288 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
activities emerged as noteworthy drivers of increased ROA,
while firm size, energy efficiency, and total new products
were key determinants of Tobin’s Q.
The introduction of innovative and sustainable new
products strengthened a mining company’s competitive
edge and market valuation, underscoring the strategic
importance of sustainability. Robustness checks using dif-
ferent regression models with various fixed effects and error
clustering confirmed the initial findings.
These results offer valuable insights into the relation-
ship between sustainability behaviors and financial perfor-
mance, but causality cannot be inferred from correlation
alone. Further research is warranted to derive precise impli-
cations for business practices.
CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
This study explored the relationship between sustainability
behaviors and financial performance (measured by ROA
and Tobin’s Q). Rigorous analysis yielded valuable insights
into how corporate sustainability efforts, particularly those
aimed at carbon reduction, influence financial success.
A staged approach tested the hypothesis of an associa-
tion between specific sustainability behaviors and financial
performance. Initial fixed-effects regressions controlled for
entity and time-specific effects, then incorporated sustain-
ability variables. Finally, multi-way clustering addressed
potential data correlations, enhancing robustness.
The first hypothesis revealed that company size and
total associations positively impacted ROA, while energy
efficiency and total incentives had negative influences.
Other variables, like new products and R&D investments,
did not show significant effects. The model explained
75.4% of ROA variance.
Similarly, the second hypothesis showed company size
and new products negatively influencing Tobin’s Q, while
energy efficiency had a borderline negative impact. Total
volunteerism and other variables, like financial leverage
and training, did not show significant effects. The model
explained 76.14% of Tobin’s Q variance.
Overall, the study’s quantitative analysis consistently
demonstrated that sustainability behaviors influence finan-
cial performance. Key determinants of improved per-
formance, identified through both ROA and Tobin’s Q,
include firm size, energy efficiency, total incentives, and
assessment and measurement activities. These insights hold
substantial implications for policymakers and the mining
industry as they navigate towards sustainable practices, par-
ticularly those focused on carbon reduction.
REFERENCES
Abban, A.R., &Hasan, M.Z. (2021). The causality direc-
tion between environmental performance and financial
performance in Australian mining companies-A panel
data analysis. Resources Policy, 70, 101894.
Boehnke, R.F., Hoppe, T., Brezet, H., &Blok, K. (2019).
Good practices in local climate mitigation action by
small and medium-sized cities exploring meaning,
implementation and linkage to actual lowering of
carbon emissions in thirteen municipalities in The
Netherlands. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 630–
644. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.264.
Busch, T., Bassen, A., Lewandowski, S., &Sump, F.
(2020). Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance
Revisited. Organization &Environment, 35(1), 154–
171. doi: 10.1177/1086026620935638.
Cenci, S., Burato, M., Rei, M., &Zollo, M. (2023a).
An Analysis of Corporate Sustainability Behaviour
Through the Lens of Empirical Fitness Landscapes.
Available at SSRN 4205664.
Cenci, S., Burato, M., Rei, M., &Zollo, M. (2023b).
Business sustainability behaviour and alignment
with climate targets. Research Square. doi: 10.21203/
rs.3.rs-1711150/v1.
Diaye, M.-A., Ho, S.-H., &Oueghlissi, R. (2022). ESG
performance and economic growth: a panel co-integra-
tion analysis. Empirica, 49(1), 99–122.
Eccles, R.G., Ioannou, I., &Serafeim, G. (2014). The
impact of corporate sustainability on organizational
processes and performance. Management Science,
60(11), 2835–2857.
Ellram, L.M., Tate, W.L., &Saunders, L.W. (2022). A
legitimacy theory perspective on Scope 3 freight trans-
portation emissions. Journal of Business Logistics, 43(4),
472–498. doi: 10.1111/jbl.12299.
Fan, L.W., Pan, S.J., Liu, G.Q., &Zhou, P. (2017). Does
energy efficiency affect financial performance? Evidence
from Chinese energy-intensive firms. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 151, 53–59.
Fyson, C.L., Baur, S., Gidden, M., &Schleussner, C.-F.
(2020). Fair-share carbon dioxide removal increases
major emitter responsibility. Nature Climate Change,
10(9), 836–841. doi: 10.1038/s41558‑020‑0857‑2.
Gao, S., Meng, F., Wang, W., &Chen, W. (2023).
Does ESG always improve corporate performance?
Evidence from firm life cycle perspective. Frontiers in
Environmental Science, 11, 103.
activities emerged as noteworthy drivers of increased ROA,
while firm size, energy efficiency, and total new products
were key determinants of Tobin’s Q.
The introduction of innovative and sustainable new
products strengthened a mining company’s competitive
edge and market valuation, underscoring the strategic
importance of sustainability. Robustness checks using dif-
ferent regression models with various fixed effects and error
clustering confirmed the initial findings.
These results offer valuable insights into the relation-
ship between sustainability behaviors and financial perfor-
mance, but causality cannot be inferred from correlation
alone. Further research is warranted to derive precise impli-
cations for business practices.
CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
This study explored the relationship between sustainability
behaviors and financial performance (measured by ROA
and Tobin’s Q). Rigorous analysis yielded valuable insights
into how corporate sustainability efforts, particularly those
aimed at carbon reduction, influence financial success.
A staged approach tested the hypothesis of an associa-
tion between specific sustainability behaviors and financial
performance. Initial fixed-effects regressions controlled for
entity and time-specific effects, then incorporated sustain-
ability variables. Finally, multi-way clustering addressed
potential data correlations, enhancing robustness.
The first hypothesis revealed that company size and
total associations positively impacted ROA, while energy
efficiency and total incentives had negative influences.
Other variables, like new products and R&D investments,
did not show significant effects. The model explained
75.4% of ROA variance.
Similarly, the second hypothesis showed company size
and new products negatively influencing Tobin’s Q, while
energy efficiency had a borderline negative impact. Total
volunteerism and other variables, like financial leverage
and training, did not show significant effects. The model
explained 76.14% of Tobin’s Q variance.
Overall, the study’s quantitative analysis consistently
demonstrated that sustainability behaviors influence finan-
cial performance. Key determinants of improved per-
formance, identified through both ROA and Tobin’s Q,
include firm size, energy efficiency, total incentives, and
assessment and measurement activities. These insights hold
substantial implications for policymakers and the mining
industry as they navigate towards sustainable practices, par-
ticularly those focused on carbon reduction.
REFERENCES
Abban, A.R., &Hasan, M.Z. (2021). The causality direc-
tion between environmental performance and financial
performance in Australian mining companies-A panel
data analysis. Resources Policy, 70, 101894.
Boehnke, R.F., Hoppe, T., Brezet, H., &Blok, K. (2019).
Good practices in local climate mitigation action by
small and medium-sized cities exploring meaning,
implementation and linkage to actual lowering of
carbon emissions in thirteen municipalities in The
Netherlands. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 630–
644. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.264.
Busch, T., Bassen, A., Lewandowski, S., &Sump, F.
(2020). Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance
Revisited. Organization &Environment, 35(1), 154–
171. doi: 10.1177/1086026620935638.
Cenci, S., Burato, M., Rei, M., &Zollo, M. (2023a).
An Analysis of Corporate Sustainability Behaviour
Through the Lens of Empirical Fitness Landscapes.
Available at SSRN 4205664.
Cenci, S., Burato, M., Rei, M., &Zollo, M. (2023b).
Business sustainability behaviour and alignment
with climate targets. Research Square. doi: 10.21203/
rs.3.rs-1711150/v1.
Diaye, M.-A., Ho, S.-H., &Oueghlissi, R. (2022). ESG
performance and economic growth: a panel co-integra-
tion analysis. Empirica, 49(1), 99–122.
Eccles, R.G., Ioannou, I., &Serafeim, G. (2014). The
impact of corporate sustainability on organizational
processes and performance. Management Science,
60(11), 2835–2857.
Ellram, L.M., Tate, W.L., &Saunders, L.W. (2022). A
legitimacy theory perspective on Scope 3 freight trans-
portation emissions. Journal of Business Logistics, 43(4),
472–498. doi: 10.1111/jbl.12299.
Fan, L.W., Pan, S.J., Liu, G.Q., &Zhou, P. (2017). Does
energy efficiency affect financial performance? Evidence
from Chinese energy-intensive firms. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 151, 53–59.
Fyson, C.L., Baur, S., Gidden, M., &Schleussner, C.-F.
(2020). Fair-share carbon dioxide removal increases
major emitter responsibility. Nature Climate Change,
10(9), 836–841. doi: 10.1038/s41558‑020‑0857‑2.
Gao, S., Meng, F., Wang, W., &Chen, W. (2023).
Does ESG always improve corporate performance?
Evidence from firm life cycle perspective. Frontiers in
Environmental Science, 11, 103.