Many advisors on the right have argued that it pays to be environmentally green because reducing emissions increases efficiency and saves money, giving firms a cost advantage.

While those on the left with divergent views posit that pollution abatement is a cost burden on firms and is detrimental to competitiveness.

I suggest that your company’s pollution prevention strategy should offer to cut emissions well below the levels required by law, reducing the firm’s compliance and liability costs.

There tends to be a long lag between emissions reduction and impact on return on equity (ROE).

This may be due to ROE reflecting operating efficiency and capital structure with confounding effects on return on sales (ROS) and return on assets (ROA).

The other factor is that the environmental profile of a company has an effect on its liability exposure, reputation, and market share.

The general observation is that efforts by companies to prevent pollution and reduce emissions usually drops to the ‘bottom line’ within one to two years of initiation.

And that those firms with the highest emission levels stand the most to gain

Your company’s emission reduction strategy can be achieved either through reduction or control mechanism.

I encourage companies to adopt a win‐win view of the relationship between business and the environment.

The consensus is that talk is cheap but environmental efforts are not.

 â˜²â˜²â˜²

✔ We provide clients with advisory and insights into strategy, finance, value-for-money, and training.

✔ is your company looking for Non-Executive Directors? We can help.

Dr Leesi Gborogbosi

â–£ Doctorate in Strategy.

â–£ Doctorate in Business Studies.

Gabriel Domale (Management Consulting)

Nigeria +2347034604152

www.www.gabrieldomale.com