Abstract
Purpose
This study examines the impact of board co-option on environmental innovation and the moderating effect of firms’ industrial context, ESG compensation and environmental policy stringency (EPS) on this relationship. Finally, we examine the implications of the board co-option and eco-innovation nexus on the market value of firms.
Design/methodology/approach
This study employs the system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimator on a longitudinal panel dataset of the US-listed firms to test the proposed hypotheses. The system GMM findings are substantiated using the entropy balancing method and difference-in-differences (DiD) estimations to better establish causality while addressing endogeneity concerns.
Findings
The findings provide evidence that board co-option has a negatively significant relationship with environmental innovation. Further analyses imply that the impact of board co-option on environmental innovation is positively significant among firms operating in environmentally sensitive industries, with ESG compensation for executives, and those operating in environments characterized by high environmental policy stringency. Taken together, these results suggest that industrial context, ESG compensation and environmental policy stringency moderate the impact of board co-option on environmental innovation. The results also reveal that more environmentally innovative firms attain greater market valuation when the board is co-opted.
Originality/value
This study is a novel attempt to contribute to the debate on board composition and its impact on corporate environmental innovation. It complements the existing literature on sustainability governance and accounting by providing an understanding of the impact of board co-option on corporate environmental innovation and highlights the role of regulatory pressure, industrial context and executive compensation structure in shaping this relationship. The findings offer valuable insights for academics, senior management and policymakers.
This study examines the impact of board co-option on environmental innovation and the moderating effect of firms’ industrial context, ESG compensation and environmental policy stringency (EPS) on this relationship. Finally, we examine the implications of the board co-option and eco-innovation nexus on the market value of firms.
Design/methodology/approach
This study employs the system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimator on a longitudinal panel dataset of the US-listed firms to test the proposed hypotheses. The system GMM findings are substantiated using the entropy balancing method and difference-in-differences (DiD) estimations to better establish causality while addressing endogeneity concerns.
Findings
The findings provide evidence that board co-option has a negatively significant relationship with environmental innovation. Further analyses imply that the impact of board co-option on environmental innovation is positively significant among firms operating in environmentally sensitive industries, with ESG compensation for executives, and those operating in environments characterized by high environmental policy stringency. Taken together, these results suggest that industrial context, ESG compensation and environmental policy stringency moderate the impact of board co-option on environmental innovation. The results also reveal that more environmentally innovative firms attain greater market valuation when the board is co-opted.
Originality/value
This study is a novel attempt to contribute to the debate on board composition and its impact on corporate environmental innovation. It complements the existing literature on sustainability governance and accounting by providing an understanding of the impact of board co-option on corporate environmental innovation and highlights the role of regulatory pressure, industrial context and executive compensation structure in shaping this relationship. The findings offer valuable insights for academics, senior management and policymakers.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Accounting Literature |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published (VoR) - 3 Mar 2025 |