Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 116, Issue 1, pp 1–20 | Cite as

Exploring the Valuation of Corporate Social Responsibility—A Comparison of Research Methods

Article

Abstract

This paper argues the case that tests of how investors value corporate social performance (CSP) based upon realised stock market returns are liable to be weak tests if markets are efficient and firms change CSP policies infrequently. We provide a theoretical explanation of why this will be the case using examples to illustrate. Subsequently, we set out an alternative theoretical framework for the purposes of investigating whether markets place a positive, or a negative, valuation on CSP, and show why this is superior to tests based upon Tobin’s Q. Using US KLD data, we demonstrate that, as theorised, markets place a positive value on CSP that is not detected by conventional returns-based tests. Our conclusion is that researchers who are interested in the question of whether engagement with a corporate social responsibility agenda is a value-enhancing activity for a company (as argued by some stakeholder theorists) or value destructive (as argued by Friedman, The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits, The New York Times Magazine, 1970), need to look beyond returns-based tests to answer the research question posed.

Keywords

Corporate social performance Valuation methods 

References

  1. Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett, M. L., & Salomon. (2012). Does it pay to be really good? Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal. doi:10.1002/smj.1980.
  3. Barraclough, K. (2007). Scaling regression equations: Solution or problem? Vanderbilt University working paper. http://194.90.30.6/CaesareaAdmin/Uploads/ES/Events/Files/271.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2008.
  4. Barth, M. E., Beaver, W. H., & Landsman, W. R. (1992). The market valuation implications of net periodic pension cost components. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 15, 27–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barth, M. E., Clement, M. B., Foster, G., & Kasznik, R. (1998). Brand values and capital market valuation. Review of Accounting Studies, 3, 41–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barth, M. E., & Clinch, G. (2009). Scale effects in capital markets-based accounting research. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 36(3–4), 253–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bebchuk, L. A., Cohen, A., & Ferrell, A. (2009). What matters in corporate governance? Review of Financial Studies, 22(2), 783–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bhagat, S., & Bolton, B. (2008). Corporate governance and firm performance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14, 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brammer, S., Brooks, C., & Pavelin, S. (2006). Corporate Social Performance and Stock Returns: UK Evidence from Disaggregate Measures. Financial Management, Autumn, 5–25.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, L., & Caylor, M. (2006). Corporate governance and firm valuation. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25, 409–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chauvin, K., & Hirschey, M. (1994). Advertising, R&d expenditures and the market value of the firm. Financial Management, 22, 128–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, R. B., Polk, C., & Vuolteenaho, T. (2003). The value spread. Journal of Finance, 58, 609–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen, R. B., Polk, C., & Vuolteenaho, T. (2009). The price is (almost) right. Journal of Finance, 64(6), 2739–2782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davidson, W. N, I. I. I., & Worrell, D. L. (1990). A comparison and test of the use of accounting and stock market data in relating corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Akron Business and Economic Review, 21(3), 7–19.Google Scholar
  15. Edwards, E., & Bell, P. (1961). The theory and measurement of business income. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C. Y., & Mishra, D. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital? Journal of Banking & Finance, 35, 2388–2408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1996). Multifactor explanations of asset pricing anomalies. Journal of Finance, 50, 131–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder perspective. Boston, MA: Pitman Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.Google Scholar
  20. Galema, R., Plantinga, A., & Scholtens, B. (2008). The stocks at stake: Return and risk in socially responsible investment. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32, 2646–2654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gompers, P., Ishii, J., & Metrick, A. (2003). Corporate governance and equity prices. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 107–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gow, I. D., Ormazabal, G., & Taylor, D. J. (2010). Correcting for cross-sectional and time-series dependence in accounting research. The Accounting Review, 85(2), 483–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Green, P. J., Stark, A. W., & Thomas, H. M. (1996). UK evidence on the market valuation of research and development expenditures. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 23(2), 191–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gregory, A., Tharyan, R., & A. Christidis. (2011). Constructing and testing alternative versions of the Fama–French and Carhart models in the UK. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1951831.
  25. Gregory, A., Whittaker, J., & Yan, X. (2011). Stock market valuation of corporate social responsibility indicators. Discussion paper 10/06, Centre for Finance and Investment, University of Exeter Business School.Google Scholar
  26. Gu, F., & Li, J. Q. (2010). The value-relevance of advertising: Evidence from pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 25(1), 85–120.Google Scholar
  27. Guenster, N., Bauer, R., Derwall, J., & Koedijk, K. (2011). The economic value of corporate eco-efficiency. European Financial Management, 17(4), 679–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hassel, L., Nilsson, H., & Nyquist, S. (2005). The value relevance of environmental performance. European Accounting Review, 14(1), 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kempf, A., & Osthoff, P. (2007). The effect of socially responsible investing on portfolio performance. European Financial Management, 13(5), 908–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kim, Y., & Statman, M. (2012). Do corporations invest enough in environmental responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 105, 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lev, B., & Sougiannis, T. (1996). The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21(1), 107–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lewellen, J., Nagel, S., & Shanken, J. (2010). A skeptical appraisal of asset-pricing tests. Journal of Financial Economics, 96, 175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liston-Heyes, C., & Ceton, G. (2009). An investigation of real versus perceived CSP in S&P-500 firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lundholm, R., & O’Keefe, T. (2001). Reconciling value estimates from the discounted cash flow model and the residual income model. Contemporary Accounting Research, 18(2), 311–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification. Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Narver, J. C. (1971). Rational management responses to external effects. The Academy of Management Journal, 14(1), 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2), 661–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peasnell, K. V. (1982). Some formal connections between economic values and yields and accounting numbers. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 9(3), 361–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Petersen, M. A. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies, 22(1), 435–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rees, W. P. (1997). The impact of dividends, debt and investment on valuation models. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 24(7), 1111–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Renneboog, L., Ter Horst, J. R., & Zhang, C. C. (2008). ‘Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32, 1723–1742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sharfman, M. P., & Fernando, C. S. (2008). Environmental risk management and the cost of capital. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 569–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shen, Y., & A. W. Stark (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of model specifications and estimation approaches for empirical accounting-based valuation models. SSRN working paper no. 1888386.Google Scholar
  46. Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31, 463–490.Google Scholar
  47. van Beurden, P., & Gossling, T. (2008). The worth of values—a literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Xfi Centre for Finance and InvestmentUniversity of Exeter Business SchoolExeter UK
  2. 2.Department of Organisation StudiesUniversity of Exeter Business School ExeterUK

Personalised recommendations