A framework for assessing discretionary corporate performance towards the environment

Abstract

/ This article reviews the existing models of corporate social responsiveness and develops a theoretical framework with which to examine corporations' discretionary performance with respect to one social issue, that of the environment. Discretionary indicators of corporate response to environmental issues are developed and tested within this framework. Twelve companies from five different sectors were selected for the survey, based on prior knowledge of their commitment to environmental concerns. Primary data was collected from personal interviews, and secondary data was obtained from company documents, annual reports, and other forms of publically disclosed information. Empirical results varied, but certain voluntary indicators, such as composition of the board of directors, the environmental affairs function, community support, and the annual report are considered to provide strong indications of discretionary corporate performance. Philanthropy and company products proved to be less satisfactory indicators of corporate commitment to the environment. The aggregated results revealed a correlation between the final rankings of firms' discretionary environmental performance and whether those companies are process or product oriented. Linkages between discretionary elements and those of economic and legal requirements were not explored.

CSR and green economy: Determinants and correlation of firms’ sustainable development

“…Most studies relating accountability and GE have been based on relevant case studies (Adams & Frost, 2008;Chkanikova & Lehner, 2015;Ducassy, 2013), or have a nationwide scope based on statistical databases (Clarkson, Overell, & Chapple, 2011;Gray, Kouhy, & Lavers, 1995), which tend to discard SMEs. Other studies, focused on analyzing the impact of boundary settings and external factors influencing environmental disclosure, include further information published by the companies and not only standard reports (Archel, Fernández, & Larrinaga, 2008;D'Amico, Coluccia, Fontana, & Solimene, 2014;Labatt, 1991). Still, the companies with no public data are left aside.…”

Sustainability Indicators at the Firm Level

“…The approach of sustainable development through indicators can also, and should, be based on qualitative variables (e.g., environmental perceptions, cultural preferences, strategic intent). Such qualitative information could be easily incorporated, provided it can be quantified in some way: by using intensity scales, or ordinal scales, such as performed by Labatt (1991), who implemented several indicators of corporate discretionary motivation, or by the teams of researchers working in the scope of the International Business Environmental Barometer (Eklz and Strannegkd 1997).…”

Corporate Response to Environmental Issues: Packaging

“…In order to operationalize the concept of corporate social performance in this study, it was necessary to define a measure of corporate responsiveness in terms of packaging modifications and waste reduction efforts. In the literature, some authors have measured corporate responsiveness in terms of the amount of activities undertaken to improve environmental performance (Logsdon 1985;Labatt 1991). In the present study, therefore, changes in the status of packaging are used to measure the responsiveness of manufacturers to the packaging-waste reduction issue.…”