The Measurement of Environmental Performance and Economic Performance Based on Catastrophe Theory: Case Studies of Thermal Power Industry and Steel Industry in China

Abstract:

We employed catastrophe theory and entropy method to measure and compare the environmental performance and economic performance of 40 listed companies from the thermal power and steel industries in China, to explore their relationship. The results showed that the environmental performance of the steel industry was less than that of the thermal power industry, but their economic performance was similar. This means that steel industry has had lower resource use efficiency and more pollutant emission, and has a larger potential to saving resources, energy and environment pollution. Both the correlation analysis and regression analysis indicated that there existed a significant positive relationship between the environmental performance and economic performance of the steel industry and thermal power industry in China. This means that it is very possible to gain win-win situation of these two performances, if the listed companies tend to make advanced production and environment protection activities come into a benevolent cycle, by means of technology upgrading and transformation.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 522-524)
• Pages: 1858-1870
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.522-524.1858
• Online since: February 2014
• Authors: Lin Jun Li, Wen Jiang Li, Su Li, Guo Yu Qiu*
• Keywords: Catastrophe Theory, Economic Performance, Environmental Performance, Steel Industry, Thermal Power Industry

References

[1] Al-Tuwaijri SA, Christensen TE, and Hughes Ii K: Accounting, Organizations and Society (2004) 29; 447-471.

[2] Clarkson PM, Li Y, Richardson GD, and Vasvari FP: Accounting, Organizations and Society (2008) 33; 303-327.

[3] Jiang H, Liu Z, and Cao G: Green Stock (Chinese Press of Environmental Science 2011).

[4] Patten DM: Accounting, Organizations and Society (2002) 27; 763-773.

[5] Porter ME, and Kramer MR: Harvard Business Review (2006) 12; 78493.

[6] Porter ME, and Van der Linde C: Harvard Business Review (1995) 73; 120-134.

[7] Schaltegger S, and Figge F: Eco‐Management and Auditing (2000) 7; 29-42.

[8] Schaltegger S, and Synnestvedt T: Journal of Environmental Management (2002) 65; 339-346.

[9] Schneider TE: Is there a relation between the cost of debt and environmental performance? An empirical investigation of the U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry, 1994-2005 (University of Waterloo Doctoral Dissertations 2008).

[10] Schreiber FA, Baiguera M, Bortolotto G, and Caglioti V: Journal of Systems Architecture (1997) 43; 605-624.

[11] Simpson RD, and Bradford III RL: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (1996) 30; 282-300.

[12] Su S, Li D, Yu X, Zhang Z, Zhang Q, Xiao R, Zhi J, and Wu J: Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment (2011) 25; 737-746.

[13] Su S, Zhang Z, Xiao R, Jiang Z, Chen T, Zhang L, and Wu J: Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment (2012) 26; 321-334.

[14] Thom R: Structural stability and morphogenesis (W.A. Benjamin Inc., Reading, MA 1976).

[15] Walley N, and Whitehead B: The Earthscan reader in business and the environment (1994) 36-44.

[16] Wang W, Liu S, Zhang S, and Chen J: Ecological Modelling (2011) 222; 307-312.

[17] Wang Y, and Li Z: Finance & Trade Economics (2013) 2; 37-48 (in Chinese).

[18] Zeeman EC: Catastrophe Theory (Addison-Wesley 1976).