Environmental strategies of energy companies during the COVID-19 pandemic

• Autorzy: Widyanti Rahmi , Włodarczyk Aneta

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17512/pjms.2023.28.1.22

Warianty tytułu

PL

Strategie środowiskowe spółek energetycznych w czasie pandemii COVID-19

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper focuses on the impact of COVID-19 on energy companies in terms of implementing their environmental strategies and continuing the low-emission transformation of their generating units in conditions of their financial results' instability. Nonlinear panel model is estimated for energy companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange, whose generations units have been included in EU ETS in the years 2009-2021. The estimation results indicate the existence of a U-shaped relationship between the CO2 intensity observed one year earlier and current asset returns, which can be explained by the 'too-little-of-a-good-thing' effect. It indicates that companies with proactive environmental strategies that are intensively involved in the low-carbon transformation processes of energygenerating facilities achieve increasingly better financial performance. The inclusion of pandemic shocks in the modelling has not changed the shape of the CEP-CFP relationship, but it has been observed that during this period, carbon-intensive energy companies achieved lower returns on assets. A new environmental variable was considered, namely the emission to allowances index, which, together with the variable describing the share of renewable energy in energy production, informs about the degree of low-emission transformation of electricity generation.

PL

W artykule oceniono wpływ pandemii COVID-19 na przedsiębiorstwa energetyczne w zakresie realizacji strategii środowiskowych i kontynuacji niskoemisyjnej transformacji jednostek wytwórczych w warunkach niestabilności ich wyników finansowych. Skonstruowano i oszacowano nieliniowy model panelowy dla spółek energetycznych notowanych na Giełdzie Papierów Wartościowych w Warszawie, których jednostki wytwórcze zostały objęte systemem EU ETS w latach 2009-2021. Wyniki estymacji wskazują na istnienie zależności w kształcie litery U pomiędzy obserwowaną rok wcześniej intensywnością emisji CO2 a bieżącą stopą zwrotu z aktywów, co można wytłumaczyć efektem „za mało dobrych rzeczy” ('too-little-of-a-good-thing'). Wskazuje on, że firmy posiadające proaktywne strategie środowiskowe, intensywnie angażujące się w procesy niskoemisyjnej transformacji jednostek wytwórczych, osiągają coraz lepsze wyniki finansowe. Uwzględnienie w modelowaniu oddziaływania szoków pandemicznych nie zmieniło kształtu relacji CEP-CFP, jednak zaobserwowano, że w tym okresie przedsiębiorstwa energetyczne o wysokiej intensywności emisji CO2 osiągały niższe zwroty z aktywów. Do badania zaproponowano nową zmienną środowiskową, opisującą relację między rzeczywistą emisją spółek a przyznanymi darmowymi uprawnieniami do emisji, która wraz ze zmienną opisującą udział energii odnawialnej w produkcji energii, informuje o stopniu niskoemisyjnej transformacji przedsiębiorstw.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

environmental strategies; emission intensity; financial performance; panel models; COVID-19 pandemic

PL

strategie środowiskowe; intensywność emisji; wyniki finansowe; modele panelowe; pandemia Covid-19

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: Vol. 28. No. 1
• Strony: 380--396
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 39 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Widyanti Rahmi

• Islamic University of Kalimantan, Banjarmasin, Indonesia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7458-3112

autor

Włodarczyk Aneta

• Czestochowa University of Technology, Częstochowa, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8726-4556

Bibliografia

• 1.Abban, A. R., Hasan, M. Z., (2021). The causality direction between environmental performance and financial performance in Australian mining companies - A panel data analysis. Resources Policy, 70, 101894.
• 2.Ab Rahman, Z. N., Ismail, N. and Rajiani, I., (2018). Challenges for managing nontechnological innovation: a case from Malaysian public sector. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 17(1), 7-16.
• 3.Akpan, I. J., Udoh, E. A. P. and Adebisi, B., (2020). Small business awareness and adoption of state-of-the-art technologies in emerging and developing markets, and lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 34(2), 123-140.
• 4.Aragón-Correa, J. A., Sharma, S., (2003). A Contingent Resource-Based View of Proactive Corporate Environmental Strategy. The Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 71-88.
• 5.Baltagi, B.H., (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. 3rd Edition, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
• 6.Basuki, B., Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K., Rajiani, I., Widyanti, R. and Kot, S., (2022). Working from home arrangement in delivering public service during the COVID-19 pandemic: innovation or irritation? Administratie si Management Public, 39, 26-39.
• 7.Brodeur, A., Gray, D., Islam, A. and Bhuiyan, S., (2021). A literature review of the economics of COVID-19. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(4), 1007-1044.
• 8.Busch, T., Bassen, A., Lewandowski, S. and Sump, F., (2022). Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance Revisited. Organization and Environment, 35(1), 154-171.
• 9.Ding, W., Levine, R., Lin, C. and Xie, W., (2021). Corporate immunity to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Financial Economics, 141(2), 802-830.
• 10.Fujii, H., Iwata, K., Kaneko, S. and Managi, S., (2013). Corporate Environmental and Economic Performance of Japanese Manufacturing Firms: Empirical Study for Sustainable Development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(3), 187-201.
• 11.Ghosh, D., Dutta, M., (2022). Environmental behaviour under credit constraints - Evidence from panel of Indian manufacturing firms. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 63, 490-500.
• 12.Guérin, P., Suntheim, F., (2021). Firms’ environmental performance and the COVID-19 crisis. Economics Letters, 205, 109956.
• 13.Halmai, P., (2022). COVID-19 Crisis and Supply Side Bottlenecks in the EU. Shorter and Longer Term Prospects. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 18(4), 19-30.
• 14.He,H., Harris, L., (2020). The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social responsibility and marketing philosophy. Journal of Business Research, 116, 176-182.
• 15.Hermundsdottir, F., Haneberg, D. H. and Aspelund, A., (2022). Analyzing the impact of COVID-19 on environmental innovations in manufacturing firms. Technology in Society, 68, 101918.
• 16.Horváthová, E., (2012). The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: Short-term costs and long-term benefits? Ecological Economics, 84, 91-97.
• 17.Hosseini, S. E., (2020). An outlook on the global development of renewable and sustainable energy at the time of COVID-19. Energy Research and Social Science, 68, 101633.
• 18.Huang, S., Liu, H., (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on stock price crash risk: Evidence from Chinese energy firms. Energy Economics, 101, 105431.
• 19.Ismail, N., Kot, S., Abd Aziz, A. S. and Rajiani, I., (2020). From innovation to market: Integrating university and industry perspectives towards commercialising research output. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 8(4), 99-115.
• 20.Lahouel, B., Gaies, B., Zaied, Y. and Jahmane, A., (2019). Accounting for endogeneity and the dynamics of corporate social - Corporate financial performance relationship. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, 352-364.
• 21.Misani, N., Pogutz, S., (2015). Unraveling the effects of environmental outcomes and processes on financial performance: A non-linear approach. Ecological Economics, 109, 150-160.
• 22.Mukanjari, S., Sterner, T., (2020). Charting a “Green Path” for Recovery from COVID-19. 76, 825-853.
• 23.Pesaran, M. H., (2021). General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empirical Economics, 60(1), 13-50.
• 24.Scherer, M., Milczarski, P., (2021). Machine-learning-based carbon footprint management in the frozen vegetable processing industry. Energies, 14(22), 7778.
• 25.Segura, S., Ferruz, L., Gargallo, P. and Salvador, M., (2018). Environmental versus economic performance in the EU ETS from the point of view of policy makers: A statistical analysis based on copulas. Journal of Cleaner Production, 176, 1111-1132.
• 26.Seroka-Stolka, O., (2020). How Does Stakeholder Pressure Affect Strategic Environmental Types. The Evidence from Polish Companies. [in:] Education Excellence and Innovation Management: a 2025 Vision to Sustain Development during Global Challenges, Soliman Khalid S. (eds.), International Business Information Management Association, Norristown, 8267-8278.
• 27.Streimikiene, D. (2022). COVID-19 effect on energy poverty: Lithuanian case study. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 17(4), 215-223.
• 28.Szczygielski, J. J., Brzeszczyński, J., Charteris, A. and Bwanya, P. R., (2022). The COVID-19 storm and the energy sector: The impact and role of uncertainty. Energy Economics, 109.
• 29.Thorgren, S.,Williams, T. A., (2020). Staying alive during an unfolding crisis: How SMEs ward off impending disaster. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 14, 1-11.
• 30.Trumpp, C., Guenther, T., (2017). Too Little or too much? Exploring U-shaped Relationships between Corporate Environmental Performance and Corporate Financial Performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(1), 49-68.
• 31.Wahyuni, D., Ratnatunga, J., (2015). Carbon strategies and management practices in an uncertain carbonomic environment - lessons learned from the coal-face. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 397-406.
• 32.Wan, D., Xue, R., Linnenluecke, M., Tian, J. and Shan, Y., (2021). The impact of inwestor attention during COVID-19 on investment in clean energy versus fossil fuel firms. Finance Research Letters, 43,101955.
• 33.Włodarczyk, A., (2019). Economic and environmental performance analysis of Polish energy companies. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 5(SI), 1-11.
• 34.Włodarczyk, A., Kadłubek, M., (2018). Use of multifactor models with GARCH structure in carbon emissions risk management, [in:] Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering 2018, Panova, Zabrze, 1(1), 407-413.
• 35.Yoo, S., Keeley, A. R. and Managi, S., (2021). Does sustainability activities performance matter during financial crises? Investigating the case of COVID-19. Energy Policy, 155, 112330.
• 36.Zhang, D., (2022). Capacity utilization under credit constraints: A firm‐level study of Latin American manufacturing. International Journal of Finance and Economics, 27(1), 1367-1386.
• 37.Zhang, D., Fang, Y., (2022). Are environmentally friendly firms more vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic? Journal of Cleaner Production, 355, 131781.
• 38.Zhang, D., Zheng, W., (2022). Does COVID-19 make the firms’ performance worse? Evidence from the Chinese listed companies. Economic Analysis and Policy, 74, 560-570.
• 39.Zulfikar, R. Z., Widyanti, R. W., Basuki, B., Mayvita, P. A. and Purboyo, P., (2021). Encourage SMEs sustainable behavior during Covid-19 pandemic through competitive advantages and corporate culture. Serbian Journal of Management, 16(2), 405-417.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2024)..