Firmaların Çevresel Performansları ile Pay Senedi Getirileri İlişkisi: Enerji Sektöründe Bir Analiz

Öz

Günümüzde yaşanan iklim değişikliği ile birlikte firmaların yayınladıkları raporlar, yapmış oldukları çevresel açıklamalar ve çevreye karşı duyarlılıklarını gösteren çevresel performansları paydaşlar tarafından karşılık bulmaya başlamıştır. Firmaların çevre bilinci geliştirmeleri ile kurumsal itibarlarını artırdıkları ve buna bağlı olarak paydaşların firma hakkında olumlu görüşe sahip olduğu varsayılır. Paydaşların firma hakkında daha olumlu bir kurumsal imaja sahip olması, pay fiyatlarının ve firma değerinin artmasına neden olabilmektedir. Bunun yanında firmaların çevre dostu faaliyetler yürütmeleri firmalara maliyet tasarrufu sağlayabilmekte ve finansal performanslarını artırabilmektedir. Bu kapsamda, firmaların çevre performansları gibi finansal olmayan faaliyetlerinin firmaların pay getirileri üzerindeki rolü literatürde tartışılmaktadır. Çalışmada, gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülke gruplarında enerji sektöründe yer alan firmaların göstermiş oldukları çevre bilincinin pay getirilerinde karşılık bulup bulmadığı araştırılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, firmaların çevre kirlilikleri ve çevresel tahribatları önleyici faaliyetleri ile söz konusu firmanın pay getirisi arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi incelenmiştir. Diğer bir ifadeyle, yatırımcılar açısından firmaların çevre performanslarının yatırım kararlarında etkili olup olmadığı, pay fiyatlarının belirlenmesinde yatırımcıların, firmaların çevre performanslarını dikkate alıp almadığı sorularına cevap aranmıştır. Çalışmanın amacı doğrultusunda gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkelerdeki enerji sektöründe faaliyet gösteren 63 firmanın 2009-2020 dönemleri arasındaki çevresel performansları ile pay getirileri arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi incelenmiştir. Çalışmada yapılan Dumitrescu ve Hurlin (2012) panel nedensellik test sonuçlarına göre gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkelerdeki enerji sektöründeki firmaların çevresel performansları ile pay getirileri arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmanın bulgularına göre firmaların çevre performanslarının pay getirilerinin tahmininde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı etkisi bulunmaktadır. Firmaların çevresel performansları ile hisse senedi getirileri arasında çift yönlü bir nedensellik ilişkisi olduğu bulgusu, çevresel performansın hisse senedi getirilerinin öngörülebilirliğinde yatırımcılar, yöneticiler ve hissedarlar için yol gösterici bir unsur olarak kullanılabileceğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sürdürülebilir finans
• sürdürülebilirlik
• çevre performansı
• pay getirileri
• nedensellik analizi

The Relationship between Environmental Performance of Firms and Stock Returns: An Analysis in the Energy Sector

Abstract

Today, with climate change, firms' reports, environmental disclosures and environmental performances that demonstrate their sensitivity to the environment have begun to be accepted by stakeholders. It is assumed that firms increase their corporate reputation by developing environmental awareness and accordingly, stakeholders have a positive opinion about the firm. When stakeholders have a more positive corporate image of the firm, share prices and firm value can increase. Moreover, environmentally friendly activities of firms can save costs and improve their financial performance. In this context, the role of non-financial activities such as firms' environmental performance on firms' stock returns is discussed in the literature. The study investigates whether the environmental awareness shown by firms in the energy sector in developed and developing country groups is reflected in stock returns. In this study, we examine the causality relationship between firms' activities to prevent environmental pollution and environmental damage and their stock returns. In other words, we ask whether the environmental performance of firms has an impact on investors' investment decisions and whether investors take firms' environmental performance into account when determining stock prices. In line with the objective of the study, the causality relationship between the environmental performance and stock returns of 63 firms operating in the energy sector in developed and developing countries for the period 2009-2020 is analyzed. According to the findings of the study, firms' environmental performance has a statistically significant effect on forecasting. According to the results of Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) panel causality test, there is a bidirectional causality relationship between the environmental performance of firms in the energy sector in developed and developing countries and their stock returns. According to the findings of the study, firms' environmental performance has a statistically significant effect on the estimation of stock returns. The finding that there is a bidirectional causal relationship between firms' environmental performance and stock returns suggests that environmental performance can be used as a guiding factor for investors, managers and shareholders in predicting stock returns.

