Sohanur Rahman, Elisabeth Sinnewe, Larelle Chapple, Sarah Osborne
{"title":"Environment-specific political risk mitigation: Political lobbying versus green innovation","authors":"Sohanur Rahman, Elisabeth Sinnewe, Larelle Chapple, Sarah Osborne","doi":"10.1111/jbfa.12740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Greater political pressure to improve corporate environmental performance and mitigate climate change impact leads firms to operate under greater political risk and uncertainty, affecting productivity and firm value. Using a panel of 3255 US firms from 2002 to 2020, this research tests the effectiveness of two environment-specific political risk (EPR) mitigation approaches: political lobbying and green innovation. The results suggest that while both approaches mitigate EPR of the current year, only green innovation reduces future EPR. By mitigating EPR, green innovation increases firm value to a greater degree than political lobbying. This study also shows that political lobbying has a larger effect on EPR mitigation for the leaders than the laggards in green innovation. The results are robust to alternative specifications of green innovation, political lobbying and potential endogeneity concerns. Overall, this study supports the value-enhancing role of green innovation as an effective political risk mitigation strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":48106,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Finance & Accounting","volume":"51 5-6","pages":"911-942"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbfa.12740","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Finance & Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbfa.12740","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Greater political pressure to improve corporate environmental performance and mitigate climate change impact leads firms to operate under greater political risk and uncertainty, affecting productivity and firm value. Using a panel of 3255 US firms from 2002 to 2020, this research tests the effectiveness of two environment-specific political risk (EPR) mitigation approaches: political lobbying and green innovation. The results suggest that while both approaches mitigate EPR of the current year, only green innovation reduces future EPR. By mitigating EPR, green innovation increases firm value to a greater degree than political lobbying. This study also shows that political lobbying has a larger effect on EPR mitigation for the leaders than the laggards in green innovation. The results are robust to alternative specifications of green innovation, political lobbying and potential endogeneity concerns. Overall, this study supports the value-enhancing role of green innovation as an effective political risk mitigation strategy.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Business Finance and Accounting exists to publish high quality research papers in accounting, corporate finance, corporate governance and their interfaces. The interfaces are relevant in many areas such as financial reporting and communication, valuation, financial performance measurement and managerial reward and control structures. A feature of JBFA is that it recognises that informational problems are pervasive in financial markets and business organisations, and that accounting plays an important role in resolving such problems. JBFA welcomes both theoretical and empirical contributions. Nonetheless, theoretical papers should yield novel testable implications, and empirical papers should be theoretically well-motivated. The Editors view accounting and finance as being closely related to economics and, as a consequence, papers submitted will often have theoretical motivations that are grounded in economics. JBFA, however, also seeks papers that complement economics-based theorising with theoretical developments originating in other social science disciplines or traditions. While many papers in JBFA use econometric or related empirical methods, the Editors also welcome contributions that use other empirical research methods. Although the scope of JBFA is broad, it is not a suitable outlet for highly abstract mathematical papers, or empirical papers with inadequate theoretical motivation. Also, papers that study asset pricing, or the operations of financial markets, should have direct implications for one or more of preparers, regulators, users of financial statements, and corporate financial decision makers, or at least should have implications for the development of future research relevant to such users.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
