A Classification of Carbon Abatement Opportunities of Global Firms

Christian C. Blanco
{"title":"A Classification of Carbon Abatement Opportunities of Global Firms","authors":"Christian C. Blanco","doi":"10.1287/msom.2022.1115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Problem definition: Carbon abatement opportunities are diverse, making it difficult to classify them. Do latent classes of carbon abatement opportunities exist and is there a type that is financially and environmentally superior? Methodology/results: In this study, we classify 16,525 implemented carbon abatement projects using text analysis. We benchmark our clustering method to the latent Dirichlet allocation model and verify our classifications using a crowd-sourcing platform. We then compare the payback period, financial hurdle (measured in upfront cost), savings, and carbon emissions reduction by type. Our results show that latent classes exist, and they statistically differ in the metrics we examine. Our regression results show that the type of project explains more of the variation in the financial and environmental outcomes than the firm-level financial controls we included. We find that liquidity (measured using cash-to-asset and current ratios) is associated with the number of reported projects, but the magnitude and direction varies by type. Our extension shows that marginal abatement costs statistically differ by type with a few exceptions. Lastly, we show that our classification is robust to sector-level variation. Managerial implications: Although the results show that no single type of opportunity dominates in all four metrics, our classification provides a ranking of the types firms should pursue depending on their goals. Our results suggest that firms likely place different weights across these four metrics. This means that policies targeted at making investment costs more attractive (e.g., subsidies or better financing) may not have the same impact on firms that put more weight on savings compared with those more sensitive to costs. A classification of opportunities can contribute toward understanding whether a unifying theory or pattern across carbon abatement activities may exist or not.","PeriodicalId":18108,"journal":{"name":"Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag.","volume":"18 1","pages":"2648-2665"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Problem definition: Carbon abatement opportunities are diverse, making it difficult to classify them. Do latent classes of carbon abatement opportunities exist and is there a type that is financially and environmentally superior? Methodology/results: In this study, we classify 16,525 implemented carbon abatement projects using text analysis. We benchmark our clustering method to the latent Dirichlet allocation model and verify our classifications using a crowd-sourcing platform. We then compare the payback period, financial hurdle (measured in upfront cost), savings, and carbon emissions reduction by type. Our results show that latent classes exist, and they statistically differ in the metrics we examine. Our regression results show that the type of project explains more of the variation in the financial and environmental outcomes than the firm-level financial controls we included. We find that liquidity (measured using cash-to-asset and current ratios) is associated with the number of reported projects, but the magnitude and direction varies by type. Our extension shows that marginal abatement costs statistically differ by type with a few exceptions. Lastly, we show that our classification is robust to sector-level variation. Managerial implications: Although the results show that no single type of opportunity dominates in all four metrics, our classification provides a ranking of the types firms should pursue depending on their goals. Our results suggest that firms likely place different weights across these four metrics. This means that policies targeted at making investment costs more attractive (e.g., subsidies or better financing) may not have the same impact on firms that put more weight on savings compared with those more sensitive to costs. A classification of opportunities can contribute toward understanding whether a unifying theory or pattern across carbon abatement activities may exist or not.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全球企业碳减排机会分类
问题定义:碳减排的机会是多种多样的,很难对它们进行分类。是否存在潜在的碳减排机会类别,是否存在一种在经济上和环境上都更优越的类型?方法/结果:在本研究中,我们使用文本分析对16,525个实施的碳减排项目进行分类。我们将我们的聚类方法以潜在的狄利克雷分配模型为基准,并使用众包平台验证我们的分类。然后,我们按类型比较投资回收期、财务障碍(以前期成本衡量)、节省和碳排放量减少。我们的结果表明,潜在的类别是存在的,它们在我们检验的指标上有统计学上的不同。我们的回归结果表明,项目类型比我们纳入的公司层面的财务控制更能解释财务和环境结果的变化。我们发现,流动性(使用现金对资产比率和流动比率来衡量)与报告项目的数量有关,但其大小和方向因类型而异。我们的扩展表明,边际减排成本在统计上因类型而异,只有少数例外。最后,我们证明了我们的分类对行业水平的变化是稳健的。管理启示:尽管结果表明,没有一种类型的机会在所有四个指标中占主导地位,但我们的分类提供了企业应该根据其目标追求的类型排名。我们的研究结果表明,公司可能会对这四个指标赋予不同的权重。这意味着,旨在使投资成本更具吸引力的政策(例如补贴或更好的融资)可能不会对那些更重视储蓄的公司产生与那些对成本更敏感的公司相同的影响。机会分类有助于理解碳减排活动是否存在统一的理论或模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Introduction to Special Section on Data-Driven Research Challenge Food Donations, Retail Operations, and Retail Pricing The Design of Optimal Pay-as-Bid Procurement Mechanisms Asymmetric Information of Product Authenticity on C2C E-Commerce Platforms: How Can Inspection Services Help? Believing in Analytics: Managers' Adherence to Price Recommendations from a DSS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1