EMPIRIGAL TESTS AND RESULTS
Pollution Index
The pollution index for all firms was developed in two steps. First, a weighted index was computed for each of three measures of pollutants, i.e., TSS, BOD, pH, on the basis of the methodology described earlier (see Table 1). The raw pollution scores contained in column 1 of Table 1 were converted to a weighted index for each pollutant. The production data contained in column 2 was used for developing the BOD and TSS pollution index. The weighted index for BOD and TSS is given in column 3 and for pH in column 2. In the second step, the weighted index of three pollutants was added to develop an overall pollution index for each firm. This index is given in Table 2.
Table 2
An Overall Pollution Index (Ranked from best to worst)
Company Index
Mead 17.46 Westvaco 23.88 Hammermill 34.74 Champion 40.00 St. Regis 47.66 Boise Cascade 69.74 Great N. Nekoosa 75.07 Potlatch 104.69 Weyerhaeuser 135.60 Scott 146.50 International Paper 190.30 Crown Zellerbach 191.15 Georgia Pacific 191.37
POLLUTION: PULP AND PAPER FIRMS 707
Relationship Between Pollution and Economic Performance
The association between pollution index and economic performance indicators was evaluated by using the Pearson Correlation test for three different time periods.' First, the pollution performance of 1978 was correlated with the 1978 economic performance of the firm upon the assumption that economic performance information will reflect the impact of pollution reports filed with the EPA during the same year. Second, 1978 pollution performance was correlated with an average of economic performance for the preceding three years, i.e. 1975—77. This test was conducted upon the assumption that pollution reports filed in 1978 would refiect pollution performance which was the result of expenditures incurred on pollution related activities during the preceding years. Third, the 1978 pollution performance was correlated with an average of economic performance of three years from the year of reporting of pollution emissions, i.e. 1978—80. This period was selected on the assumption that the impact of pollution performance may appear with a time lag of one or two years. The results of correlation tests for the three periods are contained in Table 3. The results relating to the association between 1978 polution performance and 1978 economic performance indicate that pollution performance is negatively correlated with all economic performance indicators, except for the ratio of Cash Flow/Equity. However, only the correlation coefficient relating to NI is marginally significant at the 0.09 level. All other correlation coefficients are insignificant. The results on the association between 1978 pollution index and economic performance for the preceding three years, i.e. 1975—77, indicate that the correlation coefficients are negative for all economic performance indicators
Table 3
Results of Association Between Pollution Performance and Economic Performance of Pulp and Paper Firms
Variables
Net Income
Return on Equity
Return on Assets
Cash Flows/Equity
Cash Flows/Assets
Pearson 1975-77
-0.630 (0.021) -0.305 (0.31) -0.357 (0.23) -0.559 (0.047) -0.558 (0.048)
Correlation 1978
-0.492 (0.09) -0.056 (0.85) -0.010 (0.97) 0.391 (0.19) -0.445 (0.13)
Coefficients 1978-80
-0.501 (0.08) 0.20 (0.51) 0.17 (0.58) -0.30 (0.32) -0.189 (0.54)
0 Probability
708 JAGGI AND FREEDMAN
and these are significant for NI and Cash Flow indicators at the 0.05 level. These results thus suggest that pollution related activities of firms undertaken during the preceding three years as refiected in the 1978 pollution emission reports are negatively correlated with economic performance of three years preceding pollution reporting. This negative association is especially significant for ratios based on cash fiows. The results on assocation between 1978 pollutuion performance and 1978—80 economic performance indicate that the association is negative for NI and cash fiow based ratios, but positive for ROE and ROA. However, the correlation coefficients are insignificant at the classical levels of significance except for NI, which is marginally significant at the level of 0.08. The above results provide evidence, though not very strong, that pollution performance is negatively associated with the economic performance over a short period of time, especially for the period preceding the year of pollution reporting. This negative association continued during the period after the reporting year for cash based economic indicators. On the basis of these results, we reject the first null hypothesis that there was no association between pollution performance and economic performance and accept the alternative hypothesis that there was a negative association between these variables. These results differ from the results of Bradgon-Marlin's and Spicer's studies which indicated that there was a positive association between pollution perforrnance and economic performance. T
النتائج (
العربية) 1:
[نسخ]نسخ!
