José A. Plaza-Úbeda

Environmental protection and financial performance: an empirical analysis in Wales

Purpose – This paper analyses the relationship between environmental protection and mid-term financial performance, focusing on when and why this relationship is positive. In particular, the paper disaggregates environmental protection, differentiating between environmental management practices, environmental proactivity and environmental performance of the organization. Design/methodology/approach – It uses a cross-section survey of 2,122 Welsh companies to gather information on environmental practices and the FAME database to collect data on accounting based financial performance. The paper uses regression analysis on a combined sample of 186 Welsh companies to evaluate the effect on performance of different types of environmental protection. Findings – On the whole, the results show a positive effect of environmental protection on mid-term financial performance. Financial performance has a positive and significant correlation with environmental proactivity and with environmental performance, while it has a no significant relation with environmental management. Originality/value – The paper presents a disaggregated analysis of environmental protection in relationship with financial performance. The paper differentiates between environmental management practices, environmental proactivity and environmental performance of the organization in their relationship with financial performance.

Evaluating the Firm’s Environmental Risk: A Conceptual Framework

This chapter is organised into three sections. The first two sections outline the conceptual framework and the empirical procedure used in this project to evaluate the environmental risk generated by the firm. Risk is defined as the result of combining potential hazard, vulnerability and exposure. The framework suggests that the gap separating real – or managed – risk and potential – or evaluated – risk widens with less uncertainty and greater governability. The third section provides a description of the governability of environmental impact in Latin America, where the divide between real and potential risk is low, and where, therefore, methodologies that evaluate potential risk may also be appropriate for interpreting the extent to which evaluated risk is being managed.

Business and Environmental Risks

Based on detailed research funded across two continents and involving universities in Argentina, Spain and the UK, this book sets out an innovative, multidisciplinary approach to assessing both environmental and social risks in a given territorial area. Using data from a number of Ibero-American nations, the study combines environmental, socio-economic and geographic factors to construct a set of spatial and technical indicators that measure the social vulnerability and industrial hazardousness of a defined area. Aggregating these indicators in a geographic information system (GIS) allows researchers to assess the potential risk to which a certain area and its population are subject as a result of the environmental deterioration caused by co-located industrial activity.

“The Biofuels Program”: Decreasing Rural Poverty and Environmental Deterioration Through Cooperative Land-Use Innovation

Collective action engagement can enable individuals to overcome self-interestedness and work toward shared goals but to “get the institutions right for cooperation” requires an understanding of how the particular set of market and nonmarket relationships really work for participants. In the context of the biodiesel value chain in Brazil, this paper uses a case study to explore how institutional arrangements need to evolve if they are to foster the productive and sustained inclusion of small farmers in collective action to promote sustainable innovation as a regional economic development strategy. The analysis suggest that collaborative arrangements between policy-makers, Petrobras and grass-root representatives acting as agents of farmers shaped the design of the program and provided political and economic incentives for its implementation. However, institutional and socio-technical innovation failed to take-off because during implementation. The number of farmers engaged with the program was only a half than forecasted and productivity was even lower. A primary source of disincentives was the lack of direct engagement of small-farmers in decision-making and the dominance of institutional and cultural arrangements excluding small farmers from linking mechanisms to engage with external agencies. This suggest the need for policy intervention to foster inclusive collaboration based on repeated interactions and community governance mechanisms building trust and common understanding about potential course of actions.