A recent study has investigated how the relationships between
a company’s owners, managers and boards of directors may influence its environmental performance. The findings indicate that environmental performance is higher in companies with powerful CEOs, who are also chairpersons on their board of directors.
Many companies aim to have a positive impact on stakeholders, including the public, and the environment through corporate social responsibility
(CSR) programmes, and some include social impacts in their corporate
goals. While voluntary initiatives, such as the UN Global Compact1 and
International Corporate Governance
Network2, encourage companies to incorporate social goals into their
governance agenda, few offer any detailed guidance on building socially
accountable governance structures.
The researchers decided to focus specifically on environmental aspects of social responsibility.
They refer to their approach as ‘fact-based research’, which may
eventually provide the groundwork for new theories about the
relationship between governance structure and social and environmental impacts.
Their study is based on analysis of the governance and environmental performance
of 313 companies listed in an index of the USA’s top publically traded
companies between the years 1997-2005. Most of the companies were from
five industries that typically have a large environmental impact:
food; chemicals; machinery; electronics and instruments; and electric,
gas and sanitary services. Overall, governance structure seemed to have
an important but complex relationship with environmental performance. Environmental performance was influenced by how boards of directors were set-up, how companies were managed and how they were owned.
The researchers measured their environmental performance in terms of environmental strengths (strategies introduced to improve environmental performance)
and environmental concerns (incorporating pollution). Chief executives
had a key influence - companies with powerful CEOs, who were also
chairpersons on their board of directors, had more environmental
strengths. This finding contradicts current thinking on financial
performance, which indicates that it is beneficial to separate the roles
of CEO and chairperson of the board, and maintain an independent board
of directors. The results therefore hint that the type of governance
structure that maximises profits is not necessarily one that will
benefit social and environmental aims.
Another important aspect was long-term investment. Previous research
has often tended to assume that long-term investors encourage companies
to take their environmental responsibilities more seriously. However,
the study suggests that this is only true in companies with boards that
include outside members. The researchers say this demonstrates that
investors are willing to wait for environmental benefits, as long as
independent monitoring exists.
According to the researchers, their fact-based approach represents a first step towards understanding the relationship between corporate governance and environmental performance.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire