Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Data collection The current research is aimed to examine the relationship between the climate change and the organizational structure which are related to the climate change. For the analysis purpose the data from the 60 firms has been collected. The random sampling method or the non-probability method of sample selection has been used to extract the sample from the population data set. The data was created in the new excel sheet (which is provided separately) and the data cleaning process was also completed inexcel. The missing values were coded as 999 so that it can be easily identified. Also the variable which were not relevant to the current study were removed from the final data set. After the data cleaning process, the data was imported to SPSS and the descriptive and inferential analysis was conducted. Data analysis (descriptive) The descriptive statistics of the variable are discussed in this section. For the continuous variable various measured of the central tendencies has been included along with other measures such as the kurtosis and skewness. Among the variables included in this research only the dependent variable is continuous so the results for the same has been shown in the table below. All other variables are categorical variables, and the graphical representation of the categorical variable are discussed in the next section. Statistics Emission (metric ton) NValid34 Missing26 Mean2853.9791 Median.0030 Mode.00 Std. Deviation16521.51606 Variance272960493.0 02 Skewness5.831 Std. Error of Skewness.403 Kurtosis33.999 Std. Error of Kurtosis.788 Minimum.00 Maximum96356.00 Percentiles 25.0000 50.0030 754.8425 Table1Results from the descriptive statistics
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
As shown in the table above the mean value for the dependent variable (emission of carbon) is 2853.97 and the standard deviation for the same is 16521. This shows that the data points are far from the mean value and there is high variation in the data set. The high variation is may be because the firmsfrom different sectorsare includedin the data set. The firmsin the manufacturing are expected to have more carbon emission as compared to the firms in the service sector. The minimum and the maximum value also indicates that the carbon emission is very different among the firms. Skewness The results from the skewnes shows that variable is less skewed or the emission of carbon is less for most of the firms. If the data was normally distributed more data points lies near the mean value. The skweness value of 5.81 also suggest the same. The descriptive results for the categorical variable has been shown in terms of the pie chart as the numerical presentation are not very appropriate for the categorical variables.
5%7% 7% 7% 10% 13%25% 27% Country Argentina Bermuda Colombia Israel Mexico New Zealand Switzerland other Figure1Results from the descriptive statistics based on countries The results from the country show that most of the firms are either developed or developing countries. The highest proportion of countries are from Switzerland followed by the firms in New Zealand. 5% 28% 55% 12% Highest responsibility other manager Senior manager Board others Figure2Results from the descriptive statistics for highest responsibility Another important variable included in the data set is to examine who have the highest responsibility of decision making on climate change in the selected firms. Results shows that for most of the firm the board is responsible for all the decisions related to climate change in the firm.
25% 75% Incentive for climate change Yes No Figure3Descriptive statistics for the incentive for climate change Similarly the results also shows that in 75 % of the firms there is incentive for climate change. In other words the firm provide some kinds of incentive to the employees and organisations who promote climate change or follow the eco friendly procedure. 12% 50% 38% Risk managerment for climate change specific program Integrated with multidisciplnary program No documente process Figure4Descriptive statistics for risk management for climate change When asked about whether the firm has the special risk management process for climate change, 50 % of the firms responds that they have the plan but are integrated with other multidisciplinary programs of the firm. Only 12 % of the firms have specific program to deal with the climate change.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
68% 32% Climate change strategy yes NO Figure5Descriptive statistics for climate change strategy Furthermore 68 % of the firms have the climate change strategy and rest of the 32 % do not have any specific strategy for the climate change. 47% 53% Public awareness for carbon emission yes no Figure6Descriptive results for public awareness for carbon emission Promoting awareness about the carbon emission is one of the major responsibilities of the firms. However results from the current research shows that only 47 % of the firm promote awareness about the climate change. Data analysis (inferential)
The results from the inferential analysis and their interpretations is discussed in the current section. Chi square test The chi square test has been conducted to examine whether the firms in the different locations have same carbon emission or not. To test the same two variables carbon emission and the country has been used. Results from the chi square test show that the Pearson chi square is 124.99 with 199 degrees of freedom. However the p value is more than 0.05, on the basis of which it can be said that there is no statistically significant difference in the mean value of carbon emission for firms in the different locations. Chi-Square Tests ValuedfAsymp.Sig. (2-sided) PearsonChi- Square 124.997a119.335 Likelihood Ratio77.238119.999 N of Valid Cases34 a. 144 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .06. Correlation analysis Another important analysis in the inferential part is the correlation analysis. The relationship between the two variables in any study can be measured by the correlation coefficient. In this case the correlation between the dependent and the independent variables shows that the carbon emission(dependentvariable)isnegativelyrelatedwithclimatechangeincentive,risk managementprogram,publicawarenessandclimatechangestrategy.Theseresultswere expected because increase in the step towards by introducing the incentive or strategy the carbon emission is expected to decline. Correlations
Emission (metric ton) Highest responsibility incentivefor climate cahnge Risk managemne forclim cahnge Dependent variable Pearson Correlation1.091-.315-.035 Sig. (2-tailed).609.070.856 N34343430 IV1 Pearson Correlation.0911-.106-.195 Sig. (2-tailed).609.421.175 N34606050 IV2 Pearson Correlation-.315-.1061.179 Sig. (2-tailed).070.421.214 N34606050 IV3 Pearson Correlation-.035-.195.1791 Sig. (2-tailed).856.175.214 N30505050 IV4 Pearson Correlation-.113.102.062.338* Sig. (2-tailed).524.439.638.016 N34606050 IV5 Pearson Correlation-.165.070.386**.395** Sig. (2-tailed).351.593.002.004 N34606050 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Regression analysis Regression analysis is used to find the relationship between the variables and also impact of the explanatory variables on the response variable. In the current case also the regression analysis has been conducted to examine the impact of various organization level strategies on carbon emission. Model Summary ModelRR SquareAdjustedR Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1.363a.132-.04918016.66586
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
a. Predictors:(Constant),Publicawarenessfor carbon emission, Highest responsibility , climage change strategy, Riskmanagemnetforclimagecahnge,incentivefor climate cahnge The results from the model summary can be interpreted in terms of the R squared. The R squared value of 0.132 is the percentage of variation explained by the independent variables of the dependent variable. In this case the R squared is low, but the overall significance of the model cannot be judged only on the basis of R squred. ANOVAa ModelSumof Squares dfMean SquareFSig. 1 Regression1180407470. 496 5236081494.0 99 .727.610b Residual7790405969. 572 24324600248.7 32 Total8970813440. 067 29 a. Dependent Variable: Emission (metric ton) b.Predictors:(Constant),Publicawarenessforcarbonemission,Highest responsibility , climage change strategy, Risk managemnet for climage cahnge , incentive for climate cahnge The ANOVA table shows that the F statistic of 0.727 is not statistically significant as the significance value is more than the required 0.05. Coefficientsa ModelUnstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients tSig. BStd. ErrorBeta 1 (Constant)17503.18825030.519.699.491 IV13363.8705728.271.119.587.563 IV2-14411.4209073.453-.369-1.588.125 IV33428.7575273.247.142.650.522 IV4-6574.5368738.152-.161-.752.459 IV51970.5368555.284.056.230.820 a. Dependent Variable: Emission (metric ton)