IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v142y2017icp21-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relevance of Complementarities in the Study of the Economic Consequences of Environmental Proactivity: Analysis of the Moderating Effect of Innovation Efforts

Author

Listed:
  • Garcés-Ayerbe, Concepción
  • Cañón-de-Francia, Joaquín

Abstract

In this paper, we present arguments and empirical evidence that highlights one key aspect of the study of the relationship between environmental proactivity and economic performance in firms: The effect of complementarities with other innovation-related resources. According to the literature, environmental proactivity—defined as the tendency to go beyond compliance with basic requirements established by law or institutionalized adoption of environmental practices in industry—enables firms to improve both economic and environmental outcomes. Within the framework of the resource-based view and the dynamic capabilities approach, we find that this win-win situation is far more likely when environmental proactivity is adopted in conjunction with a proactive innovation strategy. By analyzing panel data with 336 observations (42 Spanish industrial firms over an eight-year period), we demonstrate that environmental proactivity generates complementarities with technological proactivity that are sustainable and especially profitable in dynamic environments. More precisely, empirical evidence reveals that complementarities between environmental and technological proactivity are sustainable in groups of firms subject to high external pressure (such as that generated in the European Union Emissions Trading System context). Complementarities are also greater for companies during a financial crisis, a period characterized by high uncertainty and dynamism of the environment. This particularly advantageous win-win situation generated by environmental proactivity justifies its interpretation as a dynamic capability.

