Panel data analysis finds a positive link between green investment intensity and corporate financial performance in an emerging market, suggesting strategic benefits.
This study examines the relationship between green investment intensity and corporate financial performance amongst Vietnam's listed enterprises using panel data methodology spanning 2008 to 2017. Drawing upon stakeholder theory and resource-based view perspectives, the research investigates how environmental investments influence firm profitability, operational efficiency, and market valuation in an emerging market context. The analysis employs fixed-effects and dynamic panel estimation techniques on a comprehensive dataset of 847 listed companies, representing 6,776 firm-year observations from Vietnam's stock exchanges. The empirical findings reveal a significant positive association between green investment intensity and corporate financial performance, with coefficients ranging from 0.142 to 0.286 across different performance measures. The relationship exhibits temporal dynamics, with performance benefits materialising approximately two years following initial green investments. Diagnostic tests confirm model robustness through panel unit root analyses, cross-sectional dependence assessments, and heteroskedasticity corrections. The study contributes theoretically by demonstrating the applicability of stakeholder theory in emerging market contexts and methodologically by employing advanced panel data techniques to address endogeneity concerns. Practical implications suggest that Vietnamese firms can enhance financial performance through strategic environmental investments, whilst policy implications highlight the importance of regulatory frameworks supporting corporate sustainability initiatives. These findings advance understanding of the business case for environmental investments in emerging economies and provide empirical evidence for the reconciliation of environmental and financial objectives in corporate strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hong Nam PHI (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: