The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Market Valuation of Environmental Capital Expenditures by Pulp and Paper Companies
Abstract
The objective of this study is to examine the market valuation of environmental capital expenditure investment related to pollution abatement in the pulp and paper industry. The total environmental capital expenditure of $8.7 billion by our sample firms during 1989–2000 supports the focus on this industry. In order to be capitalized, an asset should be associated with future economic benefits. The existing environmental literature suggests that investors condition their evaluation of the future economic benefits arising from environmental capital expenditure on an assessment of the firms' environmental performance. This literature predicts the emergence of two environmental stereotypes: low-polluting firms that overcomply with existing environmental regulations, and high-polluting firms that just meet minimal environmental requirements. Our valuation evidence indicates that there are incremental economic benefits associated with environmental capital expenditure investment by low-polluting firms but not high-polluting firms. We also find that investors use environmental performance information to assess unbooked environmental liabilities, which we interpret to represent the future abatement spending obligations of high-polluting firms in the pulp and paper industry. We estimate average unbooked liabilities of $560 million for high-polluting firms, or 16.6 percent of market capitalization.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship
Porter, M. E., & Linde, C. V. D. (1995) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.9.4.97 · Cited by 13,365
Cited by
Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2008) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003 · Cited by 3,570
Self-citationFirm-value effects of carbon emissions and carbon disclosures
Matsumura, E. M., Prakash, R., & Vera-Muñoz, S. C. (2014) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr-50629 · Cited by 1,681
Voluntary environmental disclosure quality and firm value: Further evidence
Plumlee, M., Brown, D., Hayes, R. M., & Marshall, R. S. (2015) · Journal of Accounting and Public Policy · doi:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2015.04.004 · Cited by 1,031
The relevance of environmental disclosures: Are such disclosures incrementally informative?
Clarkson, P. M., Fang, X., Li, Y., & Richardson, G. (2013) · Journal of Accounting and Public Policy · doi:10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.06.008 · Cited by 672
Self-citationCSR disclosure: the more things change…?
Cho, C. H., Michelon, G., Patten, D. M., & Roberts, R. W. (2015) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/aaaj-12-2013-1549 · Cited by 413
Metadata
- Authors
- Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., & Richardson, G. D.
- Venue
- The Accounting Review
- Publisher
- American Accounting Association
- Published
- 2004-04-01
- Volume
- 79
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 329-353
- ISSN
- 0001-4826 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-7967
- OpenAlex
- W2111058671
- Cited by
- 541
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 27.47
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Market Valuation of Environmental Capital Expenditures by Pulp and Paper Companies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/accr.2004.79.2.329
- The paper
- Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., & Richardson, G. D. (2004). The Market Valuation of Environmental Capital Expenditures by Pulp and Paper Companies. The Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2004.79.2.329
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.