An Empirical Examination of the Role of Environmental Accounting Information in Environmental Investment Decision-Making

Part of the Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science book series (ECOE, volume 24)


An experiment is used to investigate two important factors associated with environmental investment decision-making by managers: the regulatory regime in which the firm operates and the nature of environmental information used as a decision aid. Two regulatory regimes are examined, a command and control regulatory regime and a voluntary self-regulatory regime. Two accounting systems are contrasted, environmental management accounting and conventional management accounting, thereby providing a 2 × 2 experimental design for the empirical study. The paper considers environmental investment decision-making by different types of managers working in the Australian offshore petroleum industry. These empirical results indicate that environmental accounting information has a more significant influence on the willingness of managers to incorporate environmental considerations into investment decisions and to avoid future environmental risks, than does the type of regulatory regime.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Al-Tuwaijri, S. A., Christensen, T. E., & Hughes, K. E. (2004). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organisations and Society, 29(5,6) 447–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AMSA (Australian Maritime Safety Authority). (2005). Major oil pills in Australia. Retrieved October 27, 2005, from
  3. APPEA (Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association). (1999). Senate environment, communications, information technology and the arts references committee inquiry into global warming. Canberra.Google Scholar
  4. APPEA (Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association). (2003). Greenhouse response strategy: Commitments of the upstream oil and gas industry. Canberra: APPEA.Google Scholar
  5. APPEA (Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association). (2004). The Australian petroleum exploration and production industry key statistics. Canberra: APPEA.Google Scholar
  6. Australia and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC). (1998). Towards sustainability: Achieving cleaner production in Australia. 16th Meeting: Hobart.Google Scholar
  7. Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (1994). Capital-budgeting systems and capabilities investments in the U.S. companies after the Second World War. Business History Review, 68, 73–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benidickson, J., Doren, G. B., & Olewiler, N. (1992). Greening the green light: Environmental regulation and investment in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, Ryerson.Google Scholar
  9. Blamey, R., & Braithwaite, V. (1997). A social values segmentation of the potential ecotourism market. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5(1), 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bromiley, P. (1986). Corporate planning and capital investment. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organisation, 7(2), 147–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burritt, R. L. (2004). Environmental management accounting: Roadblocks on the way to the green and pleasant land. Business Strategy and the Environment, 13(1), 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carliss, B. Y, & Clark, K. B. (1994). Capital-budgeting systems and capabilities investments in U.S. companies after Second World War. Business History Review, 68(1), 73–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dale, V. H., & O’Neill, R. V. (1999). Tools to characterise the environmental setting. In V.H. Dale, & M. R. English. Tools to aid environmental decision making (pp. 62–90). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Earnhart, D. (2004). Regulatory factors shaping environmental performance at publicly-owned treatment plants. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 48(1), 655–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Zbaracki, M. J. (1992). Strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eisner, M. A. (2004). Corporate environmentalism, regulatory reform, and industry self-regulation: Toward genuine regulatory reinvention in the United States. Governance, 17(2), 145—167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Elkington, J. (1999). The triple bottom line: implications for the oil industry. Oil & Gas Journal, 97(50), 139–141.Google Scholar
  18. Fayers, C. (1999). Environment and investment: The role of personal investment choice in creating sustainability. Sustainable Development, 7, 64–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fryxell, G. E., & Lo, C. W. H. (2003). The influence of knowledge and values on managerial behaviours on behalf of environment: an empirical examination of managers in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(1), 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gunningham, N., & Rees, J. (1997). Industry self-regulation: An institutional perspective. Law and Policy, 19(9), 365–414.Google Scholar
  21. Gunningham, N., & Johnstone, R. (1999). Regulating workplace safety systems and sanctions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hart, S. (1997). Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 66–76.Google Scholar
  23. IFAC. (2004). International guidelines on environmental management accounting, exposure draft. New York: International Federation of Accountants.Google Scholar
  24. Joshi, S., Krishnan, R., & Lave, L. (2001). Estimating the hidden costs of environmental regulation. The Accounting Review, 76(2), 171–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Locke, E. A., Schweiger, D. M., & Latham, G. P. (1986). Participation in decision-making: When should it be used? Organisational Dynamics, 16, 65–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Milne, M. J., & Chan, C. C. (1999). Narrative corporate social disclosure: how much of a difference do they make to investment decision-making? British Accounting Review, 31(4), 439–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Milne, M. J., & Patten, D. M. (2002). Securing organisational legitimacy: An experimental decision case examining the impact of environmental disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. 15(3), 372–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mohammad, A., & Arnold, W. (1987). An examination of the effects of experience and task complexity on audit judgments. The Accounting Review, 62(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  29. Ness, K. E., & Mirza, A. M. (1991). Corporate social disclosure: A note on a test of agency theory. British Accounting Review, 23(3), 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. O’Donovan, G. (2002). Environmental disclosure in the annual report: extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(3), 344–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Rourke, A. (2003). The message and methods of ethical investment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11, 683–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Reyes, M. F. (2000). Environmental management accounting (EMA): Putting the right numbers in sustainable projects. Environmental management accounting network—Asia Pacific.Google Scholar
  33. Sarker, T. K., & Burritt, R. L. (2005). Does self-regulation improve corporate ecological-efficiency? An empirical investigation into the Australian Petroleum Industry from 1996 to 2002. APPEA Journal, 45(1), 511–521.Google Scholar
  34. Schaefer, A., & Harvey, B. (2000). Environmental knowledge and the adoption of ready made environmental management solutions. Eco-Management and Auditing, 7, 74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. L. (2000). Contemporary environmental accounting: Issues, concepts and practices. Sheffield: Greenleaf.Google Scholar
  36. Scott, R. W. (1995). Institutions and organisations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Shapiro, K., Stoughton, A., Graff, R., & Feng, L., (2000). Healthy hospitals: environmental improvements through environmental accounting. Boston: Tellus Institute.Google Scholar
  38. Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organisational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Swain, M. R., & Haka, S. F. (2000). Effects of information load on capital budgeting decisions. Behavioural Research in Accounting, 12, 171–198.Google Scholar
  40. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  41. Thomas, A. (1995). Regulating pollution under asymmetric information: The case of industrial wastewater treatment. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 28(3), 357–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tippet, J., & Leung, P. (2001). Defining ethical investment and its demography in Australia. Australian Accounting Review, 11(3), 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Trotman, K. (1996). Research methods for judgment and decision making studies in auditing. Melbourne: Coopers & Lybrand.Google Scholar
  44. Wheelwright, S. C. (1986). Facilities planning: Reflecting corporate strategy in manufacturing decisions. In M. Kaufman (Ed.). The capital budgeting handbook. Homewood: Dow Jones-Irwin.Google Scholar
  45. Wilmshurst, T. D., & Frost, G. F. (2001). The role of accounting and the accountant in the environmental management system. Business Strategy and the Environment. 10(3), 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yishai, Y. (1998). The guardian state: a comparative analysis of interest group regulation. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 11(2), 153–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Young, M. D. (1992). Sustainable investment and resource use: Equity, environmental integrity and economic efficiency. Carnforth: Parthenon Press and Paris, UNESCO.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Social Responsibility in MiningThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.School of CommerceUniversity of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations