Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Different proprietary databases have been used extensively in research to assess the environmental performance and environmental risk of companies. This study explores the convergent validity of the environmental ratings of MSCI ESG STATS (formerly known as Kinder, Lydenberg, and Domini Research & Analytics; KLD), Thomson Reuters ASSET4 (ASSET4) and Global Engagement Services (GES). The study shows that the ratings have common dimensions, but on aggregate, they do not converge. On the environmental opportunity side, KLD environmental strengths, and ASSET4 and GES environmental performance metrics correlate highly and provide convergent scores for US companies from 2003–2011. On the environmental risk side, KLD environmental concerns converge with the GES environmental industry risk and company emissions from the ASSET4 database. Further analysis confirms that industry-related risks are drivers of company-specific environmental performance.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Albuquerque, R., Durnev, A., & Koskinen, Y. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. SSRN working paper no. 1977053.
Artiach, T., Lee, D., Nelson, D., & Walker, L. (2010). The determinants of corporate sustainability performance. Accounting and Finance, 50(1), 31–51. CrossRef
Brower, J., & Mahajan, V. (2013). Driven to be good: A stakeholder theory perspective on the drivers of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 117, 313–331. CrossRef
Carlson, K., & Herdman, A. (2012). Understanding the impact of convergent validity on research results. Organizational Research Methods, 15(1), 17–32. CrossRef
Chatterji, A., Levine, D., & Toffel, M. (2009). How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 18(1), 125–169. CrossRef
Chatterji, A., & Toffel, M. (2010). How firms respond to being rated. Strategic Management Journal, 31(9), 917–945.
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35, 1–23. CrossRef
Cho, C., & Patten, D. (2007). The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: A research note. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32, 639–647. CrossRef
Clarkson, P. (2012). The valuation relevance of environmental performance: evidence from the academic literature. In S. Jones & J. Ratnatunga (Eds.), Contemporary issues in sustainability accounting, assurance and reporting. Emerald: UK.
Clarkson, P., Fang, X., Li, Y., & Richardson, G. (2013). The relevance of environmental disclosures: Are such disclosures incrementally informative? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32, 410–431. CrossRef
Clarkson, P., Li, Y., Richardson, G., & Vasvari, F. (2011). Does it really pay to be green? Determinants and consequences of proactive environmental strategies. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 30(2), 122–144. CrossRef
Delmas, M., & Blass, V. (2010). Measuring corporate environmental performance: the trade-offs of sustainability ratings. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19, 245–260. CrossRef
Dixon-Fowler, H., Slater, D., Johnson, J., Ellstrand, A., & Romi, A. (2013). Beyond “Does it pay to be green?” A meta-analysis of moderators of the CEP–CFP relationship. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(2), 353–366. CrossRef
Eccles, R.G., & Serafeim, G. (2013). The performance frontier: Innovating for sustainable strategy. Harvard Business Review, 5(May), 50–60.
Giuli, A., & Kostovetsky, L. (2014). Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 111, 158–180. CrossRef
Griffin, J., & Mahon, J. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate. Business and Society, 36(1), 5–31. CrossRef
Guenster, N., Derwall, J., Bauer, R., & Koedijk, K. (2011). The economic value of corporate eco-efficiency. European Financial Management, 17(4), 679–704. CrossRef
Hedesström, M., Lundqvist, U., & Biel, A. (2011). Investigating consistency of judgement across sustainability analyst organizations. Sustainable Development, 19, 119–134. CrossRef
Hillman, A., & Keim, G. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139. CrossRef
Ilinitch, A., Soderstrom, N., & Thomas, T. (1998). Measuring corporate environmental performance. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 17, 383–408. CrossRef
Kim, Y., Park, M., & Wier, B. (2012). Is earnings quality associated with corporate social responsibility? The Accounting Review, 87(3), 761–796. CrossRef
Kim, Y., & Statman, M. (2012). Do corporations invest enough in environmental responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 105(1), 115–129. CrossRef
Lopatta, K., & Kaspereit, T. (2013). The world capital markets’ perception of sustainability and the impact of financial crisis. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1760-9.
Mattingly, J., & Berman, S. (2006). Measurement of corporate social action: Discovering taxonomy in the Kinder Lydenburg Domini ratings data. Business and Society, 45(1), 20–46. CrossRef
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F., & Rynes, S. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403–441. CrossRef
Peters, G., & Romi, A. (2013). Discretionary compliance with mandatory environmental disclosures: Evidence from SEC filings. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32(4), 213–236. CrossRef
Rahman, N., & Post, C. (2012). Measurement issues in environmental corporate social responsibility (ECSR): toward a transparent, reliable, and construct valid instrument. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(3), 307–319. CrossRef
Schäfer, H. (2005). International corporate social responsibility systems. Conceptual outline and empirical results. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 20(Winter), 107–120.
Schäfer, H., Beer, J., Zenker, J., & Fernandes, P. (2006). Who is who in corporate social responsibility rating. A survey of internationally established rating systems that measure corporate responsibility. Working paper, University Stuttgart, Stuttgart.
Schultze, W., & Trommer, R. (2012). The concept of environmental performance and its measurement in empirical studies. Journal of Management Control, 22, 375–412. CrossRef
Semenova, N., Hassel, L., & Nilsson, H. (2010). The value relevance of environmental and social performance: evidence from Swedish SIX 300 companies. The Finnish Journal of Business Economics, 3, 265–292.
Sharfman, M. (1996). The construct validity of the Kinder, Lydenberg & Domini social performance ratings data. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 287–296. CrossRef
Statman, M., & Glushkov, D. (2009). The wages of social responsibility. Financial Analysts Journal, 65(4), 33–46. CrossRef
Trochim, W., & Donnelly, J. (2007). The research methods knowledge base. Ohio: Cengage Learning-Atomic Dog Publishing.
Waddock, S. (2003). Myths and realities of social investing. Organizations and Environment, 16(3), 369–380. CrossRef
Waddock, S., & Graves, S. (1997). The corporate social performance—Financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319. CrossRef
Wall, T., Michie, J., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Sheehan, M., Clegg, C., et al. (2004). On the validity of subjective measures of company performance. Personnel Psychology, 57, 95–118. CrossRef
Walls, J. L., Phan, P. H., & Berrone, P. (2011). Measuring environmental strategy: construct development, reliability, and validity. Business and Society, 50(1), 71–115. CrossRef
Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. The Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.
- On the Validity of Environmental Performance Metrics
Lars G. Hassel
- Springer Netherlands
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta