Thread by @AnnikaStenstrm

New paper from me & @LenSeabrooke just out in @Gov_Journal "Professional ecologies in European sustainable finance".

We investigate how actors influence expert groups tasked with developing new policy framework on #EU #sustainablefinance?

A thread.

doi.org/10.1111/gove.1…

Greening finance has been high on the agenda of for long time. We investigate the formation of the @EU_Commission sustainable finance agenda through activity in/around the HLEG and TEG on sustainable finance. Who has influence over the policy framework?

Our (theoretical) starting point to understand how actors influence expert groups is to view those active as members belonging to professional ecologies. They can be supported by a capacity to influence from either official mandate, scientific esteem, or claims to experience.

Our research design is a layered #mixedmethods approach, using both quant & qual methods. We deploy:

- social network analysis of professional affiliation
- sequence analysis of career data
- and qualitative interviews with experts

Using social network analysis we identify actors w likely claims to influence in the network. We explore the network structure and zone-in on the key groups through centrality measures & the community detection algorithm.

In addition to being informative, it's pretty!

Blue is dominated by the policymaking ecology. Red is a mix of experts from the activist & consultancy ecologies. Purple is dominated by the finance ecology.

We also identify influental 'multiple insiders' w mixed careers & ties to multiple ecologies at the intersections.

To determine if “vanilla” or more diverse careers are linked to likely influence in the EU sustainable finance network (i.e is there a pattern to influence claims), we conduct career sequence analysis of the most central experts in the network.

Cluster 1 consists of experts w mixed careers, moving between finance, civil society, policy. This is in line w prior research on revolving doors in elite policy communities, particulary in EU context. Those in cluster 2 are more likely to rely on official mandate for influence.

Through interviews we investigate likely influence over issue treatment fx on ESG disclosures. The ESG disclosures was contested - should they focus on impact or be developed incrementally w market actors? The incremental appr. favoured by investors won in the end.

Findings suggest that official mandate or scientific esteem does not itself convey influence. Rather, it's mixed careers allows experts to expand network & speak the language of different ecologies. Also, many of those central to the network are now involved in asset mgtm.

We note ties between the finance and civil society ecology through prior employment & current board seats/advisory positions. Could blurring boundaries between activists and finance professionals lead to the emergence of sustainability experts at the transnational level?

Our findings suggest that during a period of where sustainable finance is not yet settled, financial institutions, investors and the private sector have played an important role in setting the policy direction.

We also find that being able to speak the established language of investors is important to be seen as relevant in the network, particularly for activists seeking a voice on EU sustainable finance discussions.

That's it - end of thread! Thanks to participants from @cbspeg , @CSO_SciencesPo & @SASE_Meeting and of course our two reviewers and editor Paolo Graziano for valuable comments and suggestions that improved the paper.