DOCSLIB.ORG

Green Policies and Firms'competitiveness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Green Policies and Firms'competitiveness 2018 Inclusive solutions #GGSD #GGKP6 Forum & Annual Conference for the OECD, Paris green transition 27-29 November Issue Paper Green policies and firms’competitiveness Antoine Dechezleprêtre Environment Directorate, OECD Misato Sato Grantham Research Institute, LSE OECD GREEN GROWTH AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FORUM The GGSD Forum is an OECD initiative aimed at providing a dedicated space for multi-disciplinary dialogue on green growth and sustainable development. It brings together experts from different policy fields and disciplines and provides them with an interactive platform to encourage discussion, facilitate the exchange of knowledge and ease the exploitation of potential synergies. By specifically addressing the horizontal, multi-disciplinary aspects of green growth and sustainable development, the GGSD Forum constitutes a valuable supplement to the work undertaken in individual government ministries. The GGSD Forum also enables knowledge gaps to be identified and facilitates the design of new works streams to address them. AUTHORSHIP & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This issue note was prepared for the 2018 GGSD Forum to steer discussion around the theme of Session 2 on “Green growth and Competitiveness: firms who win, firms who lose.” A previous version of this note was published as “The impacts of environmental regulations on competitiveness” (2017), Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 11(2), 183–206. The authors are Antoine Dechezleprêtre (OECD) and Misato Sato (Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science). The note benefitted from comments and suggestions by Enrico Botta and Jaco Tavenier from the OECD. The previous version was reviewed by Milan Brahmbhatt, Raphael Calel, Baran Doda, Damien Dussaux, Carolyn Fischer, Matthieu Glachant, Colin McCormick, and Dimitri Zenghelis. The note was produced under the supervision of Kumi Kitamori, Head, Green Growth and Global Relations Division, OECD. Financial contribution by the Global Green Growth Institute, the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, the European Union Seventh Framework Programme and the UK Economic and Social Research Council through the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy is gratefully acknowledged. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the OECD member countries. This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimination of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. 2 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 3 2. HOW DOES ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION AFFECT FIRMS’ COMPETITIVENESS? ................ 4 Asymmetric Environmental Regulations and Relative Production Costs .................................................. 4 The Pollution Haven Hypothesis vs the Porter Hypothesis ....................................................................... 5 Key conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 7 3. MEASURING COMPETITIVENESS EFFECTS EMPIRICALLY ........................................................... 8 Measuring competitiveness at the micro-level with firm data ................................................................... 8 Measuring environmental stringency ......................................................................................................... 8 Key conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 9 4. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE: IMPACTS ON TRADE, INDUSTRY LOCATION, AND EMPLOYMENT .. 10 Impacts on trade ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Impacts on Location of Production and Foreign Investment ................................................................... 11 Impacts on Employment .......................................................................................................................... 13 Key conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 16 5. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE: IMPACTS ON PRODUCTIVITY, INNOVATION AND COMPETITIVENESS ................................................................................................... 17 Environmental Regulations and Productivity ........................................................................................... 17 Environmental Regulations and Innovation .............................................................................................. 18 Key conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 20 6. CONCLUSIONS AND PRIORITIES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ....................................................... 21 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 23 3 1. Introduction A major concern in the context of the green transition is the potential impacts of environmental policies, and of green growth policy packages more generally, on the competitiveness of companies affected by these regulations. Businesses and policy makers fear that, in a world characterised by integrated global value chains and capital flows, differences in the stringency of environmental policies across countries could shift pollution-intensive production capacity towards regions with less ambitious regulation. For example, many countries are concerned that their efforts to achieve carbon emission reductions will put their own carbon- intensive producers at a competitive disadvantage in the global economy, and such concerns are often used by policy makers as a justification for not introducing more ambitious environmental policies. Yet, environmental regulations are sometimes viewed as potential drivers of economic growth. For example, the famous Porter hypothesis (Porter and van der Linde, 1995a) argues that more stringent environmental policies can actually have a net positive effect on the competitiveness of regulated firms because such policies promote cost-cutting efficiency improvements, which in turn reduce or completely offset regulatory costs, and foster innovation in new technologies that can help firms achieve international technological leadership and expand market share. The growing importance of this debate among policy makers has given rise to a large number of studies that attempt to quantify the effects of environmental regulations on key aspects of firms’ competitiveness, including trade, industry location, employment, productivity, and innovation. The objective of this briefing note is to review this recent empirical literature in order to inform the political debate concerning the potential economic impacts of the green transition. The note starts by explaining how environmental regulation may cause competitiveness effects and how these effects are measured. It then reviews the existing empirical evidence, discussing first the impact of relative environmental stringency on trade, industry location and employment, and then examining the effects on productivity and innovation, which could also impact firms’ competitiveness. It concludes with a summary identifying knowledge gaps and a discussion of priorities for future research. Competitiveness concerns stem largely from differences in environmental regulation across countries. Thus, this note focuses primarily on studies that empirically examine cross-country differences in environmental stringency. It also includes some studies that examine differences between smaller-scale jurisdictions (e.g., cross-county differences in the United States). Importantly, the review covers only ex post evaluation studies, thus excluding ex ante modelling studies, which have recently been reviewed by Carbone and Rivers (2017). It also focuses on environmental regulations that affect the manufacturing sector and target industrial emissions, which are at the centre of most competitiveness debates.1 1 Regulations on fishing, agriculture, forestry, mining, or waste, which are sometimes directed explicitly at protecting the environment and human health, are not included. 4 2. How does environmental regulation affect firms’ competitiveness? In the context of environmental policies, competitiveness2 effects result from differences or asymmetries in regulatory stringency3 applied across entities (e.g., firms or sectors) that are competing in the same market. For example, some firms may be regulated while others are exempt; some sectors may face stricter pollution standards than others; or environmental stringency may vary across jurisdictions as is the case with climate change mitigation policies where different regions are expected to take carbon mitigation action at different speeds under the UNFCCC’s Paris Agreement. If two competing firms face identical regulation, then competitiveness effects are not an issue.4 Thus, competitiveness effects can be distinguished from the general effects of regulations on polluting firms' economic outcomes, which are
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flexible Emission Fees
    TemaNord 2012:511 TemaNord Ved Stranden 18 DK-1061 Copenhagen K www.norden.org Flexible emission fees An incentive for driving sustainable production and consumption Flexible emission fees An incentive for driving sustainable production and consumption This report explores the urgent question of how to transition to a green economy. If the price of pollution becomes the same as the price to not pollute, i.e. the investment required for a non-polluting solution, could market forces be harnessed to create a totally green economy? Would the consumer lead the way if pollution fees were simply credited into everyone’s account? Would economic growth and technical develop- ment forge ahead? Taking the flexible fee mechanism proposed by Höglund as a starting point, the report examines the academic litera- ture and presents the results of a workshop where leading Swedish economists and environmentalists examine the issues involved in price discovery mechanisms and call for further developments in this field. TemaNord 2012:511 ISBN 978-92-893-2335-2 2012511-Omslag-kor.indd 1 28-03-2012 11:38:40 Flexible emission fees An incentive for driving sustainable production and consumption Magnus Enell TemaNord 2012:511 Flexible emission fees An incentive for driving sustainable production and consumption Magnus Enell TemaNord 2012:511 ISBN 978-92-893-2335-2 http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/TN2012-511 © Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen Print: Kailow Express ApS Copies: 250 Cover photo: Image Select Printed in Denmark This publication has been published with financial support by the Nordic Council of Ministers. However, the contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views, policies or rec- ommendations of the Nordic Council of Ministers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness? Stefan Ambec*, Mark A
    2 The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness? Stefan Ambec*, Mark A. Coheny, Stewart Elgiez, and Paul Lanoie§ Introduction Some twenty years ago, Harvard Business School economist and strategy professor Michael Porter challenged the conventional wisdom about the impact of environmental regulation on business by arguing that well-designed regulation could actually increase competitiveness: “Strict environmental regulations do not inevitably hinder competitive advantage against rivals; indeed, they often enhance it” (Porter 1991, 168). Until that time, the traditional view of environmental regulation, held by virtually all economists, was that requiring firms to reduce an externality like pollution necessarily restricted their options and thus by definition reduced their profits. After all, if profitable opportunities existed to reduce pollution, profit-maximizing firms would already be taking advantage of them. Over the past twenty years, much has been written about what has since become known simply as the Porter Hypothesis. Yet even today, we continue to find conflicting evidence concerning the Porter Hypothesis, alternative theories that might explain the Porter Hypothesis, and oftentimes a misunderstanding of what it does and does not say. This article reviews the key theoretical foundations and empirical evidence to date concern- ing the Porter Hypothesis and identifies research challenges and opportunities concerning the links between environmental regulation, innovation, and competitiveness. Such a careful exam- ination of both the theory and the empirical evidence can yield some useful insights for the *Senior researcher, Toulouse School of Economics (INRA-LERNA), and visiting professor, University of Gothenburg; e-mail: [email protected]. yProfessor of management and law, Vanderbilt University, and university professor, Resources for the Future; e-mail: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Trade Integration and the Polarisation of Eco-Labelling Strategies Vera Danilina
    Trade Integration and the Polarisation of Eco-Labelling Strategies Vera Danilina To cite this version: Vera Danilina. Trade Integration and the Polarisation of Eco-Labelling Strategies. 2017. halshs- 01556484 HAL Id: halshs-01556484 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01556484 Preprint submitted on 5 Jul 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Working Papers / Documents de travail Trade Integration and the Polarisation of Eco-Labelling Strategies Vera Danilina WP 2017 - Nr 25 Trade Integration and the Polarisation of Eco-Labelling Strategies* Vera Danilinay Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS, EHESS, Centrale Marseille, AMSE July 5, 2017 Abstract Growing ecological concerns give rise to salient discussions of green policy impact within different social sciences domains. This research studies the outcomes of voluntary environmental labelling in autarky and upon trade in- tegration in the presence of two types of heterogeneity, across countries and across producers. It investigates the impact of the two main types of eco- labels - multiple-criteria-based programmes (ISO Type I) and self-declared environmental claims (ISO Type II), both of which are simultaneously in- troduced due to the environmental concerns of consumers. The model illus- trates the polarisation of eco-labels when the least productive firms tend to avoid green strategies, lower-middle productive and the most efficient firms are incentivized to greenwash, and the upper-middle productive firms choose trustful programmes.
    [Show full text]
  • Induced Innovation in Clean Energy Technologies from Foreign Environmental Policy Stringency?*
    Induced Innovation in Clean Energy Technologies from Foreign Environmental Policy Stringency?* Kyle S. Herman1* and Jun Xiang 1 University College London, Global Governance Institute * Correspondence: [email protected] *Final accepted version published in Technological Forecasting and Social Change Abstract: : In this paper, we re-conceptualize the meaning of policy-induced innovations in clean technologies by taking a cross-border approach. Previously, empirical research has shown how domestic climate and environmental policies induce firms in the same country to innovate in clean and environmental technologies. This phenomenon has become known as the Porter Hypothesis. However, most research focuses strictly on domestic inducement effects and, if foreign effects are accounted for, they are assumed to be either “knowledge” or “technology” spillovers. We, however, propose that policy spillovers might also induce innovations in other countries. In order to test this hypothesis, we construct a “foreign” environmental policy stringency proxy. This proxy is used as the main explanatory variable, with the outcome variable clean technologies, defined here as all renewable energy technologies as well as electrical energy storage, because these technologies are predominantly defined within the scope of climate and environmental policies as necessary to combat climate change and set forth as paramount to stemming pollutant causing climate change in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change founding documents. Our results show that foreign environmental policy stringency does, indeed, induce clean-technology innovation at home, but this effect varies with different lag structures in our three models. Keywords: dynamic innovation; ITC; cross-border climate policy; CCMTs; Environmental Technologies; Porter Hypothesis; UNFCCC; World Bank; ETS 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Porter's Hypothesis: a Stochastic Frontier Panel Data Analysis of Dutch Horticulture
    Testing Porter's Hypothesis: A Stochastic Frontier Panel Data Analysis of Dutch Horticulture Arno van der Vlist, Cees Withagen, and Henk Folmer Paper prepared for presentation at the XIth Congress of the EAAE (European Association of Agricultural Economists), 'The Future of Rural Europe in the Global Agri-Food System', Copenhagen, Denmark, August 24-27, 2005 Copyright 2005 by Arno van der Vlist, Cees Withagen, and Henk Folmer. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. TESTING PORTER'S HYPOTHESIS: A STOCHASTIC FRONTIER PANEL DATA ANALYSIS OF DUTCH HORTICULTURE Abstract: We propose a test of the Porter hypothesis for the Dutch horticulture sector, using a stochastic production frontier analysis allowing for an inclusion of policy variables to account for the effect of environmental policy of firm performance. We find considerable heterogeneity in the way firms react to environmental policy measures. Our estimation results indicate, for example, that a 1997 voluntary agreement covering energy, nutrient and pesticides use enhances technical efficiency of vegetable and plants growers, contrary to specialised flower growers. Specialised flower growers, however, did react to the 1993 multi-year agreement on energy reduction, contrary to vegetable and plant growers. Summarising, our findings are mixed but do not seem to reject the anecdotal evidence mentioned by Porter and Van der Linde (1995b) that Dutch horticulture firms’ performance increased due to increased environmental stringency. JEL codes: D24, Q12, Q50 Keywords: firm performance, environmental stringency, technical efficiency 1. Introduction Environmental economists schooled in the neoclassical tradition are tempted to assume that environmental policy endangers the competitiveness of (domestic) firms compared to (foreign) competitors that are not subject to such policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Development, Ecological Complexity, and Environmental Values
    Sustainable Development, Ecological Complexity, and Environmental Values EDITED DY Ignacio Ayestar3n a nd Miren Ona india Center for Basque Studies Current Research Series, No. 10 Sustainable Development, Ecological Complexity, and Environmental Values Edited by Ignacio Ayestarán and Miren Onaindia Current Research Series No. 10 Center for Basque Studies University of Nevada, Reno Published in conjunction with the University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU f// Center for -:;_ Basque Studies Universidad Euskal Herriko 0 .. UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO II del Pais Vasco Unibertsitatea Current Research Selections of the ongoing work done by the faculty of the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), www.ehu.es Editorial Committee Amaia Maseda (Chair, UPV/EHU), Arantza Azpiroz (UPV/EHU), Javier Echeverría (UPV/EHU and Ikerbasque), Jon Landeta (UPV/EHU), Sandra Ott (UNR), Joseba Zulaika (UNR), Santos Zunzunegui (UPV/EHU) Current Research Series No. 10 Center for Basque Studies University of Nevada, Reno Reno, Nevada 89557 http://basque.unr.edu Copyright © 2013 by the Center for Basque Studies. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Cover and series design © 2013 by Jose Luis Agote. Cover design based on engravings by Eduardo Chillida and Jorge Oteiza. Translations by: introduction and chapter 2, Jennifer Martin; chapters 1, 10, and 13 Julie Waddington; chapter 3 and 4, Lauren DeAre; chapters 6 and 12, Laura Bunt-MacRury; chapters 7, 9, and 11, Jennifer Ottman Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sustainable development, ecological complexity, and environmental values / edited by Ignacio Ayestarán and Miren Onaindia. pages cm. -- (Current research series ; no. 10) “Published in conjunction with the University of the Basque Country.” Summary: “Collection of articles on sustainability in the Basque Country”- -Provided by publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 17 Greening the Economy
    CHAPTER 17 Greening the Economy CHA P TER 17 FOCUS QUEST I ONS • Is a “green economy” possible? • What economic theories provide insight into the relationship between the economy and the environment? • Is protecting the environment bad for the economy? • What policies can promote a transition to a green economy? 17.1 THE GREEN ECONOMY : INTRODUCT I ON Economic and environmental objectives are often presented as conflicting goals. A common theme in political debates in recent years is that certain environmental regulations result in unacceptable job losses. Thus the choice is presented as being between improved environmental quality on one hand, and a robust economy on the other (see Box 17.1 for a recent example of this debate). But is the choice this simple? Can’t we have both sufficient environmental qual- ity and plentiful, good jobs? In this chapter we explore the relationship between protecting the environment and economic growth. We’ll consider the research on the topic to determine if there is necessarily a tradeoff between the environment and the economy. While protecting the environment clearly involves some costs, including job losses in some sectors, economists focus on whether the benefits jus- tify these costs. Environmental regulations may also create jobs in some sectors— for example, environmental restrictions on coal plants may lead to expansion of wind power production. Thus it may be possible that at least some environmental regulations actually lead to net job gains. Some recent policy proposals suggest that a well-designed response to current envi- ronmental and energy challenges can actually be the engine for future economic growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Environmental Regulations Promote Corporate Environmental Responsibility? Evidence from the Moderated Mediating Effect Model and an Empirical Study in China
    sustainability Article Can Environmental Regulations Promote Corporate Environmental Responsibility? Evidence from the Moderated Mediating Effect Model and an Empirical Study in China Benhong Peng 1,2, Yu Tu 1,* and Guo Wei 3 1 School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China; [email protected] 2 Institute of Climate Change and Public Policy, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China 3 Department of Mathematics & Computer Science, University of North Carolina at Pembroke, Pembroke, NC 28372, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 8 January 2018; Accepted: 23 February 2018; Published: 28 February 2018 Abstract: Based on the Stakeholder theory, a moderated mediating effect model is developed to reach the study objective, revealing an important connection that suggests environmental regulations (ERs) influence corporate environmental responsibility (CER) (Porter Hypothesis). In building the model, the validity of the questionnaire data was analyzed with factor analysis. By employing a two-step approach, a regression analysis is utilized to discuss the mediating effect of altruistic motivation and moderating effect of green innovation, and a structural equation model is used to explore the interactive mechanism of different variables. It is found that altruistic motivation plays a medium role in the relationship between ERs and CER, and green innovation engages a positive coordination in the relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Regulation and Financial Performance in China: an Integrated View of the Porter Hypothesis and Institutional Theory
    sustainability Article Environmental Regulation and Financial Performance in China: An Integrated View of the Porter Hypothesis and Institutional Theory Eunmi Lee School of Business, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea; [email protected]; Tel.: +82-10-2670-8147 Received: 3 November 2020; Accepted: 4 December 2020; Published: 6 December 2020 Abstract: The link between environmental regulations and financial performance has long been studied, but whether command and control environmental regulation or voluntary instruments induce better results is an unsettled question. By drawing on the Porter Hypothesis, this paper examines whether both approaches to environmental protection boost forms of environmental protection regulations that have positive impacts on financial performance. By integrating institutional theory, this study also examines whether ownership structures moderate the relationship between environmental regulation and financial performance. The results from data on 183 firms listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges confirmed that both command and control environmental regulation and voluntary instruments positively affect financial performance. This paper also found that ownership structure strengthens the relationship between command and control environmental regulation and financial performance. The findings enrich the Porter Hypothesis and contribute to environmental research by revealing that properly designed environmental regulations have positive impacts on financial performance. By drawing on institutional theory, this study further contributes to business and management studies by confirming that the specific moderator, China’s state-owned enterprises, is a crucial contributor in achieving robust financial results. Keywords: environment management; environmental regulation; porter hypothesis; institutional theory; financial performance 1. Introduction Since China opened its economy in 1978, rapid economic growth has led to the significant deterioration and sacrifice of the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Linkages Between Environmental Policy and Competitiveness
    OECD Environment Working Papers No. 13 Linkages between Environmental Policy OECD and Competitiveness https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/218446820583 Unclassified ENV/WKP(2009)8 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 11-Jan-2010 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ English - Or. English ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE Unclassified ENV/WKP(2009)8 ENVIRONMENT WORKING PAPER No.13 LINKAGES BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND COMPETITIVENESS By Leena Lankoski (1) (1) Department of Economics and Management, University of Helsinki, Finland JEL classification: O31, O33, O38 Keywords: eco-innovation, competitiveness, environment policy, resource efficiency, globalization, supply chain, Porter hypothesis, pollution haven All Environment Working Papers are available at www.oecd.org/env/workingpapers English - Or. English JT03276818 Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format ENV/WKP(2009)8 OECD ENVIRONMENT WORKING PAPERS This series is designed to make available to a wider readership selected studies on environmental issues prepared for use within the OECD. Authorship is usually collective, but principal authors are named. The papers are generally available only in their original language English or French with a summary in the other if available. The opinions expressed in these papers are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainability and Competitive Advantage: an Empirical Study of Value Creation
    Competition Forum Vol. 9(1), 2011 Sustainability and Competitive Advantage: An Empirical Study of Value Creation Neeraj J. Gupta, Elon University Christina C. Benson, Elon University EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This paper seeks to fill a gap in existing literature by testing whether sustainable companies are able to compete effectively in terms of financial performance and attractiveness to investors. Our sample consists of firms appearing in the Innovest ‘Global 100’ rankings released annually at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Our empirical results indicate that sustainable companies do not significantly underperform the stock market as a whole, and are viewed as highly competitive within their industries. We provide a theoretical basis for these results by linking classic corporate strategy and competitive advantage theories to the performance of sustainable enterprises. Keywords: Sustainability, Competitive advantage, Porter hypothesis, Corporate strategy, Empirical study INTRODUCTION In 2003, at the age of 93, legendary business guru Peter Drucker declared: “Every single social and global issue of our day is a business opportunity in disguise” (Cooperrider, 2008, 1). Over the past three decades, a growing body of academic literature has developed around the relationship between social responsibility and firm performance. Companies across the world have increasingly embraced the concept of sustainability as a powerful source of organizational and technological innovation. This paper seeks to fill a gap in the existing literature
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability and Preserving the Environment for the Sake of Tomorrow
    “Businesses bottom line is not only about dollars and cents. It is giving back to the society Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability and preserving the environment for the sake of tomorrow. This book says it all.” Corporate Social Responsibility Professor Ishak Ismail Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) and Sustainability “I commend this book to all who have a current interest and understanding of CSR; to those wishing to improve their theoretical and practical understanding of CSR and to those Contemporary Perspectives contemplating the implementation of CSR to benefit from the many advantages of its adoption.” Associate Professor Wayne Binney Deakin University, Australia “The content of this book is timely as the structure of the book will provide additional insights into the concepts of CSR and the strategic implications of embedding CSR into corporate strategies.” Associate Professor Faizah Darus Head Asia-Pacific Centre for Sustainability (APCeS) Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Malaysia Mehran Nejati Ali Quazi Azlan Amran Mehran Nejati Ali Quazi Azlan Amran Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability Contemporary Perspectives Edited by Mehran Nejati Ali Quazi & Azlan Amran Singapore London New York Toronto Sydney Tokyo Madrid Mexico City Munich Paris Cape Town Hong Kong Montréal A01_MEHR0000_01_SE_FM.indd 1 12/12/14 2:06 PM Published by Pearson Malaysia Sdn Bhd Level 1, Tower 2A, Avenue 5 Bangsar South No. 8 Jalan Kerinchi 59200 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Custom Solutions and Delivery Director: Ang Teck Chuan Custom Solutions Manager: Lucy Cook Content Development Manager: Esther Yap Pearson Asia Pacific offices:Bangkok, Beijing, Ho Chi Minh City, Hong Kong, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Seoul, Singapore, Taipei, Tokyo Printed in Malaysia 4 3 2 1 17 16 15 14 ISBN 978-967-349-672-3 Cover Art: Copyright © Pearson Malaysia Sdn Bhd 2015.
    [Show full text]