The moderating effects of environmental risk of the industry on the relationship between corporate environmental and financial performance

Abstract

Purpose – Industries differ in their environmental impacts, such as emissions, water and energy use, fuel consumption and hazardous wastes, which will have implications for how environmental performance translates to operating performance and market value at company level. By incorporating industry-specific differences of environmental impacts, this paper includes industry-level environmental risk as a moderating factor on the relationship between two indicators of corporate environmental performance (CEP) (management and policy) and corporate financial performance (profitability and market value). The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – Using panel data of US companies across all industries, the paper empirically tests a regression model, which includes an interaction effect representing both the form and strength of dependency of CEP on the environmental risk of the industry. The paper adopts the natural resource based theory to argue that financial returns are a decreasing function of CEP in high environmental impact industries, where environmental spending beyond compliance is costly and there is not much opportunity for consumer orientation. Findings – The results show that environmental management has different impacts on operating performance at high and low environmental risk of the industry (form of relationship) while environmental policy (reporting) has a stronger signal on market premium in industries with low rather than high environmental risk (strength of relationship). Differences in both form and strength of moderating effects are demonstrated. Research limitations/implications – Further research can introduce other industry-specific moderating factors, such as the disclosure maturity of the industry and the institutionalization of environmental disclosures across boarders in the industries, in order to explore the complexity of the relationship. Practical implications – The results of the paper are relevant to investors, company managers and a broad group of stakeholders when considering both industry- and company-level environmental risks. Originality/value – Previous studies have relied on controlling for industry membership. This paper uses an industry-specific environmental variable, environmental risk of the industry, to examine the form and strength of moderating effects.

Analysis of Economic Performance of Manufacturing Companies in Indonesia

“…The higher the rating, the higher the ROA of the company. This result is in line with the research conducted by Al-Tuwaijri et al, (2004); Mahoney et al, (2013); Rohmah & Wahyudin, (2015); Semenova & Hassel, (2016); Suratno et al, (2007); Tristianasari & Fachrurrozie, (2014) stating that there is a significant relationship between the environmental performance and economic performance. Unlike Esita (2016), however, there is no influence between environmental performance and the corporate value.…”

Exploring factors relating to extinction disclosures: What motivates companies to report on biodiversity and species protection?

“…Prior studies found that companies from high-risk industries tend to disclose more environmental information than companies from lowrisk industries (Djajadikerta & Trireksani, 2012;Semenova & Hassel, 2016). The underlying assumption is that companies that have higher pollution propensity are required to comply with more rigorous legal requirements.…”

Analyzing the Effect of Corporate Environmental Performance on Corporate Financial Performance in Developed and Developing Countries

“…Prior empirical studies suggest that large firms tend to exhibit diseconomies of scale, because of complex processes of decision-making, coordination and resource allocation and costly structural changes, and find a negative association between firm size and corporate financial performance [101,109]. Therefore, we control for firm size (Lsize), calculated as the natural logarithm of firm's total assets [109].…”

“…This database, founded in 2003, collects and compiles publicly available information on firms' CSR strategies using 750 individual data points, combined into over 280 key performance indicators from over 4612 large firms distributed around the world and belonging to several industries. The ASSET4 database has been used in [15,18,101,102], among others. On the other hand, Worldscope database provides information on over 58,000 firms, with more than 37,000 of them active, which are included in this database on meeting at least one of these criteria: (1) their market capitalization must be greater than US$100 million; (2) they must be a member of one or more global or local indexes; (3) they must be quoted on many stock markets; and (4) they must have high visibility.…”