RMIT University
Browse

Investment decisions: The trade-off between economic and environmental objectives

journal contribution
posted on 2024-11-02, 14:49 authored by Venkateshwaran NarayananVenkateshwaran Narayanan, Kevin Baird, Richard TayRichard Tay
While there are broader socio-political, psychological, and structural factors that influence investment decisions (see Harris et al., 2016), in line with the critical approach, this study provides an empirical insight into the notion that financialization, specifically the tendency to prioritise economic over environmental objectives, has a strong bearing on how managers view investment trade-off decisions in relation to sustainability issues. The study empirically investigates this notion by examining the investment trade–off preferences of Australian managers in relation to three decision attributes – economic outcomes (i.e. financial returns), environmental impact (i.e. carbon emissions) and stakeholder pressure to consider environmental issues. We use the discrete choice experimental method to quantify the trade-offs between the above mentioned three attributes. In addition, we also investigate the potential effect of three contingency factors on individual's preferences. Specifically, at the organisational level, we explore the effects of financial and environmental rewards and at the individual level, we explore the effect of environmental consciousness. In line with the financialization hypotheses our results indicate that managers prioritise financial returns over carbon emissions and stakeholder pressures with the preference for financial returns found to be positively associated with rewards for financial performance. However, in line with the pragmatic approach and despite the overall dominance of financial returns, there is evidence that manager's focus on financial returns can be influenced, with the preference for financial returns negatively associated with rewards for environmental performance and environmental consciousness. In addition, while stakeholder pressure was not found to be associated with any of the three contingency factors and, manager's emphasis on carbon emissions was not associated with financia

History

Related Materials

  1. 1.
    DOI - Is published in 10.1016/j.bar.2020.100969
  2. 2.
    ISSN - Is published in 08908389

Journal

British Accounting Review

Volume

53

Number

100969

Issue

3

Start page

1

End page

17

Total pages

17

Publisher

Elsevier

Place published

United Kingdom

Language

English

Copyright

© 2020 British Accounting Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Former Identifier

2006104003

Esploro creation date

2021-06-01

Usage metrics

    Scholarly Works

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC