英语论文网

es, both of them are selected to assess the financial performance. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression is the main analysis method in this study. The results should be able to answer the research question satisfactorily, while finding out which financial performance measure is better in the CEP-CFP relationship research. The results achieved in this study can give a direction for strategic managers when making decisions on resources allocation. Moreover, results also are an attempt to give directions for further researchers in this area.

In the following sections, details for how this research carries out and results achieved will be fully presented. In the Literature Review section, main literatures in this research area will be analysed and research directions for this study could be achieved; the theories applied in this study will be discussed in the Theoretical Framework Section; in the Methodology Section, details for how this research carries out will be presented; and in the Findings section, results achieved will be fully discussed. Finally, a conclusion of this study will be made.
2. Literature Review

Wood (1991) pointed out that there have been a large number of literatures that have investigated the relation between corporate environmental performance and financial performance. The contributions and limitations of these empirical research studies will be summarised in this section. The more recent literatures, which should have more valuation for further research in this area, get more coverage.

As mentioned earlier, the results of pervious researches for CSR-CFP relationship are inconsistent. (Orlitzky et al., 2003) Some studies discovered a positive relationship between environmental performance and financial performance, such as Waddock and Graves (1997), Stanwick and Stanwick (1998), Salama (2005). Some suggested a negative relationship, such as Ingram and Frazier (1983), Freedman and Jaggi (1982). Some asserted that there should be a curvilinear relationship, such as Barnett and Salomon (2006). The others argued that there is no relationship, such as Mcwilliams and Siegel (2000), Surroca, Tribo and Waddock (2010). To sum up, there are eight main reasons for mixed results: (1) Samples selection (2) Different corporate environmental performance measures; (3) Different corporate financial performance measures; (4) Different control variables; (5) Applied different theories; (6) The direction of causality; (7) Different analysis methods; (8) Possible research errors.

2.1 Samples Selection

The first issue addressed in this part is the industries examined in the studies. According to Griffin and Mahon (1997), majority of 52 literatures reviewed chose to take the samples with multiple industries, while only ‘Bromiley and Marcus (1989), Davidson, Chandy and Cross, (1987), Rockness, Schlachter and Rockness. (1986)’ three journals focused on only one industry.

Both samples from multiple industries and samples within one industry have their own merits and flaws. Griffin and Mahon (1997) chose to focus on only chemical industry. Although they did not work out a clear answer for the relationship question, their work gives a useful direction for further research. However, taking only one industry into account does not consider all the factors. In another words, i