Sustainable investment, often called socially responsible investing (SRI), has seen a remarkable surge in interest over the last few decades. This trend reflects a broader shift among investors towards integrating ESG criteria into their investment decisions. Far from being a niche or purely ethical choice, sustainable investments have demonstrated their potential to deliver competitive returns, challenging traditional notions of investment performance (Mahn, 2016). The discourse around sustainable investment is rich and multifaceted, engaging diverse investor classes, notably retail investors and high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs). This paper delves into the practices and preferences of these two distinct groups, leveraging existing research to underscore both commonalities and divergences in their approach to sustainable investing. By examining the motivations and decision-making processes of retail investors and HNWIs in sustainable investing, this paper aims to provide valuable insights for financial professionals and policymakers seeking to promote sustainable finance further. Understanding the nuances of how different investor classes engage with sustainable investments can help better tailor strategies and products to meet their needs and preferences (Camilleri, 2020).

The Rise of Sustainable Investment

The ascent of sustainable investment can be attributed to a confluence of factors, including heightened awareness of environmental issues, social justice movements, and a growing consensus on the importance of good governance within corporations. Investors increasingly recognise that sustainable investments can mitigate risk and uncover opportunities that traditional financial analysis may overlook (Schmidt & McCann, 2022). A more significant societal shift towards sustainability is the foundation for this change, with investors playing a crucial role in pushing corporate and governmental policies towards more sustainable practices. As sustainable investing continues gaining momentum, companies face increasing pressure to align their practices with environmental and social responsibility standards. The transition towards sustainability is influenced by ethical factors and the prospect of facing financial gains and reliability in response to global issues, including climate change (Pástor et al., 2021).

Retail vs. High Net-Worth Investors in Sustainable Investment

Retail and high-net-worth investors represent two pivotal yet distinct cohorts within the sustainable investment landscape. Retail investors, often characterized by their limited capital, are showing a growing interest in sustainable investing as a means of connecting their portfolios with their personal values and broader societal objectives (Benuzzi et al., 2023). High-net-worth individuals, possessing more significant financial resources and access to sophisticated investment advice, are uniquely positioned to influence market trends and drive innovation in sustainable investment products and strategies. Both retail investors and high-net-worth individuals are crucial in advancing sustainable investment practices and promoting positive social and environmental impacts. Their collective engagement can help drive the mainstream adoption of sustainable investing principles and contribute to the overall growth of the responsible investment market. Uma Reddy (2021) highlights the significant influence that high-net-worth individuals exert in equity markets, including sustainability-related sectors. Their investment decisions can shape market dynamics and catalyse shifts towards more sustainable business practices. Meanwhile, Schmidt and McCann (2022) explore the challenges and opportunities presented by ESG criteria in constructing balanced portfolios, a concern relevant to retail and high-net-worth investors seeking to navigate the complexities of sustainable investment. High-net-worth individuals can drive change in companies by directing their investments towards sustainable practices, influencing market trends, and encouraging corporate responsibility. As ESG criteria become increasingly crucial in investment decisions, retail and high-net-worth investors must carefully consider the long-term effect of their portfolios on sustainability goals (Reddy, 2021; Schmidt & McCann, 2022).

Cognitive Barriers and Opportunities

Despite the growing interest in sustainable investment, cognitive barriers remain, particularly among wealthy private investors. Busch and Paetzold (2014) identify these barriers, suggesting that misconceptions about the performance and impact of sustainable investments can hinder broader engagement. Overcoming these barriers requires targeted education and the development of robust, transparent ESG metrics that can demystify sustainable investment for both retail and high-net-worth individuals. Additionally, providing evidence of the financial benefits of sustainable investing can help dispel myths and encourage more investors to consider incorporating ESG factors into their portfolios. By addressing these cognitive barriers and highlighting the opportunities for financial gain and positive impact, the investment community can work towards a more sustainable future (Busch & Paetzold, 2014); ( Pástor et al., 2021); (Xie et al., 2019).

The role of ESG funds

The presence and reliability of ESG funds within different asset classes represent significant elements that affect the adoption of sustainable investment strategies. Schmidt and McCann (2022) provide an in-depth analysis of ESG challenges in the UK, shedding light on the practical considerations that investors must navigate. Their findings underscore the importance of accessible, high-performing ESG funds in facilitating sustainable investment, particularly for private investors who may lack the resources to conduct extensive due diligence on individual investments. By offering a diverse range of ESG funds that align with different risk profiles and investment goals, asset managers can empower investors to incorporate sustainability into their portfolios effectively. This promotes responsible investing and contributes to the sustainable finance industry's growth and success. Through the provision of transparent information regarding ESG criteria and performance metrics, asset managers facilitate informed decision-making for investors, ensuring alignment with their values and financial objectives (Martiny et al., 2024). This drives demand for sustainable investments and encourages companies to improve their ESG practices to attract more capital. The landscape of sustainable investment is evolving, with retail and high-net-worth investors playing pivotal roles in its growth. As this paper will explore, understanding the practices and preferences of these investor classes is crucial for advancing the field of sustainable investment. By examining existing research, this introduction sets the stage for a comprehensive inquiry into how retail and high-net-worth investors approach sustainable investment, highlighting the challenges and opportunities ahead. By shedding light on the motivations and decision-making ways of these investors, we can identify strategies to engage them in sustainable investment opportunities effectively. This research focuses to provide valuable insights for asset managers and companies looking to align their ESG efforts with investor expectations (Schmidt & McCann, 2022).

Objectives of the study

1. Investigate and compare the sustainable investment approaches and motivations of retail investors (mutual funds and ETFs) and high-net-worth (HNW) investors (strategic, impact-driven investments).
2. Examine the challenges both investor classes face due to the lack of standardized ESG metrics and transparency, and assess the resources and strategies employed by HNW investors to navigate these challenges.
3. Analyse the impact of geographic, economic, and regulatory contexts on the sustainable investment practices of retail and HNW investors, with a focus on local issues for retail investors and global initiatives and regulatory navigation for HNW investors.Top of Form

The methodology for this paper on sustainable investment perspectives, focusing on the sustainable value approach (SVA) and the comparative analysis between retail and high net worth (HNW) investors, is rooted in a qualitative research design. This approach facilitates an in-depth exploration of the nuanced practices, preferences, and decision-making processes associated with sustainable investments among these investor classes. This approach utilises a thorough examination of existing literature, facilitating the collection and integration of knowledge from a diverse array of sources, such as scholarly articles, industry analyses, and case studies. The literature review is structured around the principles of relevance to sustainable investment, emphasising retail and high-net-worth investor practices, as well as contributions to the understanding of the impact of ESG criteria on investment decisions. Critical databases such as Scopus and Web of Science were used to ensure a thorough and wide-ranging collection of pertinent literature. A total of 200 papers were selected based on their relevance, contribution to the field, and citation impact, ensuring a robust foundation for analysis (Yadav et al., 2016; Bashynska et al., 2022).

The study's analytical framework is underpinned by the Sustainable Value Approach (SVA), as proposed by Figge and Hahn (2008), which provides a methodology for assessing the sustainability performance of investments. This approach is instrumental in overcoming the bias often encountered in socially responsible investment research. It enables a focused comparative analysis

of how retail and HNW investors integrate sustainability into their investment decisions. The analysis aims to identify patterns, trends, and divergences in investment strategies, motivations for sustainable investing, challenges encountered, and the influence of regulatory and economic contexts on investment decisions. This methodology ensures an objective and evidence-based exploration of sustainable investment practices, adhering to ethical standards in academic research by accurately representing sources and maintaining an unbiased analytical perspective.

Table 1: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Literature on Sustainable Investment Perspectives

Source: Author

Figure 1: PRISMA framework

Exploring sustainable investment perspectives, focusing on the comparative inquiry into retail and high net worth (HNW) investor practices and preferences, yields several key findings. These insights are drawn from an extensive review of the literature, including seminal works by Chatzitheodorou et al. (2019), Hezam et al. (2023), Plastun et al. (2021), Keenan et al. (2019), Liu et al. (2022), Kouaib (2022), Alkaraan et al. (2023), Tomo and Landi (2016), Kou et al. (2023), Azmat et al. (2022), and others. The findings highlight the nuanced approaches, motivations, and challenges retail and HNW investors face in the sustainable investment landscape. For example, retail investors may prioritise environmental impact, while HNW investors may focus more on financial returns. Additionally, the research underscores the importance of tailored strategies and communication efforts to engage both types of investors in sustainable investing practices effectively.

1. Divergent Approaches to Sustainable Investment

Retail and HNW investors exhibit distinct approaches to sustainable investing. Retail investors focus on mutual funds and ETFs that explicitly incorporate ESG criteria, driven largely by ethical considerations and the desire to contribute to societal and environmental well-being. HNW investors, with access to more sophisticated investment opportunities and advisory services, often engage in direct impact investing, private equity, or venture capital investments in sustainability-focused enterprises, aiming for both financial returns and significant societal or environmental impact. HNW investors can also participate in exclusive sustainable investment opportunities such as green or social impact bonds, which may offer higher potential returns than traditional investments. Additionally, they often seek specialised advisors or wealth managers who can provide tailored strategies and insights into the rapidly evolving field of sustainable investing.

2. Varied Motivations and Preferences

The motivations behind sustainable investment choices vary between retail and HNW investors. While both groups desire to align their investments with their personal or ethical values, HNW investors also exhibit a strategic approach to sustainability, viewing it as essential to risk management and long-term value creation. This strategic approach is less pronounced among retail investors, who may prioritise immediate ethical considerations. Retail investors may be more focused on their investments' social or environmental impact rather than the long-term financial implications. Additionally, HNW investors may have access to more resources and expertise to implement sustainable investment strategies effectively. This resource access can enable HNW investors to engage in more sophisticated sustainability practices, such as impact investing or shareholder advocacy. On the other hand, retail investors may rely more on traditional investment vehicles and may not have the same level of support in implementing sustainable strategies.

3. Challenges in Sustainable Investment

Both investor classes face challenges in sustainable investing, including the lack of standardised ESG metrics and transparency. However, HNW investors may have better resources to overcome these challenges, such as access to private data or bespoke analysis. On the other hand, retail investors often rely on public information, which can be inconsistent or insufficient for making informed investment decisions. Retail investors may also face limitations in terms of financial resources and access to specialised sustainable investment products. Despite these challenges, both investor classes have the opportunity to contribute to positive environmental and social impact through their investment choices.

4. Impact of Geographic and Economic Contexts

The geographic and economic contexts significantly influence sustainable investment practices and preferences. Local or national sustainability issues may influence retail investors, while HNW investors have the capacity and inclination to engage in global sustainability initiatives. This difference underscores the broader investment outlook of HNW investors and their potential to effect change across borders. HNW investors, with their global perspective and resources, are uniquely positioned to drive sustainable practices on a larger scale. By leveraging their financial power and influence, they can play a crucial role in promoting positive environmental and social impact worldwide.

5. Regulatory Landscape and Investment Opportunities

Government regulations play a crucial role in shaping sustainable investment opportunities, with HNW investors being more adept at navigating this landscape due to their resources and access to expert advice. While affected by these regulations, retail investors may find it challenging to adjust their investment strategies in response to changing regulatory environments. However, with the proper guidance and education, retail investors can also capitalise on sustainable investment opportunities and align their portfolios with their values. Additionally, staying informed about regulatory changes and seeking professional advice can help retail investors make informed decisions in this evolving landscape.

6. Cognitive Biases and Heuristics

Cognitive biases and heuristics affect sustainable investment decision-making across both investor classes. However, the impact and management of these biases differ, with HNW investors potentially leveraging professional advice to mitigate their effects. In contrast, retail investors may be more susceptible to these biases due to limited access to comprehensive investment analysis and advice. Therefore, retail investors should be aware of common cognitive biases such as confirmation bias and anchoring when making sustainable investment decisions. Seeking educational resources and actively challenging these biases can help retail investors make more rational and informed choices in their investment portfolios.

7. THE ROLE OF TRANSPARENCY AND DISCLOSURE

Both retail and HNW investors recognise the importance of corporate sustainability disclosure and its impact on investment efficiency. However, HNW investors may emphasise detailed disclosures to inform their investment decisions, reflecting their focus on strategic and impact-driven investments. For example, a retail investor may be biased towards investing in companies marketed as "green" without fully understanding the sustainability practices behind the label. By educating themselves on what makes a company sustainable and challenging their biases, they can make more informed decisions aligning with their values. On the other hand, an HNW investor may dig deeper into corporate sustainability disclosures to assess the long-term impact of their investments, focusing on strategic and impact-driven choices that align with their financial goals and values.

CONCLUSION

The exploration of sustainable investment perspectives through an extensive literature review has illuminated this field's complex and multifaceted nature, particularly when examining the practices and preferences of retail and high-net-worth (HNW) investors. This paper has sought to bridge the gap in understanding between these two distinct investor classes, shedding light on their decision-making processes, investment strategies, and the challenges they face in aligning their portfolios with environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria.

The key findings of this inquiry underscore the diversity in sustainable investment approaches between retail and HNW investors. Retail investors are increasingly drawn to sustainable investments and motivated to align their financial activities with their values and the broader societal good. They tend to favour mutual funds and ETFs that offer clear ESG integration. However, they face challenges related to the lack of standardised metrics and reporting when assessing the sustainability impact of their investments.

HNW investors, on the other hand, exhibit a more strategic and nuanced approach to sustainable investing. With access to more sophisticated investment vehicles and advisory services, they are positioned to engage in impact investing and direct financing of sustainability projects, aiming not only for financial returns but also for significant environmental and social impact. However, they, too, navigate challenges, including cognitive barriers and the need for a deeper understanding of the regulatory and governance frameworks that influence sustainable investment opportunities.

Implications for Practice

The distinctions between retail and HNW investors in sustainable investment practices have significant implications for financial advisors, investment firms, and policymakers. There is a clear need for enhanced transparency and standardisation in ESG reporting to aid all investors in making informed decisions. Furthermore, developing tailored advisory services that cater to each investor class's specific needs and motivations can help bridge the gap between the desire for sustainable investment and the ability to engage in such practices effectively.

For policymakers, the findings highlight the importance of creating supportive regulatory environments encouraging sustainable investment. This includes policies facilitating access to sustainable investment options for retail investors and supporting innovative financing mechanisms for HNW investors looking to fund large-scale sustainability projects.

Future Directions

As sustainable investment evolves, future research should focus on the dynamic interplay between investor behaviour, market developments, and regulatory changes. Longitudinal studies could offer insights into how the preferences and practices of retail and HNW investors adapt over time, particularly in response to global sustainability challenges and technological advancements. Additionally, exploring the role of emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain, in enhancing transparency and efficiency in sustainable investing could provide valuable directions for innovation in this field.

In conclusion, the journey towards a more sustainable and equitable financial system is complex and requires the concerted effort of investors across the spectrum, from retail to HNW individuals. By understanding the unique perspectives and challenges of each investor class, financial advisors, investment firms, and policymakers can better facilitate the transition towards sustainable investment practices that yield financial returns and contribute positively to society and the environment. As this field continues to grow and evolve, it remains an essential area for ongoing research, dialogue, and action. Collaboration among stakeholders is crucial in driving the shift towards sustainable investment practices, as it requires a collective understanding and commitment to long-term goals. By engaging with diverse investors and incorporating their perspectives, the financial industry can work towards creating a more inclusive and impactful system that benefits both present and future generations. 

