Do the ecoinnovation and ecodesign strategies generate value added in munificent environments?

Abstract

Within innovation strategies, ecodesign and ecoinnovation are becoming very relevant in recent years as they seek to reduce the environmental impact of both products and production processes by using new technologies and ways of working that contribute to sustainable development and at the same time help to promote the competitiveness of companies. In this framework, the objective of this paper is to analyze the impact that the strategies of environmental innovation in products and processes have on the profitability and the market value of the companies, considering the moderating role that the munificence of the industry has in this relationship. Using the generalized method of moments, the results obtained from a sample of 6,454 international companies during the period 2002–2017 show that although environmental innovation strategies do not entail higher returns, they are well valued by the capital market. This was especially true in environments with greater economic growth and availability of resources, that is, in munificent environments.

Board interlocks and greenhouse gas emissions

“…Our control variables are those that are commonly used for research regarding either board interlocks, GHG emissions, or environmental performance and include the following: board size (Endo, 2020; Orazalin, 2020; Zou, Xie, Qi, & Yang, 2019), sales growth (Lu & Herremans, 2019), firm size (Orazalin, 2020; Zou, Xie, Qi, & Yang, 2019), return on assets (ROA) (Cordeiro et al, 2020; Orazalin, 2020; Zou, Xie, Qi, & Yang, 2019), free cash flow (García‐Sánchez, Gallego‐Álvarez, & Zafra‐Gómez, 2020; Xue, Zhang, & Li, 2020), leverage (Endo, 2020; Orazalin, 2020; Zou, Xie, Qi, & Yang, 2019), newness of capital equipment (Mahmoudian, Lu, Yu, Nazari, & Herremans, 2020), and capital expenditures (García‐Sánchez et al, 2020; Jordaan et al, 2017). Board Size is the number of members on the board of an individual firm.…”

Eco‐innovation motivations and ecodesign tool implementation in companies in the Nordic textile and information technology sectors

“…Ecodesign can be generalized to focus on the systematic integration of environmental considerations in product and process development (Bovea & Pérez‐Belis, 2012; Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2019: 20–21; García‐Sánchez et al, 2019; Karlsson & Luttropp, 2006). In this paper, ecodesign is considered to be more focused on products and incremental technological changes (e.g., Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2016; Directive 2009/125/EC; van Hemel & Cramer, 2002), whereas eco‐innovation may be more radical and shed light on nontechnological aspects (Arundel & Kemp, 2009; Cluzel, Vallet, Tyl, Bertoluci, & Leroy, 2014).…”

“…Exceptions to this pattern include Santolaria, Oliver‐Solà, Gasol, Morales‐Pinzón, and Rieradevall (2011) and Cluzel et al (2014), who studied the attitudes and perceptions of ecodesign and eco‐innovation in Spanish and French companies, respectively. In addition, Huang, Hu, Liu, Yu, and Yu (2016) considered ecodesign as a method that contributed to eco‐innovation, and García‐Sánchez et al (2019) studied eco‐innovation and ecodesign strategies in munificent companies.…”

“…Eco‐innovation can be understood as a business strategy that aims to increase the competitive capacity of companies as they respond to the growing demand for environmental responsibility (Demirel & Kesidou, 2019; García‐Sánchez, Galleggo‐Álvarez, & Zafra‐Gómez, 2019). In this paper, eco‐innovation refers to incremental and radical innovation of products, processes, and methods with reduced environmental impact (Arundel & Kemp, 2009; Carrillo‐Hermosilla et al, 2010; Chen, Lai, & Wun, 2006; Demirel & Kesidou, 2019; Horbach, 2008; Kiefer, Del Río Gonzalez, & Carrillo‐Hermosilla, 2018; Schiederig, Tietze, & Herstatt, 2012; Spangenberg, 2001: 26).…”

Do independent, female and specialist directors promote eco‐innovation and eco‐design in agri‐food firms?

“…Taking into account the negative effect of eco‐innovation and eco‐design policies on financial performance in the short‐term—they require more resources leading to more expensive products and so forth—could cause managers to pursue short‐term preferences rather than these types of strategies. However, investors recognize the value added potential of long‐term policies oriented to sustainable development (García‐Sánchez, Aibar‐Guzmán, & Aibar‐Guzmán, 2020; García‐Sánchez, Gallego‐Álvarez, & Zafra‐Gómez, 2020; López‐Arceiz, Santamaría, & del Río, 2020). Thus, the board of directors, which guarantees the interests of investors and other stakeholders (Priego‐de‐la‐Cruz, Alfaro‐Cortés, & Manzaneque‐Lizano, 2020), could be the main driver of the implementation of eco‐innovation and eco‐design strategies.…”