Journals / Ekonomi-tek / 2017 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

Role of Strategic Interactions in Corporate Sustainability Decisions: An Empirical Investigation

Pages
17–46
Publication Date
2017-01-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall evidence suggests a central role for strategic motives in management’s sustainability decisions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There is a large amount of empirical literature on the relationship between corporate sustainability and corporate financial performance.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Thus, we consider the sustainability decision making of companies to be of a strategic nature and show that strategic motives, typically ignored in the literature, can be an important factor in the process.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall evidence suggests a central role for strategic motives in management’s sustainability decisions.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Corporate sustainability · strategic interactions · market entry

Abstract

There is a large amount of empirical literature on the relationship between corporate sustainability and corporate financial performance. However, the literature considers company-specific aspects affecting the link but omits the influence of the competition. A firm’s gains from its sustainability efforts, however, depend on whether its industry competitors also perform sustainable actions—whether similar in type or different. Thus, we consider the sustainability decision making of companies to be of a strategic nature and show that strategic motives, typically ignored in the literature, can be an important factor in the process. We estimate an Instrumental Variable (IV) Probit model using inclusion in the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index and draw on financial information from the Wharton Research Data Services COMPUSTAT dataset in order to identify the effect of competition. We find that the effect of competition on the likelihood of entry into the sustainability market is negative, but this is only true if the endogeneity is correctly taken into account. Probit estimates present an upward bias, which means that results from raw models can be misleading in designing policies on sustainability. Overall evidence suggests a central role for strategic motives in management’s sustainability decisions.

Özet

There is a large amount of empirical literature on the relationship between corporate sustainability and corporate financial performance. However, the literature considers company-specific aspects affecting the link but omits the influence of the competition. A firm’s gains from its sustainability efforts, however, depend on whether its industry competitors also perform sustainable actions—whether similar in type or different. Thus, we consider the sustainability decision making of companies to be of a strategic nature and show that strategic motives, typically ignored in the literature, can be an important factor in the process. We estimate an Instrumental Variable (IV) Probit model using inclusion in the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index and draw on financial information from the Wharton Research Data Services COMPUSTAT dataset in order to identify the effect of competition. We find that the effect of competition on the likelihood of entry into the sustainability market is negative, but this is only true if the endogeneity is correctly taken into account. Probit estimates present an upward bias, which means that results from raw models can be misleading in designing policies on sustainability. Overall evidence suggests a central role for strategic motives in management’s sustainability decisions.

🔖

Cite This Article

SOYTAS, M. A., UŞAR, D. D. (2017). Role of Strategic Interactions in Corporate Sustainability Decisions: An Empirical Investigation. Ekonomi-tek, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 17–46. https://ajindex.com/articles/753681

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Athey, S., J. Levin, and E. Seira, (2008), "Comparing Open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Theory and Evidence from Timber Auctions," Working Paper, Stanford University. Bajari, P., A. Hortacsu, (2003), "The Winner's Curse, Reserve Prices, and Endogenous Entry: Empirical Insights from e-Bay Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, 34 (2), pp. 329-355.
  2. Bajari, P., H. Hong, J. Krainer, D. Nekipelov, (2010), “Estimating Static Models of Strategic Interactions,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Vol. 28:4, pp. 469-482.
  3. Battini, D., A. Persona, F. Sgarbossa, (2014), “A Sustainable EOQ Model: Theoretical Formulation and Applications,” International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 149, pp. 145-153.
  4. Berry, S. T., (1992), "Estimation of a Model of Entry in the Airline Industry," Econometrica, Vol. 60, pp. 889-917.
  5. Berry, S. and P. Reiss, (2007), “Empirical Models of Entry and Market Structure,” Handbook of Industrial Organization, Vol. 3, Chapter 29, pp. 1845-1886.
  6. Berry, S. T. and J. Waldfogel, (1999), “Social Inefficiency in Radio Broadcasting,” Rand Journal of Economics, Vol. 30:3, pp. 397-420.
  7. Birkinshaw, J., J. Ridderstrale, (1999), “Fighting the Corporate Immune System: A Process Study of Subsidiary Initiatives in Multinational Corporations,” International Business Review, Vol. 8, pp. 149-180.
  8. Björn, P. and Q. Vuong, (1984), "Simultaneous Equations Models for Dummy Endogenous Variables: A Game Theoretic Formulation with Application to Labor Force Participation,” Californian Institute of Technology. Bresnahan, T. F. and P. C. Reiss, (1991a), “Empirical Models of Discrete Games,” Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 48:1-2, pp. 57-81.
  9. Bresnahan, T. F. and P. C. Reiss, (1991b), “Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 99:5, pp. 977-1009.
  10. Carroll, R. J., D. M. Primo, and B. K. Richter, (2016), “Using Item Response Theory to Improve Measurement in Strategic Management Research: An Application to Corporate Social Responsibility,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 37, pp. 66-85.
  11. Cassimon, D., P. Engelen, and L. Van Liedekerke, (2016), “When Do Firms Invest in Corporate Social Responsibility? A Real Option Framework,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 137, pp. 15-29.
  12. Conrad, K., (2005) “Price Competition and Product Differentiation When Consumers Care for the Environment,” Environmental & Resource Economics, Vol. 31, pp. 1-19.
  13. Cheng, B., I. Ioannou, and G. Sefafeim, (2014), “Corporate Social Responsibility and Access to Financ