MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601623900

Is pollution profitable? A cross-sectional study

2015· article· en· W2601623900 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Islam Elshahat, Clark M. Wheatley, Ahmed Elshahat

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Accounting and Financial Studies journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanctionsIncentiveKyoto ProtocolTreatyBusinessInternational tradeGreenhouse gasAgency (philosophy)ConventionEnvironmental protectionEconomic policyEconomicsPolitical scienceLawMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION The Go green initiatives seen at every level of society demonstrate society's concerns regarding the importance of preserving the environment. Attempts to protect the environment are seen at most, if not all, levels of society. Across borders, countries have worked on international environmental protection treaties such as the Kyoto protocol under which signatory nations committed to binding emission reduction targets (The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations [UN] Framework Convention on Climate Change is an international treaty adopted on December 11, 1997 in Kyoto, Japan that places binding obligations on industrialized countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions--of the member nations of the UN all but Andorra, Canada, South Sudan and the United States ratified the treaty). Within countries, governments and regulatory agencies have established rules and regulations to protect and preserve the surrounding environment, but the authority and effectiveness of these agencies varies from one country to another. In the United States, for instance, the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] sets protective rules and applies clean-up sanctions on firms polluting the environment. In the corporate world, firms strive not just to avoid sanctions from the EPA, but also to maintain an environmentally conscious public image. Further, individuals are, in their daily actives, more aware and oriented towards recycling products and reducing waste. Wasteful activities endanger the environment whether by individuals or by businesses. Firms' large-scale operations constitute a greater threat to the environment especially when financial incentives and social incentives are at odds. In this study we shed light on the issue by providing evidence on the nature of the association between environmental and financial performance. In the environmental performance literature there has been a vigorous debate about the association between corporate environmental performance and financial performance. One school supports the traditional perspective, which suggests that expenditures on environmental improvements involve additional costs that generally provide no additional value to the firm. Another school supports the relatively newer perspective, which suggests that expenditures on environmental improvements and pollution controls lead to increased firm value. A third school suggests that corporate environmental performance and financial performance have no association whatsoever. We seek to offer some resolution to the debate, and to provide specific guidance for public policy, by employing a variety of distinct attributes of corporate environmental performance in our models. This research addresses the overall association between firms' environmental performance and capital market valuations. Prior research has provided conflicting evidence on this association, and has often followed an event study methodology that yields results that are not generalizable (See, for example, Blaconniere and Patten 1994, Blaconniere and North cut 1997, Freedman and Patten 2004, and Griffin and Sun 2013). Unlike prior studies, we conduct an explanatory study to investigate the general association between corporate environmental performance and firms' annual returns independent of any particular environmental event. By taking this approach, we are able to present evidence regarding the nature of the association between environmental and financial performance that is generalizable and that explains the contradictory results of prior studies. We are also able to investigate how environmental attributes interact when combined into a single overall measure. The results of this study may provide guidance to investors, regulators and standard setters with respect to their understanding of the nature of the conflicts involved. It may also help regulators and standard setters identify relevant venues to resolve these conflicts. If, for example, profits are the objective firms seek when conducting operations that endanger the environment, then regulators and standard setters should impose financial sanctions to make such activities unprofitable. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Accounting and Financial Studies journalSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207