Suggested Citation

  • Garcés-Ayerbe, Concepción & Cañón-de-Francia, Joaquín, 2017. "The Relevance of Complementarities in the Study of the Economic Consequences of Environmental Proactivity: Analysis of the Moderating Effect of Innovation Efforts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 21-30.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:142:y:2017:i:c:p:21-30
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915302081
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohnen, Pierre & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Complementarities in innovation policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1431-1450, August.
    2. Jeremy Hall & Marcus Wagner, 2012. "Integrating Sustainability into Firms' Processes: Performance Effects and the Moderating Role of Business Models and Innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 183-196, March.
    3. Arora Seema & Cason Timothy N., 1995. "An Experiment in Voluntary Environmental Regulation: Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 271-286, May.
    4. Shameek Konar & Mark A. Cohen, 2001. "Does The Market Value Environmental Performance?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(2), pages 281-289, May.
    5. David A Griffith & Michael G Harvey, 2001. "A Resource Perspective of Global Dynamic Capabilities," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 32(3), pages 597-606, September.
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, March.
    7. Sascha Rexhäuser & Christian Rammer, 2014. "Environmental Innovations and Firm Profitability: Unmasking the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 145-167, January.
    8. Wagner, Marcus, 2010. "The role of corporate sustainability performance for economic performance: A firm-level analysis of moderation effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1553-1560, May.
    9. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    10. Kristel Buysse & Alain Verbeke, 2003. "Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 453-470, May.
    11. Gilli, Marianna & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Innovation complementarity and environmental productivity effects: Reality or delusion? Evidence from the EU," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 56-67.
    12. Wagner, Marcus, 2007. "On the relationship between environmental management, environmental innovation and patenting: Evidence from German manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1587-1602, December.
    13. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    14. Galia, Fabrice & Legros, Diego, 2004. "Complementarities between obstacles to innovation: evidence from France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1185-1199, October.
    15. Antonioli, Davide & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2013. "Is environmental innovation embedded within high-performance organisational changes? The role of human resource management and complementarity in green business strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 975-988.
    16. Kee H. Chung & Stephen W. Pruitt, 1994. "A Simple Approximation of Tobin's q," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 23(3), Fall.
    17. Kjetil Telle, 2006. "“It Pays to be Green” – A Premature Conclusion?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 35(3), pages 195-220, November.
    18. Stuart L. Hart & Gautam Ahuja, 1996. "Does It Pay To Be Green? An Empirical Examination Of The Relationship Between Emission Reduction And Firm Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 30-37, March.
    19. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2013. "Environmental performance, manufacturing sectors and firm growth: structural factors and dynamic relationships," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(4), pages 367-387, October.
    20. Greg Filbeck & Raymond Gorman, 2004. "The Relationship between the Environmental and Financial Performance of Public Utilities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(2), pages 137-157, October.
    21. Lindenberg, Eric B & Ross, Stephen A, 1981. "Tobin's q Ratio and Industrial Organization," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 1-32, January.
    22. Arellano, Manuel, 2003. "Panel Data Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199245291, Decembrie.
    23. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Davide Antonioli & Claudia Ghisetti & Francesco Nicolli, 2016. "Firm Surveys relating Environmental Policies, Environmental Performance and Innovation: Design Challenges and insights from Empirical Application," OECD Environment Working Papers 103, OECD Publishing.
    24. Misani, Nicola & Pogutz, Stefano, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of environmental outcomes and processes on financial performance: A non-linear approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 150-160.
    25. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1995. "Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 179-208, April.
    26. Iain Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson, 1994. "Racing To Invest? The Dynamics of Competition in Ethical Drug Discovery," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 481-519, September.
    27. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    28. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    29. Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 69-85, January.
    30. Hottenrott, Hanna & Rexhäuser, Sascha & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2012. "Green innovations and organizational change: Making better use of environmental technology," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-043, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    31. González-Benito, Javier & González-Benito, Óscar, 2005. "Environmental proactivity and business performance: an empirical analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-15, February.
    32. Andrew King & Michael Lenox, 2002. "Exploring the Locus of Profitable Pollution Reduction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 289-299, February.
    33. Giovanni Marin & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2013. "The evolution of environmental and labor productivity dynamics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 357-399, April.
    34. William Q. Judge & Thomas J. Douglas, 1998. "Performance Implications of Incorporating Natural Environmental Issues into the Strategic Planning Process: An Empirical Assessment," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 241-262, March.
    35. Hidemichi Fujii & Kazuyuki Iwata & Shinji Kaneko & Shunsuke Managi, 2013. "Corporate Environmental and Economic Performance of Japanese Manufacturing Firms: Empirical Study for Sustainable Development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 187-201, March.
    36. Clemens, Bruce, 2006. "Economic incentives and small firms: Does it pay to be green?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 492-500, April.
    37. Glen Dowell & Stuart Hart & Bernard Yeung, 2000. "Do Corporate Global Environmental Standards Create or Destroy Market Value?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(8), pages 1059-1074, August.
    38. Andreas Ziegler & Michael Schröder & Klaus Rennings, 2008. "The Effect of Environmental and Social Performance on the Stock Performance of European Corporations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 609-609, August.
    39. Eri Nakamura, 2011. "Does Environmental Investment Really Contribute to Firm Performance? An Empirical Analysis Using Japanese Firms," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 1(2), pages 91-111, December.
    40. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    41. Walls, Judith L. & Phan, Philip H. & Berrone, Pascual, 2008. "An assessment of the construct validity of environmental strategy measures," IESE Research Papers D/754, IESE Business School.
    42. Elsayed, Khaled & Paton, David, 2005. "The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: static and dynamic panel data evidence," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 395-412, September.
    43. Aldónio Ferreira & Carly Moulang & Bayu Hendro, 2010. "Environmental management accounting and innovation: an exploratory analysis," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(7), pages 920-948, September.
    44. Ariel Pakes & Mark Schankerman, 1984. "The Rate of Obsolescence of Patents, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 73-88, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    45. Shaker A. Zahra & Harry J. Sapienza & Per Davidsson, 2006. "Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 917-955, June.
    46. Hirschey, M & Weygandt, Jj, 1985. "Amortization Policy For Advertising And Research And Development Expenditures," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 326-335.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joaquín Cañón-de-Francia & Concepión Garcés-Ayerbe, 2019. "Factors and Contingencies for the “It Pays to Be Green Hypothesis”. The European Union’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and Financial Crisis as Contexts," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Markus Hang & Jerome Geyer‐Klingeberg & Andreas W. Rathgeber, 2019. "It is merely a matter of time: A meta‐analysis of the causality between environmental performance and financial performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 257-273, February.
    3. Andreas Ziegler, 2012. "Is it Beneficial to be Included in a Sustainability Stock Index? A Panel Data Study for European Firms," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(3), pages 301-325, July.
    4. Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf & Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 442-451.
    5. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2011. "Enviromental Innovations, Complementarity and Local/Global Cooperation," Working Papers 201104, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    6. Reif, Christiane & Rexhäuser, Sascha, 2015. "Good enough! Are socially responsible companies the more successful environmental innovators?," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-018, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Surender Kumar & Pritika Dua, 2022. "Environmental management practices and financial performance: evidence from large listed Indian enterprises," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 65(1), pages 37-61, January.
    8. Horváthová, Eva, 2010. "Does environmental performance affect financial performance? A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 52-59, November.
    9. Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Schmidt, Peter & Wagner, Marcus & Ziegler, Andreas, 2013. "Does the stock market value the inclusion in a sustainability stock index? An event study analysis for German firms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 497-509.
    10. Davide Antonioli & Grazia Cecere & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2018. "Information communication technologies and environmental innovations in firms: joint adoptions and productivity effects," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(11), pages 1905-1933, September.
    11. Gilli, Marianna & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Innovation complementarity and environmental productivity effects: Reality or delusion? Evidence from the EU," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 56-67.
    12. Will Gans & Beat Hintermann, 2013. "Market Effects of Voluntary Climate Action by Firms: Evidence from the Chicago Climate Exchange," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 55(2), pages 291-308, June.
    13. Lee, Ki-Hoon & Min, Byung & Yook, Keun-Hyo, 2015. "The impacts of carbon (CO2) emissions and environmental research and development (R&D) investment on firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 1-11.
    14. Ruiqian Li & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan, 2018. "Impacts of Industrial Heterogeneity and Technical Innovation on the Relationship between Environmental Performance and Financial Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-25, May.
    15. Ziegler, Andreas & Schröder, Michael, 2010. "What determines the inclusion in a sustainability stock index?: A panel data analysis for european firms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 848-856, February.
    16. Horváthová, Eva, 2012. "The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: Short-term costs and long-term benefits?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 91-97.
    17. Liu, Zuoming, 2020. "Unraveling the complex relationship between environmental and financial performance ─── A multilevel longitudinal analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 328-340.
    18. Tariq, Adeel & Badir, Yuosre F. & Tariq, Waqas & Bhutta, Umair Saeed, 2017. "Drivers and consequences of green product and process innovation: A systematic review, conceptual framework, and future outlook," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 8-23.
    19. Vasileiou, Efi & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Attanasi, Giuseppe & Llerena, Patrick, 2022. "Green innovation and financial performance: A study on Italian firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    20. Ghisetti, Claudia & Rennings, Klaus, 2013. "Environmental innovations and profitability: How does it pay to be green? An empirical analysis on the German innovation survey," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-073, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:142:y:2017:i:c:p:21-30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.