The relationship between social and environmental performance and financial performance in companies has been a subject widely debated in the literature but the results obtained to date are not conclusive. This research employs the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) and offers new evidence on the relationship between both types of performance in a sample of companies listed in the Spanish capital market. Financial performance is measured by the return on equity (ROE) ratio, variable that is widely used in Finance and Accounting related research. The corporate performance of the company is measured by its inclusion or not in the sustainability index used as reference for the Spanish capital market, the FTSEGood4 IBEX. The model also incorporates other business variables that might affect the relationships between both types of performance, such as return on assets (ROA) ratio, company size, debt ratio, and industry. The results suggest that, for specific industries, return on assets is a necessary condition for companies with leverage to reduce the cost of debt due to their sustainability profile and consequently boost their ROE.

After the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 pandemic on 11 March 2020, almost all European countries entered a lockdown. This context caused sudden changes at multiple levels, affecting the way people were working, buying, studying and even the way they were interacting. Moreover, during lockdown people showed a special attention to local and sustainable brands giving momentum to the interest on sustainability, that has been increasing in the last years. Therefore, this study aims to determine the intention of buying sustainable and local brands due to the COVID-19 lockdown. An online survey was conducted for two groups of young adults from Spain and Romania, between April and June 2020. The questionnaire respects the methodological recommendations of Azjen (1985) and related literature on how to construct a survey based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and it aims to gather information about the three main constructs that determine the individual’s behavioral intention: attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control. The results suggest that both Spanish and Romanian samples intended to buy more local and sustainable brands, despite the slightly different attitudes. Moreover, the data show that both subjective norms and perceived behavioral control influence attitudes toward sustainable and local brands, and hence, indirectly the intention to buy sustainable products. The outcomes are adding to the literature on sustainability, and understanding the effects of COVID-19 on consumer behavior. Additionally, the results can help better understand the importance of sustainability in Spain and Romania, and therefore, offering support to practitioners in building policies and programs that encourage a sustainable lifestyle.

In this paper we set out a three-pillar monetary-financial framework to (i) analyze, categorize and compare past, current and emerging means of payment; to (ii) capture their creation and destruction processes through sectoral balance sheet dynamics; and to (iii) identify the inherent risks to the current monetary-financial system, also known as the fractional reserve banking system. These risks, which stem from sudden shifts in money demand and supply, are as follows: (I) risk of a cashless society; (II) risk of structural bank disintermediation; (III) risk of systemic bank runs; (IV) risk of currency substitution; and (V) risk of economic and financial bubbles. This framework will guide the assessment of the central bank digital currencies (CBDC), which are considered as the next step in monetary evolution. We will analyze two large groups of CBDC proposals: (i) proposals aimed at complementing cash and bank deposits; and (ii) proposals aimed at replacing all bank deposits with CBDCs. We find that once CBDCs are issued in both sets of proposals, there is always a trade-off between low levels of (I), (IV), (V), risks and high levels of (II) risk. This trade-off could also be defined as the CBDC dilemma, which states that in most CBDC proposals it is impossible to have both of the following at the same time: (1) low levels of (I), (IV) and (V) risks; and (2) low levels of (II) risk. Finally, we suggest that further research on CBDCs should focus on the second group of proposals on a phase-in basis in order to also mitigate the structural bank disintermediation risk and hence to overcome the CBDC dilemma.