We examine the impact of corporate culture on environmental performance using a sample of 7199 firm-year observations over the period of 2002–2018. We find that stronger corporate culture improves environmental performance, measured by the amount of toxic chemical release (TCR). Our result is both statistically and economically significant. We also show that cultural norms of innovation, quality and teamwork as well as a technology-oriented corporate culture have a greater impact on enhancing environmental performance. Further analyses show that managerial competence and (...) strong institutional ownership moderate the relationship between corporate culture and environmental performance. We introduce the decomposition of expected and unexpected components of TCR and document that firms with a strong corporate culture implement strategies to reduce the unexpected component of TCR in addition to the expected component of TCR. Finally, we document that strong corporate culture and environmental performance improve firms’ financial performance. Our results are robust to several sensitivity tests and procedures to mitigate endogeneity and self-selection problems. From a practical point of view, our findings suggest that a firm’s culture can determine its environmental sustainability and ethical practices. (shrink)

This study examines the impact of non-executive employee stock ownership plans (ESOP) on corporate environmental engagement. We show that granting ESOPs to non-executive employees promotes greater corporate ecological engagement from the perspectives of environmental protection expenditures, environmental information disclosure quality, and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings. ESOPs unite members in a common interest, empowering them to put pressure on management to reduce carbon emissions, which benefits their physical wellbeing and increases their residual interest in long-term corporate wealth. Further, our (...) analysis reveals that companies investing in environmental protection forgo short-term profit as a consequence of high initial costs, while increasing long-term firm value. These positive effects are attributable to ESOP schemes with higher employee subscription rates, those granted to a larger number of non-executive employees, and those with longer validity periods of ownership, whose incentive effect is sufficiently powerful to offset the free-rider problem. In addition, the impact of ESOPs is more pronounced in companies with greater media exposure, those confronting intense labor market competition, and those in heavily polluting industries. Fundamentally, our study provides novel evidence of the incentive effect of ESOPs on corporate environmental engagement and of stakeholder dynamics driving the implementation of carbon reduction strategies. (shrink)

Banks are expected to play a key role in assisting the real economy with the green transition process. One of the tools used for this purpose is the issuance of green bonds. We analyze the characteristics of banks that issue green bonds to understand: (i) which banks are more likely to resort to these funding instruments, and (ii) if the issuance of green bonds leads to an improvement in a bank’s environmental footprint. We find that large banks and banks that (...) had already publicly expressed their support for a green transition are more likely to issue green bonds. Conditional on being a green bond issuer, smaller banks tend to resort to green bonds in a more persistent manner and for relatively larger amounts, while larger banks issue green bonds on a more occasional basis and for smaller amounts. This heterogeneity is also reflected in our findings that only banks that issue green bonds more intensively improve their emissions and reduce lending to polluting sectors, thus contributing to the decarbonization of the financial sector. (shrink)

Exploiting the regulatory change in China’s Environmental Protection Law in 2015 as a plausibly exogenous shock to the stringency of pollution control, we evaluate the joint role of state ownership and environmental regulation in shaping firms’ environment-friendly (green) investments. Using a difference-in-differences methodology, we find that state-owned enterprises (SOEs) make significantly more green investments than non-SOEs in response to the regulatory change. We propose and empirically analyze four potential mechanisms that may drive this result: (i) environment-related government subsidies granted to (...) SOEs, (ii) political promotion incentives of SOEs’ top management, (iii) government administrative intervention, and (iv) SOEs’ concern for social welfare. We find strong support for the last mechanism whereby SOEs undertake greater green investments due to their greater concern for social welfare, as evidenced by the fact that SOEs making greater charitable donations and those controlled by local governments (and thus more bonded with local communities) make greater green investments. Consistent with this interpretation, we show that regions where SOEs have a greater economic influence improved their air quality to a greater extent after 2015 than regions where non-SOEs are more dominant. In sum, we demonstrate that state ownership and environmental regulation complement one another in motivating corporate green investment. Our results highlight the important implications for the effectiveness and interplay of different government tools in addressing environmental issues. (shrink)