Advertisement

Racial and Religion Influence Towards Natural Environmental Risk Management Evaluation in Credit Financing

  • Mohamad Yazis Ali BasahEmail author
  • Mazlynda Md Yusuf
Conference paper

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) concept has a long and varied history. In the West, there has been extensive literature highlighting CSR that concentrates on natural environmental management and social and cultural differences. However, such research is lacking in the Malaysian context. This study tries to investigate environmental management in Malaysia’s banking sector and how bank managers perceive environmental risk in their credit financing assessment process. Malaysia was chosen for this study as it has dual banking systems (conventional and Islamic banking), which allows to investigate the performance of environmental management of both types of banks. For these purposes, the questionnaire survey was conducted to the managers and executives in the corporate banking department where their main task is to evaluate and recommend credit financing approval. The findings via questionnaire survey suggest that, generally, Malaysian banking viewed natural environmental issues as a secondary factor in credit evaluation. Their view towards natural environmental risk is also significantly influenced by racial groups and religious affiliations. In conclusion, the study showed that social and cultural differences may influence the perception of environmental management.

Keywords

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) Islamic banking Natural environmental risk management Credit financing 

References

  1. Banks, E. (1997). The credit risk of complex derivatives (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan Press Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bessis, J. (1998). Risk management in banking. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Coulson, A. B., & Dixon, R. (1995). Environmental risk and management strategy: The implications for financial institutions. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 13(2), 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cowton, C. J., & Thompson, P. (2000). Do codes make a difference? The case of bank lending and the environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 24, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Donaldson, T. H. (1989). Credit risk and exposure securitization and transaction. New York: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duffie, D., & Singleton, K. J. (2003). Credit risk pricing, measurement and management. Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Equator Principles. (2012). Members and reporting [Internet]. Available from: http://equator-principles.com. Accessed on 01 Feb 2013.
  8. Greuning, H. V., & Bratanovic, S. B. (2000). Analyzing banking risk a framework for assessing corporate governance and financial risk management. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  9. Hill, S. H. (2007). The greening of project finance. Geography Compass, 1(5), 1058–1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pallant, J. (2007). A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS version 15. Berkshire: Mc Graw Hill and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Saunders, A., & Allen, L. (2002). Credit risk measurement, new approaches to value at risk and other paradigms. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). London: Pearson International Edition.Google Scholar
  13. Thompson, P. (1998). Bank lending and the environment: Policies and opportunities. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 16(6), 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Thompson, P., & Cowton, C. J. (2004). Bringing the environment into bank lending: Implications for environmental reporting. The British Accounting Review, 36, 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fakulti Ekonomi dan MuamalatUniversiti Sains Islam MalaysiaNilaiMalaysia
  2. 2.Fakulti Sains dan TeknologiUniversiti Sains Islam MalaysiaNilaiMalaysia

Personalised recommendations