امبيريجال الاختبارات والنتائجمؤشر التلوثتم تطوير مؤشر التلوث لجميع الشركات في خطوتين. أولاً، وضع مؤشر مرجح كان المحسوبة لكل تدبير من التدابير الثلاثة من الملوثات، أي خدمات الدعم التقني، بود، الأس الهيدروجيني، على أساس المنهجية المذكورة سابقا (انظر الجدول 1). وتم تحويل درجات التلوث الخام الواردة في العمود 1 من الجدول رقم 1 إلى فهرس مرجحة لكل الملوثات. تم استخدام بيانات الإنتاج الواردة في العمود 2 لوضع مؤشر التلوث مجلس الإدارة وخدمات الدعم التقني. ويرد المؤشر المرجح لمجلس الإدارة وخدمات الدعم التقني في العمود 3 وعلى درجة الحموضة في العمود 2. في الخطوة الثانية، تمت إضافة فهرس المرجحة للملوثات الثلاثة لوضع مؤشر تلوث شامل لكل شركة. ويرد هذا الفهرس في الجدول 2.الجدول 2مؤشر التلوث الشامل (مرتبة من الأفضل إلى الأسوأ)مؤشر الشركةميد لاتح 17.46 23.88 هاميرميل بطل 34.74 40.00 سانت ريجيس بويز 47.66 تتالي 69.74 عظيم أ. نيكوسا 75.07 Potlatch 104.69 وييرهايوسير 135.60 سكوت 146.50 الدولية ورقة التاج 190.30 زيليرباتش 191.15 جورجيا المحيط الهادئ 191.37التلوث: شركات لب الورق والورق 707العلاقة بين التلوث والأداء الاقتصاديThe association between pollution index and economic performance indicators was evaluated by using the Pearson Correlation test for three different time periods.' First, the pollution performance of 1978 was correlated with the 1978 economic performance of the firm upon the assumption that economic performance information will reflect the impact of pollution reports filed with the EPA during the same year. Second, 1978 pollution performance was correlated with an average of economic performance for the preceding three years, i.e. 1975—77. This test was conducted upon the assumption that pollution reports filed in 1978 would refiect pollution performance which was the result of expenditures incurred on pollution related activities during the preceding years. Third, the 1978 pollution performance was correlated with an average of economic performance of three years from the year of reporting of pollution emissions, i.e. 1978—80. This period was selected on the assumption that the impact of pollution performance may appear with a time lag of one or two years. The results of correlation tests for the three periods are contained in Table 3. The results relating to the association between 1978 polution performance and 1978 economic performance indicate that pollution performance is negatively correlated with all economic performance indicators, except for the ratio of Cash Flow/Equity. However, only the correlation coefficient relating to NI is marginally significant at the 0.09 level. All other correlation coefficients are insignificant. The results on the association between 1978 pollution index and economic performance for the preceding three years, i.e. 1975—77, indicate that the correlation coefficients are negative for all economic performance indicatorsTable 3Results of Association Between Pollution Performance and Economic Performance of Pulp and Paper FirmsVariablesNet IncomeReturn on EquityReturn on AssetsCash Flows/EquityCash Flows/AssetsPearson 1975-77-0.630 (0.021) -0.305 (0.31) -0.357 (0.23) -0.559 (0.047) -0.558 (0.048)Correlation 1978-0.492 (0.09) -0.056 (0.85) -0.010 (0.97) 0.391 (0.19) -0.445 (0.13)Coefficients 1978-80-0.501 (0.08) 0.20 (0.51) 0.17 (0.58) -0.30 (0.32) -0.189 (0.54)0 Probability708 JAGGI AND FREEDMANand these are significant for NI and Cash Flow indicators at the 0.05 level. These results thus suggest that pollution related activities of firms undertaken during the preceding three years as refiected in the 1978 pollution emission reports are negatively correlated with economic performance of three years preceding pollution reporting. This negative association is especially significant for ratios based on cash fiows. The results on assocation between 1978 pollutuion performance and 1978—80 economic performance indicate that the association is negative for NI and cash fiow based ratios, but positive for ROE and ROA. However, the correlation coefficients are insignificant at the classical levels of significance except for NI, which is marginally significant at the level of 0.08. The above results provide evidence, though not very strong, that pollution performance is negatively associated with the economic performance over a short period of time, especially for the period preceding the year of pollution reporting. This negative association continued during the period after the reporting year for cash based economic indicators. On the basis of these results, we reject the first null hypothesis that there was no association between pollution performance and economic performance and accept the alternative hypothesis that there was a negative association between these variables. These results differ from the results of Bradgon-Marlin's and Spicer's studies which indicated that there was a positive association between pollution perforrnance and economic performance. T
يجري ترجمتها، يرجى الانتظار ..
