses the reporting of Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EPFI). The Equator Principles are a voluntary code of conduct, providing guidelines for assessing, managing, and reporting environmental and social impacts in project finance. The objective of the study is: 1) to understand, whether EPFIs follow the Equator Principles reporting guidelines; 2) to assess the quality of the mandatory reports of the EPFIs; 3) to analyse causes for differences in reporting. Because the Equator Principles are a voluntary code of conduct, or a so-called soft law, the research has been based on institutional theory. Our results suggest that though EPFIs follow the reporting guidelines, only about 5% disclose all the information required by the guidelines and consequently achieve the highest score with respect to their reporting quality. Furthermore, differences in reporting quality are mainly caused by the size of the EPFIs. The larger the EPFI with respect to its total assets the higher is the reporting quality. We conclude that further mechanisms, such as standardisation and assurance, are needed to guarantee transparent reporting of environmental and social project risks.