The study is conducted to analyse the effect of environmental performance on the financial performance of 67 Indian manufacturing listed companies, categorized into most polluting and least polluting companies for the period of 7 years i.e. from 2014–15 to 2020–21. The present study has employed environmental performance as independent variable measured by various environmental performance measures. The content analysis has been conducted to estimate the environmental performance scores. The study covers both measures of financial performance, i.e. accounting-based measures (Return on Equity) and market-based performance measures (Market to Book value ratio) as dependent variables. The control variables used in the study are ownership structure (promoter ownership, institutional ownership and foreign ownership), firm size, leverage ratio, firm age and sale to asset ratio. By using the feasible generalized least square method, the study found a positive association of environmental performance with financial performance of both categories of companies. In contrast, an adverse effect of research and development expenditure on performance has been observed. The study witnessed the moderating impact of research and development expenditure on the relationship between environmental and financial performance. The study found the mixed effect of ownership structure on the financial performance of manufacturing companies.
AhmadN. N. N., & MohamadN. A. (2014). Environmental disclosures by the Malaysian construction sector: Exploring extent and quality. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 21(4), 240–252.
2.
AlbertiniE. (2013). Does environmental management improve financial performance? A meta-analytical review. Organization & Environment, 26(4), 431–457.
3.
AkroutM. M., & OthmanH. B. (2016). Ownership structure and environmental disclosure in Mena emerging countries. Corporate Ownership & Control, 13(4), 381–388.
4.
AlexopoulosI., KounetasK., & TzelepisD. (2018). Environmental and financial performance. Is there a win-win or a win-loss situation? Evidence from Greek manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 1275–1283.
5.
BalatbatM., SiewR., & CarmichaelD. (2012). ESG scores and its influence on firm performance: Australian evidence. In Australian School of Business School of Accounting, School of Accounting Seminar Series Semester (Vol. 2, pp. 1–30). University of New South Wales.
6.
Böhringer, C., MoslenerU., OberndorferU., & ZieglerA. (2012). Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry. Research Policy, 41(2), 442–451.
7.
BreuschT. S., & PaganA. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239–253.
8.
BrundtlandG. H., & KhalidM. (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.
9.
ChauG., & GrayS. J. (2010). Family ownership, board independence, and voluntary disclosure: Evidence from Hong Kong. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing, and Taxation, 19(2), 93–109.
10.
ConradK., & WastlD. (1995). The impact of environmental regulation on productivity in German industries. Empirical Economics, 20(4), 615–633.
11.
CurkovicS., & SroufeR. (2011). Using ISO 14001 to promote a sustainable supply chain strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(2), 71–93.
12.
Duque-GrisalesE., Aguilera-CaracuelJ., Guerrero-VillegasJ., & García-SánchezE. (2020). Does green innovation affect the financial performance of Multilatinas? The moderating role of ISO 14001 and R&D investment. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(8), 3286–3302.
13.
Duque-GrisalesE., & Aguilera-CaracuelJ. (2021). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores and financial performance of mutilations: Moderating effects of geographic international diversification and financial slack. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(2), 315–334.
14.
EarnhartD., & LizalL. (2007). Effect of pollution control on corporate financial performance in a transition economy. European Environment, 17(4), 247–266.
15.
ElliliN. O. D. (2020). Environmental, social, and governance disclosure, ownership structure and cost of capital: Evidence from the UAE. Sustainability, 12(18), 1–23.
16.
EzhilarasiG., & KabraK. C. (2020). The value relevance of quantitative and qualitative environmental disclosure of polluting companies in India: A static and dynamic panel data evidence. International Journal of Business Environment, 11(2), 98–124.
17.
FergusonM. J., LamK. C., & LeeG. M. (2002). Voluntary disclosure by state‐owned enterprises listed on the stock exchange of Hong Kong. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 13(2), 125–152.
18.
FilbeckG., & GormanR. F. (2004). The relationship between the environmental and financial performance of public utilities. Environmental and Resource Economics, 29(2), 137–157.
19.
FriedmanM. (1970). A Friedman doctrine: The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 13(1970), 32–33.
20.
GanguliS. K., & AgrawalS. (2009). Ownership structure and firm performance: An empirical study on listed mid-cap Indian companies. IUP Journal of Applied Finance, 15(12), 37–52.
21.
GujaratiD. N. (2001). Basic econometrics. McGraw-Hill.
22.
HamdanA. (2018). Intellectual capital and firm performance: Differentiating between accounting-based and market-based performance. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 11(1), 139–151.
23.
HartS. L. (1997). Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 66–77.
24.
HausmanJ. A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 46(6), 1251–1271.
25.
HsiaoC. (2014). Analysis of panel data (No. 54). Cambridge University Press.
26.
HuangC. J. (2010). Corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, and corporate performance. Journal of Management & Organization, 16(5), 641–655.
27.
IwataH., & OkadaK. (2011). How does environmental performance affect financial performance? Evidence from Japanese manufacturing firms. Ecological Economics, 70(9), 1691–1700.
28.
JyotiG., & KhannaA. (2021). Does sustainability performance impact financial performance? Evidence from Indian service sector firms. Sustainable Development, 29(6), 1086–1095.
29.
KaoE. H., YehC. C., WangL. H., & FungH. G. (2018). The relationship between CSR and performance: Evidence in China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 51, 155–170.
30.
KaramanA. S., KilicM., & UyarA. (2018). Sustainability reporting in the aviation industry: Worldwide evidence. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 9(4), 362–391.
31.
KhamisR., HamdanA. M., & ElaliW. (2015). The relationship between ownership structure dimensions and corporate performance: Evidence from Bahrain. Australasian Accounting, Business, and Finance Journal, 9(4), 38–56.
32.
KhannaM., & DamonL. A. (1999). EPA’s voluntary 33/50 program: Impact on toxic releases and economic performance of firms. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 37(1), 1–25.
33.
KumarS., & DuaP. (2022). Environmental management practices and financial performance: Evidence from large listed Indian enterprises. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 65(1), 37–61.
34.
KumarS., & ShettyS. (2018). Corporate participation in voluntary environmental programs in India: determinants and deterrence. Ecological Economics, 147, 1–10.
35.
KumarK., KumariR., & KumarR. (2021). The state of corporate sustainability reporting in India: Evidence from environmentally sensitive industries. Business and Society Review, 126(4), 513–538.
36.
KuoL., & YuH. C. (2017). Corporate political activity and environmental sustainability disclosure: The case of Chinese companies. Baltic Journal of Management, 12(3), 348–367.
37.
LeeS. (2021). Environmental responsibility, CEO power, and financial performance in the energy sector. Review of Managerial Science, 15(8), 2407–2426.
38.
LiW., & LuX. (2016). Institutional interest, ownership type, and environmental capital expenditures: Evidence from the most polluting Chinese listed firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(3), 459–476.
39.
LiY., GongM., ZhangX. Y., & KohL. (2018). The impact of environmental, social, and governance disclosure on firm value: The role of CEO power. The British Accounting Review, 50(1), 60–75.
40.
LiangD., & LiuT. (2017). Does the environmental management capability of Chinese industrial firms improve the contribution of corporate environmental performance to economic performance? Evidence from 2010 to 2015. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2985–2998.
41.
LucasM. T., & NoordewierT. G. (2016). Environmental management practices and firm financial performance: The moderating effect of industry pollution-related factors. International Journal of Production Economics, 175, 24–34.
42.
Molina‐AzorínJ. F., Claver‐CortésE., López‐GameroM. D., & TaríJ. J. (2009). Green management and financial performance: A literature review. Management Decision, 47(7), 1080–1100.
43.
MuhammadN., ScrimgeourF., ReddyK., & AbidinS. (2015). The relationship between environmental performance and financial performance in periods of growth and contraction: Evidence from Australian publicly listed companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 102, 324–332.
44.
MuttakinM. B., & KhanA. (2014). Determinants of corporate social disclosure: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Advances in Accounting, 30(1), 168–175.
45.
NguyenT. H., ElmagrhiM. H., NtimC. G., & WuY. (2021). Environmental performance, sustainability, governance and financial performance: Evidence from heavily polluting industries in China. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(5), 2313–2331.
46.
Obembe OlufemiB., AdebisiS. A., & AdeleyeO. K. (2010). Corporate governance, ownership structure, and performance of manufacturing firms in Nigeria. Corporate Ownership and Control, 8(1), 696–708.
47.
OngT. S., LeeA. S., TehB. H., & MagsiH. B. (2019). Environmental innovation, environmental performance and financial performance: Evidence from Malaysian environmental proactive firms. Sustainability, 11(12), 3494.
48.
OrazalinN., & MahmoodM. (2018). Economic, environmental, and social performance indicators of sustainability reporting: Evidence from the Russian oil and gas industry. Energy Policy, 121, 70–79.
49.
PandaB., & BagD. (2019). Does ownership structure affect firm performance in an emerging market? The case of India. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 12(1), 189–227.
50.
Pérez-CalderónE., Milanés-MonteroP., & Ortega-RossellF. J. (2012). Environmental performance and firm value: Evidence from Dow Jones sustainability measures Europe. International Journal of Environmental Research, 6(4), 1007–1014.
51.
PrasadM., MishraT., & BapatV. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability: Evidence from India using energy intensity as an indicator of environmental sustainability. IIMB Management Review, 31(4), 374–384.
52.
RassierD. G., & EarnhartD. (2010). Does the porter hypothesis explain expected future financial performance? The effect of clean water regulation on chemical manufacturing firms. Environmental and Resource Economics, 45(3), 353–377.
53.
SalamaA. (2005). A note on the impact of environmental performance on financial performance. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 16(3), 413–421.
54.
SariannidisN., ZafeiriouE., GiannarakisG., & ArabatzisG. (2013). CO2 emissions and financial performance of socially responsible firms: An empirical survey. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(2), 109–120.
55.
SarumpaetS. (2005). The relationship between environmental performance and financial performance of Indonesian companies. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 7(2), 89–98.
56.
StarikM., & MarcusA. A. (2000). Introduction to the special research forum on the management of organizations in the natural environment: A field emerging from multiple paths, with many challenges ahead. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 539–547.
57.
SureshaB., & KumarR. (2018). Nexus between ownership structure and firm performance—Evidence from the Indian service sector. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 9(7), 209–214.
58.
Taufil-MohdK. N., Md-RusR., & MusallamS. R. (2013). The effect of ownership structure on firm performance in Malaysia. International Journal of Finance and Accounting, 2(2), 75–81.
59.
VermaR., SharmaD., & ChughP. (2021). The impact of ownership structure on the financial performance of Indian corporate sector. IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 20(2), 7–20.
60.
WagnerM. (2001). A review of empirical studies concerning the relationship between environmental and economic performance: What does the evidence tell us?Centre for Sustainability Management.
61.
WangM. C., & ChenZ. (2021). The relationship among environmental performance, R&D expenditure and corporate performance: Using simultaneous equations model. Quality & Quantity, 56, 2675–2689.
62.
World Bank Group. (2013). Global financial development report 2014: Financial inclusion (Vol. 2). World Bank Publications.
63.
ZhaoC., GuoY., YuanJ., WuM., LiD., ZhouY., & KangJ. (2018). ESG and corporate financial performance: Empirical evidence from China’s listed power generation companies. Sustainability, 10(8), 2607.