1. Ahmad, R. (2022). Strategic investment decisions in sustainable finance: The role of high-net-worth individuals. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 12(3), 355-370.
2. Alkaraan, F., Elmarzouky, M., Hussainey, K., & Venkatesh, V. G. (2023). Sustainable strategic investment decision-making practices in UK companies: The influence of governance mechanisms on synergy between industry 4.0 and circular economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 187, 122187.
3. Azmat, F., Jain, A., & Michaux, F. (2022). Strengthening impact integrity in investment decision-making for sustainable development. Sustainability Accounting Management and Policy Journal, 13(1), 55–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-10-2020-0368
4. Bashynska, I., Rudenko, O., & Uvarova, O. (2022). Analysis of sustainable investment perspectives in developed and developing markets. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 35(1), 325-345.
5. Benuzzi, M., Klaser, K., & Bax, K. (2023). Which ESG+F dimension matters most to retail investors? An experimental study on financial decisions and future generations. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 41, 100882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2023.100882
6. Busch, T., & Paetzold, F. (2014). Cognitive barriers to sustainable investing: Misunderstandings and misconceptions. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 4(3), 292-306.
7. Camilleri, M. A. (2020). The rise of socially responsible investing: Literature review on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), 747-759.
8. Charles, A., & Kasilingam, D. (2015). Retail investors' investment behaviour and their preference for mutual funds and ETFs. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 20(4), 257-274.
9. Chatzitheodorou, K., Chatzitheodorou, E., & Kagitci, M. (2019). Exploring sustainable and responsible investment (SRI) perspectives and classifying investors. Sustainable Finance & Investment, 9(4), 215-230.
10. Chen, S., Song, Y., & Gao, P. (2023). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance and financial outcomes: Analyzing the impact of ESG on financial performance. Journal of Environmental Management, 345, 118829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118829
11. Coe, N. M. (2004). The impact of environmental regulations on sustainable development: A comparative analysis. Environment and Planning A, 36(6), 1073-1091.
12. Dong, Y., Xu, X., & Zhang, X. (2016). Sustainability investment under cap-and-trade regulation: The role of corporate governance. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 79, 71-90.
13. Escrig-Olmedo, E., Fernández-Izquierdo, M. Á., Ferrero-Ferrero, I., Rivera-Lirio, J. M., & Muñoz-Torres, M. J. (2017). Methodological approach to integrate ESG preferences into sustainable investment strategies. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(4), 585-604.
14. Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2008). Sustainable value creation: An analysis of the methodology and its application. Journal of Environmental Management, 89(1), 75-84.
15. Folqué, M., Sierra-García, L., & Bellosta, M. J. (2022). Sustainable investment and its contribution to the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Sustainability, 14(3), 1523.
16. Fu, X., Lu, Y., & Pirabi, M. (2023). Risk management in heat-vulnerable economic activities: Implications for sustainable investment. Environmental Research Letters, 18(1), 014012.
17. Fu, X., Lu, Y., & Pirabi, M. (2024). Climate change, decarbonization, and green finance: Interconnections and investment strategies. Environmental Research Letters, 19(1), 014023.
18. Gamel, J., Menrad, K., & Decker, T. (2017). Understanding the diversity of sustainable investment preferences across European countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, 167-177.
19. Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 451-482.
20. Gustafson, P., & Ingle, M. (1999). Defining sustainable development: Environmental and investment perspectives. Sustainable Development, 7(1), 1-10.
21. Hassan, R., & Mahlathi, S. (2020). Environmental and social net-worth in controlling alien plant invasions. Environmental Management, 66(3), 354-368.
22. Hezam, A., Alalwan, A. A., & Al-Amri, M. (2023). A decision framework for assessing sustainable transport investment projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 294, 126286.
23. Hutubessy, R., Tissot, P., & Hutubessy, R. (2023). Full Value of Vaccine Assessments (FVVA): Framework for assessing and communicating the value of vaccines for investment and introduction decision-making. Vaccine, 41(1), 111-119.
24. Jonas, A. E. G., & Gibbs, D. (2010). Carbon control and its implications for urban and regional development: The challenge of low-carbon restructuring. Regional Studies, 44(2), 209-218.
25. Keenan, J. M., Hill, T., & Gumber, A. (2019). Financing urban climate adaptation: A research agenda. Climate Risk Management, 23, 72-82.
26. Kou, G., Pamucar, D., Dinçer, H., & Yüksel, S. (2023). From risks to rewards: A comprehensive guide to sustainable investment decisions in renewable energy using a hybrid facial expression-based fuzzy decision-making approach. Applied Soft Computing, 142(110365), 110365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110365
