Exploring the moderating effect of financial performance on the relationship between corporate environmental responsibility and institutional investors: Some egyptian evidence

Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 361-371

  Wahba, Hayam ^a  

^a Main Campus   (Egypt)

Author keywords

Corporate social responsibility; Egypt; Environmental policy; Financial performance; Institutional investors; ISO 14001

Indexed keywords

EID: 56849107030     PISSN: 15353958     EISSN: 15353966     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/csr.177     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Aslaksen I, Synnestvedt T. 2003. Ethical investment and the incentives for corporate environmental protection and social responsibility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 10: 212-223.
2. Bushee B. 1998. The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. The Accounting Review 73: 305-333.
3. Chaganti R, Damanpour F. 1991. Institutional ownership, capital structure and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal 12: 479-491.
4. Chapple W, Cook A, Galt V, Paton D. 2001. The characteristics and attributes of UK firms obtaining accreditation to ISO 14001. Business Strategy and the Environment 10(4): 238-244.
5. Coffey B, Fryxell G. 1991. Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance: an empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics 10: 437-444.
6. Collison D, Cobb G, Power D, Stevenson L. 2008. The financial performance of the FTSE4Good indices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15: 14-28.
7. Cox P, Brammer S, Millington, A. 2004. An empirical examination of institutional investor preferences for corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 52: 27-43.
8. Dielman T, Rose E. 1995. A bootstrap approach to hypothesis testing in least absolute value regression. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 20: 119-130.
9. Dowell G, Hart S, Yeung B. 2000. Do corporqate global environmental standards create or destroy market value. Management Science 46: 1059-1074.
10. Emilsson S, Hjelm O. 2005. Development of the use of standardized environmental management systems (EMSs) in local authorities. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 12: 144-156.
11. Feldman S, Soyka P, Ameer P. 1997. Does improving a firm's environmental management system and environmental performance result in a higher stock price? Journal of Investing 6(4): 87-97.
12. Gimenez G, Casadeus M, Valls J. 2003. Using environmental management systems to increase firms' competitiveness. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 10: 101-110.
13. Graves S, Waddock S. 1994. Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal 37(4): 1034-1046.
14. Greene W. 2003. Econometric Analysis, 5th edn. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
15. Gujarati D. 2003. Basic Econometrics, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill: New York.
16. Hansen S, Hill L. 1991. Are institutional investors myopic? A time series study of four technology driven industries. Strategic Management Journal 12: 1-16.
17. Hart S, Ahuja G. 1996. Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between emission reduction and financial performance. Business Strategy and the Environment 5(1): 30-37.
18. Hausman J. 1978. Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46: 1251-1271.
19. Henriques I, Sadorsky P. 1996. The determinants of an environmentally responsive firm: an empirical approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30(3): 381-395.
20. Hummels H, Timmer D. 2004. Investors in need of social, ethical and environmental information. Journal of Business Ethics 52: 73-84.
21. Jayne M, Skerratt G. 2003. Socially responsible investment in the UK-criteria that are used to evaluate suitability. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 10: 1-11.
22. Johnson R, Greening D. 1999. The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal 42(5): 564-576.
23. King A, Lenox M. 2002. Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Management Science 48(2): 289-299.
24. Konar S, Cohen M. 2001. Does the market value environmental performance? The Review of Economics and Statistics 83(2): 281-289.
25. Kusku F. 2007. From necessity to responsibility: evidence for corporate environmental citizenship activities from a developing country perspective. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 14: 74-87.
26. Mallin C. 1999. Financial institutions and their relations with corporate boards. Corporate Governance: an International Review 7(3): 248-255.
27. Mallin C. 2002. Institutional investors and the growth of global influence. Corporate Governance: an International Review 10(2): 67-68.
28. Matterson H. 2000. Ethics admirable but money comes first. The Australian 35.
29. McConnell J, Servaes H. 1990. Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics 27: 595-612.
30. McLachlan J, Gradner J. 2004. A comparison of socially responsible and conventional investors. Journal of Business Ethics 52: 11-25.
31. McWilliams A, Siegel D. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal 21(5): 603-609.
32. Michelson G, Wailes N, Laan S, Forst G. 2004. Ethical investment process and outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics 52: 1-10.
33. Neubaum D, Zahra S. 2006. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: the moderating effects of investment horizon, activism and coordination. Journal of Management 32(1): 108-131.
34. Pound J. 1988. Proxy contests and the efficiency of shareholder oversight. Journal of Financial Economics 20: 237-265.
35. Preston L, O'Bannon D. 1997. The corporate social-financial performance relationship: a typology and analysis. Business and Society 36(4): 419-429.
36. Roe M. 1994. Strong Managers, Weak Owners: the Political Roots of American Corporate Finance. Princeton University Press, Princeton: NJ.
37. ROSC. 2004. Corporate Governance Country Assessment. World Bank-IMF. http://www.worldbank.org/ifa/rosc_cg_egyp2.pdf [20 March 2007].
38. Rousseeuw P, Leroy A. 2003. Robust Regression and Outliers Detection. Wiley: New York.
39. Russo M, Fouts P. 1997. A resources-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal 40(3): 534-559.
40. Salancik G, Pfeffer J. 1980. Effects of ownership and performance on executive tenure in U.S. corporations. Academy of Management Journal 23: 635-664.
41. Schnietz K, Epstein M. 2005. Exploring the financial value of reputation for corporate social responsibility during a crisis. Corporate Reputation Review 7: 327-345.
42. Seifert B, Gonenc H, Wright J. 2005. The international evidence on performance and equity ownership by insiders, blockholders, and institutions. Journal of Multinational Financial Management 15: 171-191.
43. Shleifer A, Vishny R. 1986. Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of Political Economy 94(3): 461-488.
44. Sparkes R. 1998. The challenge of ethical investment: activism assets and analysis. In The Role of Business Ethics in Economic Performance, Jones I, Pollitt M (eds). McMillan: London; 141-170.
45. Spicer B. 1978. Investors, corporate social performance and information disclosure: an empirical study. The Accounting Review 33(1): 94-111.
46. Stephen F, Urbano D, Hemmen S. 2005. The impact of institutions on entrepreneurial activity. Managerial and Decision Economics 26: 413-419.
47. Sundaramurthy C, Rhoades D, Rechner P. 2005. A meta-analysis of the effects of executive and institutional ownership on firm performance. Journal of Managerial Issues 15: 494-510.
48. Teoh H, Shiu G. 1990. Attitudes towards corporate social responsibility and perceived importance social responsibility information characteristics in a decision context. Journal of Business Ethics 9: 71-77.
49. Toms S. 2002. Firm resources, quality signals and the determinants of corporate environmental reputation: some UK evidence. British Accounting Review 34(3): 257-282.
50. Waddock S, Graves S. 1997. The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal 18(4): 303-319.
51. Wahba H. 2008. Does the market value corporate environmental responsibility? An empirical examination. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15: 89-99.
52. Welford R, Chan C, Man M. 2008. Priorities for corporate social responsibility: a survey of businesses and their stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15: 52-62.
53. White M. 1996. Corporate Environmental Performance and Shareholder Value, working paper, McIntire School of Commerce, University of Virginia.