PhD, EngD, MPhil and MSc by research theses (SAS)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing PhD, EngD, MPhil and MSc by research theses (SAS) by Supervisor "Angus, Andrew"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access An evidence base and critique for environmental regulatory reform(Cranfield University, 2013-12) Taylor, Christopher Michael; Pollard, Simon; Angus, AndrewSocieties have established various forms of governance to protect the natural environment from the adverse effects of human activity. While direct “command and control” regulation has achieved significant improvements in environmental protection, concerns for its efficiency have led governments to seek alternative approaches to achieve environmental policy objectives. Commentators describe a shift from “government” to “governance” as policy makers and regulators seek to harness wider social forces beyond government, while risk-based regulation is pursued to target constrained regulatory resources for maximum effect. However, robust evidence for the effectiveness of different forms of regulation is lacking. This thesis addresses this gap, providing an evidence base for instrument selection and a data-informed critique of regulatory reform practice. Research followed a case study strategy, gathering qualitative data through 58 in-depth semi-structured interviews, analysed using the NVIVO™ Computer Aided Qualitative Data Analysis System (CAQDAS), with senior policy makers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, England (Defra) and senior executives in businesses and trade associations in 5 UK sectors. (1) A new typology of regulatory instruments has been compiled, validated with sector experts, refined for policy end-users, and published as part of Defra’s guidance on instrument selection. (2) The critical case of instrument selection in practice at Defra has been examined for the first time, revealing factors affecting choice, the use of coregulation to develop evidence and the importance of retaining policy maker skills for new forms of regulation. (3) A multiple-case study of senior business representatives found five strongly preferred voluntary regulation, seven expressed significant doubts about its effectiveness, and 19 expressed no general preference. While voluntary approaches were valued for flexibility and lower burdens, direct regulation offered stability and a level playing field. They sought inter alia coherent, evidence based regulatory frameworks, delivered through positive regulatory relationships. This research progresses the better and smarter regulation debate on the use of alternatives to direct regulation and has already been used to inform policy making in practice.Item Open Access The green economy: The link between corporate social responsibility and financial performance during economic shocks(Cranfield University, 2015-01) Donnelly, Myles; Angus, Andrew; Lickorish, Fiona A.A prominent claim within the literature is that ‘green’ firms are fundamentally more resilient to financial, environmental and social shocks, relative to firms that take no environmental action. To test this, this study compared the financial performance of firms in the UK FTSE4good, and similar firms outside the FTSE4Good through selected financial, environmental and social shocks Firstly the FTSE4Good indices were compared to the performance of the FTSE All-Share through several shocks. The results of which indicated through average returns, ranking performance and descriptive statistics that the FTSE4good Benchmark did not provide resilience in excess of the FTSE All-Share. The lack of significance was thought to be the consequence of diversification caused by the heterogeneity of each firm’s core business. The FTSE4good UK 50 showed neither and advantage nor disadvantage in resilience performance relative to the FTSE All-Share but the higher moments in the distribution of the returns (skewness and kurtosis) shows evidence of decreased risk in producing extreme negative returns. Furthermore, the discrepancies were also thought to be a consequence of the level at which FTSE4good include firms in the index series. To account for this discrepancy, FTSE4good’s ESG ratings were used to identify the best in class firms, eliminating middle ground performance. Only firms classified according to social performance showed conclusive evidence of an advantage for investors who could reduce their risk profile by selecting only firms with relatively high social responsibility ratings. The results show that the assumption that green firms are more resilient to shocks is too imprecise, at least when analysed in terms of financial performance across the period covered by this study. To become a more effective indicator of environmental, social and governance performance the FTSE4good must demand higher levels of performance from constituent firms and punish any transgressions more severely.