Environmental and Financial Performance of Fossil Fuel Firms: A Closer Inspection of their Interaction
Introduction
Given the impact of fossil fuels on climate change, it seems very relevant to investigate how the environmental performance of fossil fuel firms (firms in oil and gas, coal, and chemicals) relates to their financial performance. More specifically, is good financial performance associated with sound environmental performance, or is there a trade-off? Further, is this relationship the same along different performance measures and (sub)industries? Answering these questions is important to assess the potential for changes in operations by fossil fuel firms to transform the energy system. Several studies find that energy-intense companies are punished by the stock market for poor environmental performance (see Patten, 1992, Kolk et al., 2001, Kollias et al., 2012). These studies usually focus on the impact of events on company reputation (see, e.g., Spence, 2011), but not on company operations and related cash flows. Scholtens (2008) and Lioui and Sharma (2012) investigate the potential reasons why there would be a link between environmental and financial performance. The former study finds that it is highly dependent on the way in which these performances are being measured. The latter finds a negative direct impact of environmental on financial performance but a positive indirect impact.
Our study specifically investigates environmental and financial performance of fossil fuel firms. As such, it tries to focus on a much more homogeneous category than understood by the concept ‘social performance’ and its equivalents, which also relates to governance, ethical, and social issues with firms. To be precise, we investigate environmental and financial performance in three subindustries: chemicals, coal, and oil and gas. We rely on both qualitative and quantitative environmental performance indicators that are much more fine-grained than those used in the literature thus far. Further, we rely on different financial performance measures to avoid biases and to account for the underlying value structure of firms. We also address endogeneity and try to detect structural relations between environmental and financial performance. We find that fossil fuel firms have significantly higher scores for their environmental performance efforts relative to firms in other industries, but it shows that this is highly sensitive to (sub)industry classification. It will not come as a surprise that we also find that fossil fuel firms produce more waste and emissions than firms in other industries. Further, we find that environmental outperformance does not impact the financial performance of chemical firms, reduces returns and risks for coal companies, and has a mixed impact on returns in oil and gas, and reduces financial risks for firms in oil and gas. Financial outperformance reduces environmental performance in all the types of fossil fuel firms investigated. This shows that there are substantial differences in the relationships studied for the different subindustries. These findings suggest that any policy approach should account for the value chain at the subindustry level, since a ‘one size fits all’ policy is likely to have very distorting effects and, hence, is doomed to be ineffective.
The remainder of this paper proceeds as follows. We first discuss the background of the relationship between financial and environmental performance of the fossil fuel firms (i.e. firms in oil and gas, coal, chemicals). Then, we introduce the data and methods employed in our analysis. Next, we report the results from the univariate analysis and show the estimation results of the regression models. Finally, we discuss our conclusions.
Section snippets
Background and Hypotheses
Bénabou and Tirole, 2006, Bénabou and Tirole, 2010 argue that there are basically three reasons as to why firms and institutions would want to behave in a responsible manner (please note that these responsibilities pertain to environmental, ethical, social and governance characteristics). The first is altruism, that is, ‘doing the right thing’. Here, the firm does incur costs to avoid or reduce externalities, but does not necessarily get something in return, such as lower expenses or higher
Data and Method
We investigate environmental and financial performance of a large international sample of firms in both fossil fuel-related (firms in oil and gas, coal, chemicals) and ‘non-fossil fuel-related’ industries (of course, we are well aware of the indirect usage of fossil fuels in all firms and in fact there is no industry that does not indirectly consume any fossil fuel) for the period 2002–2013. This period is motivated primarily on the basis of data availability of both the financial and the
Results
We first present the descriptive statistics and the univariate analysis. Then, we provide the findings from the regression analyses.
Discussion and Conclusion
We study the performance of a large, international sample of companies that are highly intense regarding the use of fossil fuels with respect to several environmental dimensions of corporate social responsibility in the period 2002–2013. We relate their environmental performance to various measures of corporate financial performance. The fossil fuel firms are of particular interest as their social costs are substantially above their private costs: External effects are a major concern with these
References (42)
- et al.
Do financial markets care about SRI? Evidence from mergers and acquisitions
J. Bank. Financ.
(2011) - et al.
Towards a theory of responsible investing: on the economic foundations of corporate social responsibility
Resour. Energy Econ.
(2015) - et al.
Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital?
J. Bank. Financ.
(2011) - et al.
Equity financing and social responsibility: further international evidence
Int. J. Account.
(2015) - et al.
Can environmental sustainability be used to manage energy price risk?
Energy Econ.
(2010) - et al.
The price of sin: the effects of social norms on markets
J. Financ. Econ.
(2009) - et al.
Winds of change: corporate strategy, climate change and oil multinationals
Eur. Manag. J.
(2001) - et al.
Environmental corporate social responsibility and financial performance: disentangling direct and indirect effects
Ecol. Econ.
(2012) - et al.
Competitive and responsible? The relationship between corporate social and financial performance in the energy sector
Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev.
(2014) Intra-industry environmental disclosure in response to the Alaskan oil spill: a note on legitimacy theory
Acc. Organ. Soc.
(1992)
Regulatory cost effects in a good news environment: the intra-industry reaction to the Alaskan oil spill
J. Account. Public Policy
A note on the interaction between corporate social responsibility and financial performance
Ecol. Econ.
Corporate social responsibility and Eurozone corporate bonds: the moderating role of country sustainability
J. Bank. Financ.
Impact of aggressive working capital management policy on firms' profitability
IUP J. Appl. Financ.
A meta-analytical investigation of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance
Rev. Gest. Resour. Hum.
CSR performance and the value of cash holdings: international evidence
J. Bus. Ethics
The impact of environmental strengths and concerns on the accounting performance of firms in the energy sector
Incentives and prosocial behavior
Am. Econ. Rev.
Individual and corporate social responsibility
Economica
Chemicals' Changing Competitive Landscape
Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility
Acad. Manag. Rev.
Cited by (96)
Carbon intensity and market pricing: An asymmetric valuation
2024, International Review of Financial AnalysisRethinking the effect of ESG practices on profitability through cross-dimensional substitutability
2024, Journal of Environmental ManagementEffect of low-carbon innovation on carbon risk: International firm-level investigation
2023, International Review of Financial Analysis