Lithographically patterned substrates

41

a firm‟s strategic alternatives, thus, driving down revenues and driving up costs (Earnhart and Lizal, 2010). For example, a firm may opt out from certain decisions such aspursuing certain product lines or avoid plant relocations and investment opportunities in certain locations.Interestingly, the relationship between environmental performance and cost has been causal in nature suggesting a future outcome of the present environmental actions and costs. The direction of the causality may be to the left or to the right in terms of cost, revenue and profitability. That is to say that the consequent of the causality as to the final effect of the environmental performance and the cost incurred may be of subsequent cost reduction, increased revenue or lack of those. Postulations abound on the direction to which environmental responsibility takes firms performances to, either to better or worse-off situations.This forms the basis of the theoretical dichotomy between the classical and contemporary schools of thought. The dichotomy which the subsequent sub section of this study is dedicated to theoretically explain forms the critical gap, the resolution of which necessitates this empirical study aimed at ascertaining the direction to which environmental costs relate with firm financial performances in Sub Saharan Africa.

42

and cost outlay as not compelling and as suchnot key to the firms‟ business objective. It follows therefore that host communities and environmental stakeholders who are affected by firms‟ operations and associated degradation are neglected.Consequently, environmental stakeholders and host communities are rarely considered as important stakeholders in business decisions resulting to neglect of the consequences of business operations and the externalities caused to the environment and host communities. Scholars have followed this school to canvass for lack of positive connectivity between environmental performance and firm performance. The traditional school of thought views environmental expenditures, whether on end-of-pipe treatment or pollution prevention efforts, as a drain on firms‟

resources. Filbeck and Gorman (2004) argued that in contrast to these enhancements to cost minimization, complex pollution-reducing devices and processes may reduce overall productive efficiency thus, raising production costs. From a generic perspective,this schoolargued that investments in environmentally responsible behavior may drag down financial performance because resources are being committed to what may appear as an ostensibly non-productive use. Specifically, environmentally responsible business decisions may limit a firm‟s strategic alternatives, thus, driving down revenues and driving up costs.

For example, a firm may decide not to pursue certain product lines or avoid plant relocations and investment opportunities in certain locations.

On the other hand, the contemporary school has a divergent view point anchored on value relevance of environmental responsibility to firms‟ performance. The school constituting mainly of environmentalists sees environmental performance as key to business as well as its successes. Accordingly, it becomes part of the critical business decision and strategiesto indulge in environmentally friendly investments that have positive trade off between benefits and costs of such investments. Many scholars have followed this thought with strong indications that environmental performances have negative impact on cost, positive impact

43

on revenue and firms‟ bottom line. Contemporary scholars have indicated strong direct and positive links between environmental performance and performance of firms. In this line, Wingard (2001) posited that a major costs faced by most manufacturers is waste disposal and especially hazardous waste disposal and further asserted that an environmentally responsible firm may be able to reduce these costs along with the liability associated with them. It seems rational and reasonable to believe that it would cost less to prevent pollution rather than clean up after it (Wingard, 2001). Neely(2015) argued thata total quality environmental management program can help organizations comply with increasingly stringent environmental regulations; reduce manufacturing costs by lowering the tangible costs of chemical disposal, waste treatment and licensing and laboratory fees.

Opinions have it that manufacturer who demonstrates efforts to minimize the negative environmental impacts of their products and processes, recycle post-consumer waste, and establish environmental management systems are poised to expand their markets or displace competitors that fail to promote strong environmental performance. Environmentally responsible firm may have the ability to attract extremely competent and capable board members which conceivably could enhance the corporation‟s image and profitability. For Wingard (2001), an environmentally responsible firm is able to market itself and its products to attract a growing segment of the world population which is demanding more environmentally friendly manufacturing, packaging and eventual recyclability of products.

Environmentally responsible behavior may improve a firm‟s perception and overall reputation among customers while better environmental performance may reduce financing costs because lenders associate lower financial risk with better environmental management.

Fundamentally, risk management is very crucial to business survival. Environmental performance which results to environmental cost may be a risk reduction strategy for firms

44

that indulge in it. Environmentally responsible firm need not be concerned about a riskof non-compliance resulting in fines, negative publicity, a subsequent costly public relations campaign and expensive litigation. Wingard (2001) confirmed that the potentially high cost of not complying with environmental legislation includes direct monetary losses due to fines and lost production as well as adverse market impact due to negative public perception. This high cost of non-compliance compels firms to actively cultivate a green image based on ecologically sound production practices.Therefore, the practical resolution of the theoretical dichotomy between the classical and contemporary schools does not lie in the quantum of research studies or scholarly references that support either side but specifically on the outcome of any specific research into the interplay between environmental performance and firm performance applicable to any population or selected sample for such study. This forms the objective of this study for quoted firms in Sub Saharan Africa.