Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,953

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

EFFECTS OF "BEST PRACTICES" OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ON COST ADVANTAGE: THE ROLE OF COMPLEMENTARY ASSETS.

Christmann, P.·2000·Academy of Management Journal
DOI 10.2307/1556360
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Research on the effects on firm performance of “best practices” of environmental management, which are supposed to enable firms to simultaneously protect the environment and reduce costs, has so far ignored the roles of existing firm resources and capabilities. Drawing on the resource-based view of the firm, this study analyzes whether complementary assets are required to gain cost advantage from implementing best practices. Results based on survey data from 88 chemical companies indicate that capabilities for process innovation and implementation are complementary assets that moderate the relationship between best practices and cost advantage, a significant factor in determining firm performance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1556360

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Christmann, P.
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Publisher
Academy of Management
Published
2000-08-01
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
663-680
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
DOI
10.2307/1556360
OpenAlex
W1990674185
Cited by
1,953
References
14
FWCI
37.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.