Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Accounting for Sustainability: Asia Pacific Perspectives pp 103–124Cite as

Managing Eco-efficiency Development for Sustainability: An Investigation of Top Carbon Polluters in Australia

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 2129 Accesses

Part of the book series: Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science ((ECOE,volume 33))

Abstract

Eco-efficiency as an important measure for integration of environmental and economic performance has been studied extensively in the past. However, previous studies are either conceptual or take a macro view of the empirical relationship between economic and environmental performance in an economy or industry. Little research has explored the actual integration in corporate practice. Using carbon emissions and their integration with corporate economic performance among Australian heavy polluters during 2009 and 2013, we analysed actual integration levels, improvements, patterns at the corporate level. Based on a typological classification of carbon efficiency developed in this study, we differentiate strong and weak eco-efficiency and identify the potential value drivers for the eco-efficiency results with regard to carbon emissions. The study finds that 54% of Australian top polluters have improved carbon efficiency since the implementation of Australian National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) Act 2007. Among this, nearly 30% of companies achieve a strong carbon efficiency outcome. Economically strong carbon efficient firms (Golden Stars) are more common than environmentally strong carbon efficient firms (Green Stars). This pattern is consistent among weak carbon efficient and inefficient firms. Dirty Cash Cows whose focus is purely on economic growth while ignoring environmental images are a minority among the companies examined. For financially stressed companies, environmental engagement appears more likely to be a reaction to regulatory requirements. Consistently, the eco-efficiency improvement changes with the government carbon policy changes over the reporting periods, indicating an influence of regulatory pressures on corporate eco-efficiency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In 2009, entities that had total greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalent or CO2-e) above 125 kilotonnes (KT) or total amount of energy produced or consumed above 500 terajoules (TJ) were required to report. The thresholds change to 87.5 KT and 350 TJ for 2010 and 50 KT and 200 TJ for later years.

  2. 2.

    Under the NGER Act 2007 (Section 23), registered controlling corporations are obliged to report information on greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption to the Greenhouse and Energy Data Officer (GEDO). The GEDO has published an extract of the information reported since 2009.

References

  • Albertini E (2013) Does environmental management improve financial performance? A meta-analytical review. Organ Environ 26(4):431–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Najjar B, Anfimiadou A (2012) Environmental policies and firm value. Bus Strateg Environ 21(1):49–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aragon-Correa JA, Rubio-Lopez EA (2007) Proactive corporate environmental strategies: myths and misunderstandings. Long Range Plan 40(3):357–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Government (2007) National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007. Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Burritt RL, Saka C (2006) Environmental management accounting applications and eco-efficiency: case studies from Japan. J Clean Prod 14(14):1262–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busch T, Hoffmann VH (2011) How hot is your bottom line? Linking carbon and financial performance. Bus Soc 50(2):233–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi BB, Lee D, Psaros J (2013) An analysis of Australian company carbon emission disclosures. Pac Account Rev 25(1):58–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A (2009) Cost data quality considerations for eco-efficiency measures. Ecol Econ 68(6):1583–1590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson PM, Li Y, Richardson GD, Vasvari FP (2011) Does it really pay to be green? Determinants and consequences of proactive environmental strategies. J Account Public Policy 30(2):122–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Villiers C, Rinaldi L, Unerman J (2014) Integrated reporting: insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Account Audit Account J 27(7):1042–1067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derwall J, Guenster N, Bauer R, Koedijk K (2005) The eco-efficiency premium puzzle. Financ Anal J 61(2):51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld JR (2005) Eco-efficiency. J Ind Ecol 9(4):6–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erkko S, Melanen M, Mickwitz P (2005) Eco-efficiency in the Finnish EMAS reports—a buzz word? J Clean Prod 13(8):799–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falck O, Heblich S (2007) Corporate social responsibility: doing well by doing good. Bus Horiz 50(3):247–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figge F (2005) Value-based environmental management. From environmental shareholder value to environmental option value. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 12(1):19–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figge F, Hahn T (2013) Value drivers of corporate eco-efficiency: management accounting information for the efficient use of environmental resources. Manag Account Res 24(4):387–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenster N, Bauer R, Derwall J, Koedijk K (2011) The economic value of corporate eco-efficiency. Eur Financ Manag 17(4):679–704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henri J-F, Boiral O, Roy M-J (2016) Strategic cost management and performance: the case of environmental costs. Br Account Rev 48(2):269–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herold DM, Manwa F, Sen S, Wilde S (2016) It’s the yeast we can do: untapping sustainability trends in Australian Craft Breweries. J Asia Entrep Sustain 12(2):82

    Google Scholar 

  • Horváthová E (2010) Does environmental performance affect financial performance? A meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 70(1):52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hukkinen J (2001) Eco-efficiency as abandonment of nature. Ecol Econ 38(3):311–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huppes G (2009) Eco-efficiency: from focused technical tools to reflective sustainability analysis. Ecol Econ 68(6):1572–1574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilinitch AY, Schaltegger SC (1995) Developing a green business portfolio. Long Range Plann 28(2):29–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Karagozoglu N, Lindell M (2000) Environmental management: testing the win-win model. J Environ Plan Manag 43(6):817–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiernan MJ (2007) Universal owners and ESG: leaving money on the table? Corp Gov 15(3):478–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King AA, Lenox MJ (2001) Does it really pay to be green? An empirical study of firm environmental and financial performance: an empirical study of firm environmental and financial performance. J Ind Ecol 5(1):105–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King A, Lenox M (2002) Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Manag Sci 48(2):289–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen RD, McLaughlin CP (1996) The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Manag Sci 42(8):1199–1214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konar S, Cohen MA (2001) Does the market value environmental performance? Rev Econ Stat 83(2):281–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korhonen J, Seager TP (2008) Beyond eco-efficiency: a resilience perspective. Bus Strateg Environ 17(7):411–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonough W, Braungart M (1998) The next industrial revolution. Atl Mon 282(4):82–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Azorín JF, Claver-Cortés E, López-Gamero MD, Tarí JJ (2009) Green management and financial performance: a literature review. Manag Decis 47(7):1080–1100. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910978313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakao Y, Amano A, Matsumura K, Genba K, Nakano M (2007) Relationship between environmental performance and financial performance: an empirical analysis of Japanese corporations. Bus Strateg Environ 16(2):106–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsato RJ (2006) Competitive environmental strategies: when does it pay to be green? Calif Manag Rev 48:127–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osazuwa NP, Che-Ahmad A (2016) The moderating effect of profitability and leverage on the relationship between eco-efficiency and firm value in publicly traded Malaysian firms. Soc Responsib J 12(2):295–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker LD (2005) Social and environmental accountability research: a view from the commentary box. Account Audit Account J 18(6):842–860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker LD (2011) Twenty-one years of social and environmental accountability research: a coming of age. Account Forum 35(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passetti E, Tenucci A (2016) Eco-efficiency measurement and the influence of organisational factors: evidence from large Italian companies. J Clean Prod 122:228–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry FN, Henry S, Perry ME, MacArthur L (2015) California green innovation index: international edition. Next 10 and Collaborative Economics, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME, Van der Linde C (1995) Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harv Bus Rev 73(5):120–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Qian W, Xing K (2016) Linking environmental and financial performance for privately owned firms: some evidence from Australia. J Small Bus Manag. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12261

  • Russo MV, Fouts PA (1997) A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Acad Manag J 40(3):534–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salzmann O, Ionescu-Somers A, Steger U (2005) The business case for corporate sustainability: literature review and research options. Eur Manag Rev 23(1):27–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S (1997) Economics of life cycle assessment: inefficiency of the present approach. Bus Strateg Environ 6(1):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S (1998) Accounting for eco-efficiency. In: Nath B, Hens L, Compton P, Devuyst D (eds) Environmental management in practice. Routledge, London, pp 272–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Burritt R (2000) Contemporary environmental accounting: issues, concepts and practice. Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Burritt R (2006) Corporate sustainability accounting: a catchphrase for compliant corporations or a business decision support for sustainability leaders? In: Schaltegger S, Bennett M, Burritt R (eds) Sustainability accounting and reporting. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 37–59

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Burritt R (2015) Business cases and corporate engagement with sustainability: differentiating ethical motivations. J Bus Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2938-0

  • Schaltegger S, Hörisch J (2015) In search of the dominant rationale in sustainability management: legitimacy or profit-Seeking? J Bus Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2854-3

  • Schaltegger S, Müller K (1998) Calculating the true profitability of pollution prevention. In: Bennett M, James P (eds) The green bottom line: Environmental accounting for management: current practice and future trends. Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield, pp 86–99

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Sturm A (1990) Ökologische Rationalität: Ansatzpunkte zur Ausgestaltung von ökologieorientierten Managementinstrumenten. Die Unternehmung 4:273–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Sturm A (1998) Eco-efficiency by eco-controlling. Vdf, Zurich

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Wagner M (2006) Managing the business case for sustainability: the integration of social, environmental and economic performance. Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Gibassier D, Zvezdov D (2013) Is environmental management accounting a discipline? A bibliometric literature review. Meditari Account Res 21(1):4–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidheiny S, Stigson B (2000) Eco-efficiency: creating more value with less impact. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman M, Fernando CS (2008) Environmental risk management and the cost of capital. Strateg Manag J 29:569–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trudel R, Cotte J (2009) Does it pay to be good. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 50(2):61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Virtanen T, Tuomaala M, Pentti E (2013) Energy efficiency complexities: a technical and managerial investigation. Manag Account Res 24(4):401–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wahba H (2008) Does the market value corporate environmental responsibility? An empirical examination. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 15(2):89–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walley N, Whitehead B (1994) It’s not easy being green. Harvard Bus Rev 72:46–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Z, Ou J, Li S (2016) Ecological accounting: a research review and conceptual framework. J Environ Prot 7(5):643–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Sustainability Governance (CSG), School of Commerce, University of South Australia Business School, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Wei Qian & Amanpreet Kaur

  2. Centre for Sustainability Management (CSM), Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

    Stefan Schaltegger

Authors
  1. Wei Qian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanpreet Kaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefan Schaltegger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Qian .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

    Ki-Hoon Lee

  2. Centre for Sustainability Management, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

    Stefan Schaltegger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Qian, W., Kaur, A., Schaltegger, S. (2018). Managing Eco-efficiency Development for Sustainability: An Investigation of Top Carbon Polluters in Australia. In: Lee, KH., Schaltegger, S. (eds) Accounting for Sustainability: Asia Pacific Perspectives. Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science, vol 33. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70899-7_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation