Corporate boards and outside stakeholders as determinants of environmental litigation

Each year, hundreds of firms are prosecuted for violating environmental laws and hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties are assessed. At the same time, a much larger number of firms escape the various costs associated with litigation by adhering to the provisions of the same laws and regulations. It is not a priori apparent why this dichotomy exists. In this paper we draw on corporate governance and stakeholder theories to empirically investigate environmental lawsuits. Specifically, we compare the pre-lawsuit profile of 209 violators to a sample of matched control firms between 1994 and 1998. We find that the likelihood of becoming a lawsuit defendant increases with board size, with the fraction of directors in industrial firms, and with the fraction of inside ownership, and decreases with the number of directorships held by outside directors. These findings are robust to alternative dependent variable specifications. Together, our results suggest that managers, researchers, and policy-makers need to direct their attention to the corporate board as the core decision-making unit forming corporate environmental policies. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Michael J. Lenox,et al.  Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry's Responsible Care Program , 2000 .

[2]  R. Watson,et al.  Corporate Performance and Stakeholder Management: Balancing Shareholder and Customer Interests in The U.K. Privatized Water Industry , 1999 .

[3]  Jonathan L. Johnson,et al.  Number of Directors and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis , 1999 .

[4]  S. Hart A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1995 .

[5]  John R. Lott,et al.  Environmental Violations, Legal Penalties, and Reputation Costs , 1999 .

[6]  Shawn L. Berman,et al.  Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? The Relationship Between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm Financial Performance , 1999 .

[7]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  Boards of Directors and Corporate Financial Performance: A Review and Integrative Model , 1989 .

[8]  Andrew King,et al.  Exploring the Locus of Profitable Pollution Reduction , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[9]  B. Smart,et al.  Beyond Compliance: A New Industry View of the Environment , 1992 .

[10]  Steven N. Kaplan,et al.  Outside directorships and corporate performance , 1990 .

[11]  R. Klassen,et al.  The impact of environmental management on firm performance , 1996 .

[12]  S. Schmidheiny Changing Course: A Global Business Perspective on Development and the Environment , 1992 .

[13]  C. Alexander,et al.  Why Do Corporations Become Criminals? Ownership, Hidden Actions, and Crime as an Agency Cost , 1999 .

[14]  Alain Verbeke,et al.  Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: an organizing framework , 1998 .

[15]  David J. Collis,et al.  Competing on Resources: Strategy in the 1990s , 1999 .

[16]  R. Freeman Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach , 2010 .

[17]  P. Shrivastava The Role of Corporations in Achieving Ecological Sustainability , 1995 .

[18]  John Mcconnell,et al.  Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value , 1990 .

[19]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .

[20]  E. Penrose The theory of the growth of the firm twenty-five years after , 1960 .

[21]  Kari Jones,et al.  Effects of Harmful Environmental Events on Reputations of Firms , 1999 .

[22]  M. Russo,et al.  A Resource-Based Perspective On Corporate Environmental Performance And Profitability , 1997 .

[23]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Who Matters to Ceos? An Investigation of Stakeholder Attributes and Salience, Corpate Performance, and Ceo Values , 1999 .

[24]  J. Elkington Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-Win-Win Business Strategies for Sustainable Development , 1994 .

[25]  P. Birnbaum The choice of strategic alternatives under increasing regulation in high technology companies. , 1984, Academy of Management journal. Academy of Management.

[26]  Noan Walley,et al.  It's not easy being green , 1994 .

[27]  E. Fama,et al.  Separation of Ownership and Control , 1983, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[28]  Kanak Gautam,et al.  The effects of board size and diversity on strategic change , 1994 .

[29]  Jonathan L. Johnson,et al.  META-ANALYTIC REVIEWS OF BOARD COMPOSITION, LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE, AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE , 1998 .

[30]  D. Yermack Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors , 1996 .

[31]  M. Muoghalu,et al.  Hazardous waste lawsuits, stockholder returns, and deterrence , 1990 .

[32]  Martin T. Wells,et al.  Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms 1 We wish to thank Asiakastieto Oy for fu , 1998 .

[33]  M. Porter,et al.  Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship , 1995 .

[34]  J.L.P. Piet,et al.  The challenge of going green , 1995 .

[35]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  DETERMINANTS OF FIRM PERFORMANCE: THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ECONOMIC AND ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS , 1989 .