27. Kou, G., Xu, Y., & Peng, Y. (2023). Sustainable investment decisions in renewable energy: Combining facial expression analysis with fuzzy logic. Journal of Environmental Management, 316, 115376.
28. Kouaib, N. (2022). Corporate sustainability disclosure and investment efficiency: Evidence from Saudi Arabia. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(3), 567-589.
29. Kumar, S., Kumar, N., & Kumar, R. (2022). Sustainability trends for 2024: Impact of political developments and technological advancements. Journal of Cleaner Production, 326, 129143.
30. Liu, X., Huang, J., & Li, Y. (2022). Low-carbon technology investment strategies: Evolutionary analysis under government regulations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 352, 131605.
31. Longsheng, M., & Shah, M. (2022). Investment in smarter and greener cities post-COVID-19: An integrated decision-making framework. Sustainable Cities and Society, 79, 103682.
32. Mahm, D. (2016). The potential of sustainable investments to deliver competitive returns: A review of evidence. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 6(2), 92-107.
33. Makarenko, I., Samarina, V., & Mikhaylova, A. (2022). Transparency in agriculture: The importance of responsible investment for better decision-making under sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 356, 131895.
34. Martiny, A., Testa, F., Taglialatela, J., & Iraldo, F. (2024). Determinants of Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) Performance: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142213
35. Meng, J., & Shaikh, A. (2023). Evaluating and prioritizing ESG criteria and green finance investment strategies using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy WASPAS methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 326, 129363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129363
36. Mudalige, A. (2023). Emerging themes in green finance: An interdisciplinary approach. Green Finance, 5(1), 34-48.
37. Otuteye, E., & Siddiquee, M. (2015). Investment preferences of retail investors: A comparative study of mutual funds and ETFs. Financial Services Review, 24(1), 51-66.
38. Owen, R., Brennan, G., & Lyon, F. (2018). The role of government policy in financing early-stage green innovation: Financing urban climate adaptation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 47-60.
39. Pástor, Ľ., Stambaugh, R. F., & Taylor, L. A. (2021). Sustainable investing in equilibrium. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 550-571.
40. Plastun, A., Inzinerine, I., & Vasylenko, O. (2021). Sustainable development goals in agriculture and responsible investment: Comparative study between the Czech Republic and Ukraine. Agriculture, 11(12), 1285.
41. Reddy, U. (2021). The power and influence of high-net-worth investors in equity markets: Implications for sustainability. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(2), 25-39.
42. Richardson, B. J. (2009). Financial sector regulation for environmentally sustainable development: Ethical and social responsibility. Sustainable Development Law & Policy, 9(1), 23-41.
43. Sahu, B. K., Majumder, D., & Chakraborty, S. (2023). Evaluating sustainable and renewable energy: An integrated hesitant fuzzy-based decision-making framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 319, 128714.
44. Schmidt, J., & McCann, L. (2022). Challenges and opportunities of ESG criteria in constructing balanced portfolios: Insights from the UK. Journal of Financial Services Research, 61(3), 435-453.
45. Siddique, A. R., & Sciulli, N. (2018). The influence of geographic and economic contexts on investment preferences. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 8(4), 383-398.
46. Sultana, R., Abdullah, M., & Saha, R. (2018). ESG and investment decisions in Bangladesh: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(2), 357-376.
47. Tomo, A., & Landi, G. (2016). Behavioural issues in sustainable investment decision-making: A comprehensive literature review. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 573-585.
48. Tsang, S., Birt, J., & Bloomfield, S. (2023). Mapping and analyzing the literature on the impacts of integrating ESG criteria on corporate sustainability performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(3), 795-818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-04963-5
49. Vadakkepatt, G. G., Winterich, K. P., Mittal, V., & Zikmund-Fisher, B. J. (2020). The role of geographic and economic contexts in shaping investment preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(3), 517-536.
50. Xie, J., Nozawa, W., Yagi, M., & Fujii, H. (2019). Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Business strategy and the environment. Journal of Business Research, 96, 405-417.
51. Yadav, P., Han, S. H., & Rho, J. J. (2016). Sustainable investment decision-making: The role of institutional and individual investors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 1256-1270.
52. Yucel, E., Celik, T., & Yilmaz, R. (2023). Determinants of sustainable finance literacy and its impact on investment decisions: Evidence from Türkiye. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 13(2), 237-251.
53. Zhou, X., & Du, X. (2021). Environmental regulations, financial development, and technological innovation: The case of China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 278, 123663.