IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/394.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

"It pays to be green" - a premature conclusion?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

It has been claimed that good environmental performance can improve firms' economic performance. However, because of e.g. data limitations, the methods applied in most previous quantitative empirical studies of the relationship between environmental and economic performance of firms suffer from several shortcomings. We discuss these shortcomings and conclude that previously applied methods are unsatisfactory as support for a conclusion that it pays for firms to be green. Then we illustrate the effects of these shortcomings by performing several regression analyses of the relationship between environmental and economic performance using a panel data set of Norwegian plants. A simple correlation analysis confirms the positive association between our measures of environmental and economic performance. The result prevails when we control for firm characteristics like e.g. size or sub-industry in a pooled regression. However, the result could still be biased by omitted unobserved variables like management or technology. When we control for unobserved plant specific characteristics in a panel regression, the effect is no longer statistically significant. Hence, greener plants perform economically better, but the analysis provides no support for the claim that it is because they are greener. These empirical findings further indicate that a conclusion that it pays to be green is premature.

Suggested Citation

  • Kjetil Telle & Iulie Aslaksen & Terje Synnestvedt, 2004. ""It pays to be green" - a premature conclusion?," Discussion Papers 394, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp394.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2004. "Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 270-283, March.
    3. Shameek Konar & Mark A. Cohen, 2001. "Does The Market Value Environmental Performance?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(2), pages 281-289, May.
    4. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    5. Andrew A. King & Michael J. Lenox, 2001. "Does It Really Pay to Be Green? An Empirical Study of Firm Environmental and Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Firm Environmental and Financial Performance," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 5(1), pages 105-116, January.
    6. Rolf Golombek & Arvid Raknerud, 1997. "Do Environmental Standards Harm Manufacturing Employment?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(1), pages 29-44, March.
    7. Théophile AZOMAHOU & Phu NGUYEN VAN & Marcus WAGNER, 2001. "Determinants of Environmental and Economic Performance of Firms: An Empirical Analysis of the European Paper Industry," Working Papers of BETA 2001-22, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    8. Harrington, Winston, 1988. "Enforcement leverage when penalties are restricted," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 29-53, October.
    9. Stuart L. Hart & Gautam Ahuja, 1996. "Does It Pay To Be Green? An Empirical Examination Of The Relationship Between Emission Reduction And Firm Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 30-37, March.
    10. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Nyborg, Karine, 2005. "Moral hazard and moral motivation: Corporate social responsibility as labor market screening," Memorandum 25/2004, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    11. Greg Filbeck & Raymond Gorman, 2004. "The Relationship between the Environmental and Financial Performance of Public Utilities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(2), pages 137-157, October.
    12. Cooley, Thomas F. & Leroy, Stephen F., 1985. "Atheoretical macroeconometrics: A critique," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 283-308, November.
    13. Callens, Isabelle & Tyteca, Daniel, 1999. "Towards indicators of sustainable development for firms: A productive efficiency perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 41-53, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Horváthová, Eva, 2012. "The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: Short-term costs and long-term benefits?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 91-97.
    2. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    3. Hidemichi Fujii & Kazuyuki Iwata & Shinji Kaneko & Shunsuke Managi, 2013. "Corporate Environmental and Economic Performance of Japanese Manufacturing Firms: Empirical Study for Sustainable Development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 187-201, March.
    4. Horváthová, Eva, 2010. "Does environmental performance affect financial performance? A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 52-59, November.
    5. Pham, Thi Hong Hanh, 2015. "Energy management systems and market value: Is there a link?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 70-78.
    6. Petra Andries & Ute Stephan, 2019. "Environmental Innovation and Firm Performance: How Firm Size and Motives Matter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Fisher-Vanden, Karen & Thorburn, Karin S., 2011. "Voluntary corporate environmental initiatives and shareholder wealth," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 430-445.
    8. Nazim Hussain, 2015. "Impact of Sustainability Performance on Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Global Fortune (N100) Firms," Working Papers 1, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    9. Vasileiou, Efi & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Attanasi, Giuseppe & Llerena, Patrick, 2022. "Green innovation and financial performance: A study on Italian firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    10. Li, Qian & Xue, Qiuzhi & Truong, Yann & Xiong, Jie, 2018. "MNCs' industrial linkages and environmental spillovers in emerging economies: The case of China," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 346-355.
    11. Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf & Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 442-451.
    12. Claudia Poser & Edeltraud Guenther & Marc Orlitzky, 2012. "Shades of green: using computer-aided qualitative data analysis to explore different aspects of corporate environmental performance," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 413-450, January.
    13. Ziegler, Andreas & Schröder, Michael, 2006. "What Determines the Inclusion in a Sustainability Stock Index? A Panel Data Analysis for European Companies," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-041, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Hjort, Ingrid, 2016. "Potential Climate Risks in Financial Markets: A Literature Overview," Memorandum 01/2016, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    15. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    16. Van Meensel, Jef & Lauwers, Ludwig H. & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Passel, Steven, 2009. "Exploring production-theoretical insights for analyzing trade-offs between economic performance and environmental pressure at firm level," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51725, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Semenova, Natalia & Hassel, Lars, 2008. "Industry Risk Moderates the Relation between Environmental and Financial Performance," Sustainable Investment and Corporate Governance Working Papers 2008/2, Sustainable Investment Research Platform.
    18. Marcus Wagner, 2007. "Effects on competitiveness and innovation activity from the integration of strategic aspects with social and environmental management," Working Papers of BETA 2007-08, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    19. Marcus Wagner, 2009. "Innovation and competitive advantages from the integration of strategic aspects with social and environmental management in European firms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 291-306, July.
    20. Jongjin Sohn & Jongseon Lee & Nami Kim, 2020. "Going Green Inside and Out: Corporate Environmental Responsibility and Financial Performance under Regulatory Stringency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-23, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic performance; environmental performance; environmental regulations; pays to be green;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:394. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.