Keywords

• Sustainable finance
• sustainability
• environmental performance
• stock returns
• causality analysis

Kaynakça

1. Aswani, J., Raghunandan, A., & Rajgopal, S. (2024). Are carbon emissions associated with stock returns?. Review of Finance, 28(1), 75-106. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfad013
2. BBC. (2015). Volkswagen: The scandal explained. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772
3. Lahouel, B. B., Zaied, Y. B., Managi, S., & Taleb, L. (2022). Re-thinking about U: The relevance of regime-switching model in the relationship between environmental corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Journal of Business Research, 140, 498-519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.019
4. Berg, F., Koelbel, J. F., Pavlova, A., & Rigobon, R. (2022). ESG Confusion and Stock Returns: Tackling The Problem of Noise (Working Paper 30562). Retrieved from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w30562
5. Brammer, S., Brooks, C., & Pavelin, S. (2006). Corporate social performance and stock returns: UK evidence from disaggregate measures. Financial Management, 35(3), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-053X.2006.tb00149.x
6. Brouwers, R., Schoubben, F., Van Hulle, C., Van Uytbergen, S., & Leuven, K. (2014). The link between corporate environmental performance and corporate value: A literature review. Review of Business and Economic Literature, 58(4), 343–374. Retrieved from: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/1665413&lang=en
7. Brunborg, T.-B., & Haldorsen, P. K. (2021). The Impact of Carbon Emissions on US Stock Returns [Norwegian School of Economics]. Retrieved from: https://openaccess.nhh.no/nhh-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2982405/masterthesis.PDF?sequence=1
8. Chang, C. L., Ilomäki, J., Laurila, H., & McAleer, M. (2020). Causality between CO2 emissions and stock markets. Energies, 13(2893), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13112893

9. Chen, Y., Kumar, A., & Zhang, C. (2020). Dynamic ESG Preferences and Asset Prices. In SSRN Electronic Journal (Issue March 2018). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3331866
10. Dechant, K., & Altman, B. (1994). Environmental leadership: From compliance to competitive advantage. Academy of Management Perspectives, 8(3), 7–20. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1994.9503101163
11. Derwall, J., Guenster, N., Bauer, R., Koedijk, K. (2005). The Eco-Efficiency Premium Puzzle The Eco-Efficiency Premium Puzzle. Financial Analysts Journal, 61(2), 51–63.
12. Dinh, M. T. H. (2023). Research in international business and finance ESG, time horizons, risks and stock returns. Research in International Business and Finance, 65, 101981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2023.101981
13. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts , evidence , and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/258887
14. Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
15. Feldman, S. J., Soyka, P. A., Ameer, P., & International, I. C. F. K. (1996). Does improving a firm’s environmental management system and environmental performance result in a higher stock price? ICF Kaiser International.
16. Freeman, E. (1984). Strategic Management. In Pitman. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203982211-18
17. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. Corporate Social Responsibility, 31–35.
18. Gavrilakis, N., & Floros, C. (2023). ESG performance, herding behavior and stock market returns: evidence from Europe. Operational Research, 23(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-023-00745-1
19. Giansante, S., Fatouh, M., & Dove, N. (2023). Carbon Emissions Announcements and Market Returns. Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(10385), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310385
20. Giese, G., Lee, L.-E., Melas, D., Nagy, Z., & Nishikawa, L. (2017). Foundations of ESG Investing (Vol. 1, Issue November).
21. Haan, M., Dam, L., & Scholtens, B. (2012). The drivers of the relationship between corporate environmental performance and stock market returns. Journal of Sustainable Finance and Investment, 2(3–4), 338–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2012.738601
22. Hart, S. L., & Ahuja, G. (1996). Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between emission reduction and firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-0836(199603)5:1<30::aid-bse38>3.0.co;2-q
23. IAC. (2023). CO2 Emissions in 2022. In CO2 Emissions in 2022. https://doi.org/10.1787/12ad1e1a-en
24. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
25. IPCC. (2019). Global Warming of 1.5°C. Retrieved from: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_High_Res.pdf
26. Jensen, M. (2001). Value Maximisation, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function. European Financial Management, 7(3), 297–317. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094840
27. Khan, M. (2019). Corporate Governance, ESG, and Stock Returns around the World. Financial Analysts Journal, 75(4), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/0015198X.2019.1654299
28. King, A., & Lenox, M. (2002). Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Management Science, 48(2), 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.2.289.258
29. Lewandowski, S. (2017). Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance: The Role of Emission Reductions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(8), 1196–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1978
30. Machdar, N. M. (2017). Corporate Financial Performance, Corporate Environmental Performance, Corporate Social Performance and Stock Return. Jurnal Manajemen Dan Kewirausahaan, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.9744/jmk.19.2.118-124
31. Miao, X., & Li, N. (2022). How Carbon Emission Affects Stock Returns and Business Management in China. 2022 2nd International Conference on Financial Management and Economic Transition (FMET 2022), 793–802. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-054-1_86
32. Ming Lee, K. Y., Ling, P. S., & Tan, C. C. (2022). Does environmental issue matter? Effect of air pollution on the stock market performance. Cogent Economics and Finance, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2022.2117118
33. Mühr, P. (2020). ESG performance and Stock Market Returns. In University of Barcelona. http://hdl.handle.net/2445/169669
34. Nuber, C., Velte, P., & Hörisch, J. (2020). The curvilinear and time-lagging impact of sustainability performance on financial performance: Evidence from Germany. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 232–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1795
35. Ouadghiri, I. El, Guesmi, K., & Peillex, J. (2019). Public attention to environmental issues and stock market returns (Issue 22).
36. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1240. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.572504
37. Porter, M. (1991). Green competitiveness. Scientific American, 264(4), 168. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28036-8_100815
38. Porter, M., & Linde, C. Van Der. (1995). Green and competitive :ending the stalemate green and competitive. Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 120–134. Retrieved from: http://hbr.org/product/green-and-competitive-ending-the-stalemate/an/95507-PDF-ENG
39. Reshetnikova, L., Ovechkin, D., Devyatkov, A., Chernova, G., & Boldyreva, N. (2023). Carbon Emissions and Stock Returns: The Case of Russia. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(8), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16080370
40. Torre, M. La, Mango, F., Cafaro, A., & Leo, S. (2020). Does the ESG index affect stock return? Evidence from the Eurostoxx50. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12166387
41. United Nations. (2014). Country Classifications. In World Economic Situation and Prospects. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511615702.009
42. Walley, N., & Whitehead, B. (1994). It’s Not Easy Being Green. Harvard Business Review, 36(81), 4.
43. Ye, C., Song, X., & Liang, Y. (2022). Corporate sustainability performance, stock returns, and ESG indicators: fresh insights from EU member states. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(58), 87680–87691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20789-8
44. Yin, X. N., Li, J. P., & Su, C. W. (2023). How does ESG performance affect stock returns? Empirical evidence from listed companies in China. Heliyon, 9(5), e16320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16320
45. Ziegler, A., Schröder, M., & Rennings, K. (2007). The effect of environmental and social performance on the stock performance of european corporations. Environmental and Resource Economics, 37(4), 661–680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9082-y