I'm not sure there's any such thing as a "comprehensive list" of reasons for the change, but here are some things to keep in mind. Please note that I am speaking from a northwestern European perspective in terms of technique.

• First off, there wasn't a wholesale abandonment of oars for sail in any period. Many sailing ships still carried oars (often called "sweeps") for moving around in harbor or other applications.
• Conversely, many of what we think of as primarily oar-powered ships (galleons, Viking ships, etc.) used sails for a large portion of their voyages.
• Rowing a ship to propel it is HARD. Like, amazingly hard. It takes a very large crew to do that with any speed.

So moving to sail does a couple of things: first, it lets you move the ship around without a very large crew (because the wind does the work); second, it lets you have a wider ship (oared ships tend to be narrow, to have less surface area to push around).

The move to sailing ships in northwest Europe also coincided with a shift from clinker-built ships (where hull strakes overlap one another) to carvel-built ships (where hull timbers butt up against one another). Relatively speaking, carvel building is cheaper than clinker building because it uses less timber and less time. With a cheaper ship and a cheaper crew (because fewer skilled oarsmen), trade became cheaper as well, and the disadvantage of the ship not handling well in the wind because easier to justify from a cost basis.