IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An empirical examination of how the corporate governance and strategy affect GHG emissions efficiency


  • Bowen Zhou

    (Graduate School of Business Administration, Kobe University)

  • Michiyuki Yagi

    (Graduate School of Business Administration, Kobe University)

  • Katsuhiko Kokubu

    (Graduate School of Business Administration, Kobe University)


This study aims to empirically examine how environmental efficiency related to GHG emissions is affected by corporate governance and activities. This study uses data from CDP (former Carbon Disclosure Project) where the observations are 686 firms worldwide in 2013. As proxy for the environmental efficiency, this study adopts GHG emissions per employee. As independent variables, this study uses dummy variables made from CDP questionnaire. Regarding the corporate governance, this study finds that the amount of greenhouse gas emissions per employee is low (i.e., efficient) when direct responsibility for climate change is taken by individual/sub-set of the board and other and senior manager/officer. However, when companies engage directly or through trade associations on climate change, the companies are considered to be less efficient than other companies. On the other hand, regarding corporate activities, this study finds that environmentally inefficient companies (i.e., more greenhouse gas emissions per employee) are likely to participate in emissions trading schemes, take a verification/assurance status that applies to firm’s Scope 3 emissions at the first year, and engage with customers.

Suggested Citation

  • Bowen Zhou & Michiyuki Yagi & Katsuhiko Kokubu, 2015. "An empirical examination of how the corporate governance and strategy affect GHG emissions efficiency," Discussion Papers 2015-27, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
  • Handle: RePEc:kbb:dpaper:2015-27

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2015
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Wenjing Li & Ran Zhang, 2010. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Ownership Structure, and Political Interference: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(4), pages 631-645, November.
    2. Daniel Matisoff, 2012. "Privatizing Climate Change Policy: Is there a Public Benefit?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(3), pages 409-433, November.
    3. Carl J. Kock & Juan Santaló & Luis Diestre, 2012. "Corporate Governance and the Environment: What Type of Governance Creates Greener Companies?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 492-514, May.
    4. Michaela Rankin & Carolyn Windsor & Dina Wahyuni, 2011. "An investigation of voluntary corporate greenhouse gas emissions reporting in a market governance system: Australian evidence," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(8), pages 1037-1070, October.
    5. Erin Marie Reid & Michael W. Toffel, 2008. "Responding to Public and Private Politics: Corporate Disclosure of Climate Change Strategies," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-019, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2009.
    6. Julie Cotter & Muftah M Najah, 2012. "Institutional investor influence on global climate change disclosure practices," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 37(2), pages 169-187, August.
    7. Jill F. Solomon & Aris Solomon & Simon D. Norton & Nathan L. Joseph, 2011. "Private climate change reporting: an emerging discourse of risk and opportunity?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(8), pages 1119-1148, October.
    8. Ans Kolk & David Levy & Jonatan Pinkse, 2008. "Corporate Responses in an Emerging Climate Regime: The Institutionalization and Commensuration of Carbon Disclosure," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 719-745.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    climate change; corporate governance; corporate activity; CDP; environmental efficiency;

    JEL classification:

    • G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:kbb:dpaper:2015-27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Yasuyuki Miyahara). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.