The Impact of Sustainability Practices on Corporate Financial Performance: Literature Trends and Future Research Potential

This paper presents an analysis of the literature concerning the impact of corporate sustainability on corporate financial performance. The relationship between corporate sustainable practices and financial performance has received growing attention in research, yet a consensus remains elusive. This paper identifies developing trends and the issues that hinder conclusive consensus on that relationship. We used content analysis to examine the literature and establish the current state of research. A total of 132 papers from top-tier journals are shortlisted. We find that 78% of publications report a positive relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance. Variations in research methodology and measurement of variables lead to the divergent views on the relationship. Furthermore, literature is slowly replacing total sustainability with narrower corporate social responsibility (CSR), which is dominated by the social dimension of sustainability, while encompassing little to nothing of environmental and economic dimensions. Studies from developing countries remain scarce. More research is needed to facilitate convergence in the understanding of the relationship between corporate sustainable practices and financial performance.


Introduction
Markets are becoming increasingly competitive, and the pace of change is putting companies under unprecedented pressure to not only succeed, but sustain their success into the future. Corporate sustainability has gained a lot of attention in recent years, as companies, investors, and consumers alike are turning their attention towards increasingly critical corporate sustainability [1,2]. Companies are expected to go beyond the narrow-and short-term financial focus, and stretch into an encompassing economic, environmental, and social sustainability [3]. Developing corporate strategies to do "well" by doing "good" and turning companies into responsible organizations that care about the environment, and the social aspect is becoming increasingly a must rather than a choice to lead in future markets [4,5].
Sustainability is defined as meeting our needs today without compromising future generations' ability to meet theirs [6]. Corporate sustainability is about expanding the financial bottom line into a triple bottom line, which includes environmental and social aspects of corporate performance [7]. As companies scramble to stay relevant in changing markets, they have come to realize that it is no longer enough to focus on the economics of their businesses alone [8]. Designing a robust business strategy is becoming increasingly dependent on how well a company positions itself in terms of sustainable development that balances financial, environmental, and human development [9].
The body of literature around the subject is far from mature. In fact, research is still struggling to find universality in the accepted understanding of corporate sustainability, or what constitutes an adequate suite of corporate financial measures to correlate to corporate sustainability practices [6,10,11]. Maybe the lack of universality is not such a problem when it comes to a wide range of industries and varying businesses, in terms of the relationship between sustainability and financial performance [12]. However, the fact remains that a comprehensive synthesis of the body of literature is greatly needed at this junction in the progress of the subject in the literature [13][14][15].
Two competing theories attempt to describe the impact of sustainability on corporate financial performance: value creating and value destroying [12]. The value-creation approach theorizes that firm risk is reduced with the adoption of environmental and social responsibility. In contrast, the value-destruction theory predicts that companies engaged in environmental and social responsibility lose focus on profitability, and instead pursue pleasing stakeholders at the expense of shareholders. Several other theories attempt to explain the relationship between sustainability and corporate financial performance. Those theories are linked to the influence (positive, negative, or neutral) and the causality (direction) of the relationship. Like with value-destruction theory, the trade-off theory suggests a negative relationship when resources are channeled towards less profitable sustainable activities [10,16]. A positive relationship is explained in resource-based view (RBV) theory and Stakeholder theory. RBV stipulate that a firm possesses unique capabilities which, if strategically exploited, can achieve competitive advantage leading to better financial performance [3]. In stakeholder theory, fulfilling the requirements of stakeholders (environmental or social) contributes to financial performance [5]. Slack resources theory suggests a reverse causality, where superior financial performance results in enough slack to entertain sustainable activities [17]. Furthermore, a positive relationship and a reverse causality lead to a virtuous cycle [18]. Finally, mixed results exist in literature regarding the relationship between sustainability and corporate financial performance, and some researchers even argue that a generalizable, unidirectional relationship applicable to all organizations in all situations simply does not exist [19].
While most reviews focus on a single or a combination of two dimensions of sustainability, those that focus on all three dimensions, such as this paper, are rare. Single-dimension reviews tend to be mostly about the environmental dimension, and do not serve as a comprehensive approach to all three dimensions of sustainability, as in this review [15,20]. On the other hand, reviews that examine all three dimensions of sustainability are scarce and outdated. For example, the most recent literature examined by Goyal et al., in their review on all three dimensions of sustainability, is from 2011 [21]; as this paper shows, some of the most substantial literature trends only start to appear in 2012 and onwards. Other recent reviews only examine influencers on the relationship between sustainability and corporate financial performance as reported in literature, such as firm, managerial and industry characteristics [19]. Similarly, other recent reviews only focus on single dimensions of sustainability. None of those recent reviews examine all three dimensions of sustainability and their impact on corporate financial performance. This paper describes the progress of literature in the subject of the corporate sustainability impact on financial performance. It also identifies trends in literature while revealing future research paths. Furthermore, this work helps structure future research in the subject, by offering a much-needed critique of shortcomings in current literature trends while also identifying opportunities to advance the topic towards a universal conclusion. Publications are identified from the literature using content analysis and bibliometric listing principles. The review considers time, country, and industry trends, while establishing the evolving use of different financial measures in the evaluation of corporate performance.

Methodology
A systematic content analysis approach was used to shortlist relevant publications from literature. A complete bibliographic listing of collected literature has been compiled, which includes titles, Sustainability 2018, 10, 494 3 of 25 journals, authors, years of publication, etc. Descriptive statistics were also utilized, such as number of publications per unit of time and journal distribution of publications [3,22,23].
This review focuses on major peer-reviewed journals indexed in quality and impact rankings, such as Scopus and ABDC. Those publications that are ranked as Q1 or Q2 in Scopus and A* or A in ABDC list were included in this review [19]. This selection of the best ranked papers ensured not only the quality of the articles by being the most reviewed and validated, but also it was closest to the current state of research during their respective times of publication [24].
In selecting articles that research the impact of sustainability practices on corporate financial performance, several keywords were used: corporate sustainability, financial performance, sustainability practices, sustainability impact, corporate social responsibility (CSR), economical sustainability, environmental sustainability and social sustainability [20,25,26]. Only peer-reviewed articles available with their full text in the English language were included in the research. Rounds of article elimination took place to shortlist articles related to the subject of the impact of sustainability practices on corporate financial performance. Starting with an initial list of articles, a series of validation and re-focus of research keywords resulted in further elimination of articles and the addition of new ones from various databases: This systematic approach shortlisted a total of 132 publications for examination. Most of the excluded literature focused on agricultural science, sustainability reporting, integration of sustainability practices, and measurement. Other excluded literature did not include the link between practices and financial performance [27,28]. Furthermore, some research focused on the feasibility of investment in firms characterized as high in sustainability practices, while others examined the "virtuous cycle" of a bidirectional relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance [29]. Those research areas are in contrast with the focus of this literature review, which is on publications that examine financial performance between firms based on their sustainability.
The articles are classified according to the time period they were published [19]. The time periods start before 2002, because of the scarcity of articles every year between 1984 and 2002. Only after that time did we start to see a trend taking shape in the number of articles. This coincides with the topic gaining momentum and focus in the literature. Hence, the papers preceding 2002 are consolidated in one time period for practicality. After the time period pre-2002, the time periods continue in constant two-year intervals, until the last time period from 2016 to October 2017.

Time Period Distribution
The percent distribution of publications across the time periods shows a steady and gradual increase in the research on sustainability impact on corporate financial performance. This classification quantifies the growth in the research in correlation to time periods (see Figure 1).
Only 4% of the total 132 articles in the review occurred before 2002. Starting in the period 2002-2003, research gained momentum and continued to grow steadily until the period 2010-2011. A significant increase in research occurs starting in the period 2012-2013, more than doubling from the previous period. Starting in the period 2012-2013 onward, the number of publications continued to increase uniformly. In the last three periods, 75% of the 132 articles were published. This shows a

Country Distribution
The distribution of articles according to where authors are based is significant in establishing the global state of the research in the topic of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance [21].
The author-based distribution shows the overall maturity of literature across the world (see Table 1).
The US has dominated the literature on the subject from the topic's infancy in the period pre-2002 and throughout the rest of the periods studied. Other significant countries include Spain, Taiwan, and China, among others. It is worth noting that the growth in research is highest in China in the last two periods. Taiwan, China, and Malaysia are leading countries of developing economies [30] in the number of articles.
Country distribution of developed and developing economies shows a significant lead by developed economies in the number of publications in corporate sustainability impact on financial performance (see Figure 2). It is interesting to note that up to the period 2006-2007, there were no publications from developing economies. Developing economies stayed at roughly the same number of publications for the next three-time periods. In the period 2014-2015, a spike was observed in the number of publications from developing economies. In general, the number of publications from developing economies is significantly lower than that from developed economies. This suggests more research is needed in developing economies, despite the fact that some developing economies, such as Taiwan and China, are witnessing the highest rate of growth in the number of publications. As more research becomes available from developing economies, research in this field is expected to benefit by becoming more generalizable.

Country Distribution
The distribution of articles according to where authors are based is significant in establishing the global state of the research in the topic of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance [21].
The author-based distribution shows the overall maturity of literature across the world (see Table 1).
The US has dominated the literature on the subject from the topic's infancy in the period pre-2002 and throughout the rest of the periods studied. Other significant countries include Spain, Taiwan, and China, among others. It is worth noting that the growth in research is highest in China in the last two periods. Taiwan, China, and Malaysia are leading countries of developing economies [30] in the number of articles.
Country distribution of developed and developing economies shows a significant lead by developed economies in the number of publications in corporate sustainability impact on financial performance (see Figure 2). It is interesting to note that up to the period 2006-2007, there were no publications from developing economies. Developing economies stayed at roughly the same number of publications for the next three-time periods. In the period 2014-2015, a spike was observed in the number of publications from developing economies. In general, the number of publications from developing economies is significantly lower than that from developed economies. This suggests more research is needed in developing economies, despite the fact that some developing economies, such as Taiwan and China, are witnessing the highest rate of growth in the number of publications. As more research becomes available from developing economies, research in this field is expected to benefit by becoming more generalizable.

Industry Distribution
An industry-based classification shows 114 articles out of the total 132 in the multi-industry category regarding sustainability impact on corporate financial performance (see Table 2).
The multi-industry category refers to publications that examine more than one industry, such as when authors use indices and secondary stock market data [21]. The next highest classification is manufacturing-related articles, with seven publications, and hospitality with three. The remaining industries have one publication each. Multi-industry publications offer a more universal applicability to organizations than the rest of the categories. Although specific industries offer valuable insights in specific industries, they are limited in their generalizability. The fact that most of literature fell into the multi-industry category comes as no surprise for this research topic, as authors have sought to find universal applicability.

Industry Distribution
An industry-based classification shows 114 articles out of the total 132 in the multi-industry category regarding sustainability impact on corporate financial performance (see Table 2).
The multi-industry category refers to publications that examine more than one industry, such as when authors use indices and secondary stock market data [21]. The next highest classification is manufacturing-related articles, with seven publications, and hospitality with three. The remaining industries have one publication each. Multi-industry publications offer a more universal applicability to organizations than the rest of the categories. Although specific industries offer valuable insights in specific industries, they are limited in their generalizability. The fact that most of literature fell into the multi-industry category comes as no surprise for this research topic, as authors have sought to find universal applicability.

Sustainability Dimension Distribution
The distribution of articles based on the sustainability dimensions researched shows three major groups: single dimension, combination of dimensions, and total sustainability. More specifically, dimension-based research is broken down into these general sub-divisions: 1.
Single Dimension: Bi-Combination of Dimensions:

Sustainability
Articles in the single-dimension group tackle only one dimension of sustainability: economic, environmental, or social. There are two combinations of dimensions: economical-environmental and social-environmental. The third group is made up of total sustainability, with the combined effect of the three dimensions rather than individual or a combination of dimensions. In the single-dimension group, the environmental dimension dominated over the entire time period, in comparison to economic or social dimensions. The combination social-environmental dimension, also denoted as CSR in those articles, shows a strong and consistent growth, especially in the last five time periods, starting in 2008 onward. This growth is in contrast with the decline in the last group, total sustainability, which peaked the time period 2012-2013 and went into a steady decline after that. The decline in the encompassing total sustainability dimension coincides with the growth in the social-environmental combination. This suggests that the literature is using the combination social-environmental dimension as a substitute for a holistic sustainability notion in the assessment of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance. Given the popularity of CSR research, the social-environmental dimension offers a convenient replacement for total sustainability, even though it is not an exact fit. CSR research underplays the environmental dimension, while completely overlooking the economic dimension. When focusing on the last three-time periods, the combination social-environmental dimension (or CSR) not only dominated other dimensions, it was also the only one growing (see Figure 3). This suggests that theory in the subject is not converging yet, and needs further development to mature.

Sustainability Dimension Distribution
The distribution of articles based on the sustainability dimensions researched shows three major groups: single dimension, combination of dimensions, and total sustainability. More specifically, dimension-based research is broken down into these general sub-divisions: Articles in the single-dimension group tackle only one dimension of sustainability: economic, environmental, or social. There are two combinations of dimensions: economical-environmental and social-environmental. The third group is made up of total sustainability, with the combined effect of the three dimensions rather than individual or a combination of dimensions. In the single-dimension group, the environmental dimension dominated over the entire time period, in comparison to economic or social dimensions. The combination social-environmental dimension, also denoted as CSR in those articles, shows a strong and consistent growth, especially in the last five time periods, starting in 2008 onward. This growth is in contrast with the decline in the last group, total sustainability, which peaked the time period 2012-2013 and went into a steady decline after that. The decline in the encompassing total sustainability dimension coincides with the growth in the social-environmental combination. This suggests that the literature is using the combination social-environmental dimension as a substitute for a holistic sustainability notion in the assessment of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance. Given the popularity of CSR research, the social-environmental dimension offers a convenient replacement for total sustainability, even though it is not an exact fit. CSR research underplays the environmental dimension, while completely overlooking the economic dimension. When focusing on the last three-time periods, the combination social-environmental dimension (or CSR) not only dominated other dimensions, it was also the only one growing (see Figure 3). This suggests that theory in the subject is not converging yet, and needs further development to mature.

Research Type Distribution
The distribution of articles based on research type shows a clear lead for empirical publications over theoretical and literature review papers. It is worth noting that theoretical publications are rare, and they only started to show a significant appearance in the time period 2012-2013, which coincided with the spike in overall number of publications witnessed in the same period. Another interesting correlation that exists in the same time period, 2012-2013, was that the number of publications that considered total sustainability peaked (see Figure 3). The number of empirical publications continued to increase and naturally follow the same growth trend as the total number of publications (see Figures 1 and 4).

Research Type Distribution
The distribution of articles based on research type shows a clear lead for empirical publications over theoretical and literature review papers. It is worth noting that theoretical publications are rare, and they only started to show a significant appearance in the time period 2012-2013, which coincided with the spike in overall number of publications witnessed in the same period. Another interesting correlation that exists in the same time period, 2012-2013, was that the number of publications that considered total sustainability peaked (see Figure 3). The number of empirical publications continued to increase and naturally follow the same growth trend as the total number of publications (see Figures 1 and 4).

Journal-Wise Distribution
This literature review examines highest-ranking publications from reputable journals. Those publications represent the most validated publications with the highest impact on literature.
A total of 68 reputable journals have published in the subject of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance during the specified time periods. The Journal of Business Ethics published the most articles on the subject, with 36 publications. Other notable journals include Social Responsibility Journal and Management Decision, with eight and six publications, respectively (see Table  3).

Journal-Wise Distribution
This literature review examines highest-ranking publications from reputable journals. Those publications represent the most validated publications with the highest impact on literature.
A total of 68 reputable journals have published in the subject of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance during the specified time periods. The Journal of Business Ethics published the most articles on the subject, with 36 publications. Other notable journals include Social Responsibility Journal and Management Decision, with eight and six publications, respectively (see Table 3).

Distribution of Methodology Approaches
The distribution of research methodologies adopted in the literature shows that most articles used regression analysis in examining the relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance, scoring 48 articles out of 132. Some articles use more than one methodology when carrying out analysis. An interesting observation is that the literature uses a wide selection of methodologies. This further exacerbates the problem of inconclusive literature when it comes to the relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance. Even though those articles examine different contexts, using a wide selection of methodologies can affect convergence of results on the nature of the subject relationship (see Table 4). Table 4. Count of methodology approaches adopted in examining the relationship between variables in examined literature.

Methodology Approach Count
Partial Least Squares

Measures of Total Sustainability
The complexity in measuring corporate sustainability comes from the multidimensional nature of the concept itself and how different corporate contexts influence it [31]. Stock market indices offer a suitable tool to measure sustainability performance of firms, such as the widely used Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) [32][33][34]. Critics to this approach argue about the inherent problem of establishing suitable weighting for the contribution of different dimensions towards total sustainability [6]. Other approaches to measurement include efficiency, in terms of value created per unit of environmental or social damage [35,36]. Several other measurement tools exist, such as qualitative sustainability initiatives, benchmarking standards, and survey-based approaches [37,38]. While each approach has its critics, researchers argue in favor of separating sustainability into its three dimensions for operational level decision-making. However, they also argue for the necessity of considering total sustainability (the aggregate of economic, environmental, and social dimensions) to achieve sound strategic decisions [35].

Distribution of Financial Measures
The publications use different types of corporate financial measures in examining the impact of sustainability practices on financial performance. Those measures are important in understanding the relationship between corporate sustainability practices and financial performance.
The articles were examined for measures used in studying the dependent variable of corporate financial performance (see Tables 5 and A1). Accounting-based measures, such as return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), return on investment (ROI), and earning per share (EPS) lead market-based measures that appear later in the time periods [22]. ROA was used in 53 out of the 132 articles, which is almost twice as many times as ROE, the second most-used measure. Other significant measures included Sales, ROI, EPS, Tobin's Q, etc. Profitability-related measures like ROA, ROE, ROI, and ROS appear throughout the time periods and make up the majority of the measures. In contrast, market-related measures such as Tobin's Q, Price to Earning (P/E) Ratio, Market Valuation, Cash Flow, etc. appear later in the time periods especially from 2012-2013 onward. The surge in the literature that started in the time period 2012-2013 coincides with a surge in the number of unique financial measurements used. Several market-related financial measures started to appear for the first time in the publications in 2012-2013, such as market return, market share, market valuation, market share, etc. In search for more reflective measures of corporate financial performance in relation to sustainability practices, the literature increasingly used market-based financial measures. Those measures offer a better ability to predict long-term corporate financial performance [9].

Impact of Sustainability Practices on Corporate Financial Performance
The articles were distributed in different combinations of the three possible outcomes of a relationship between sustainability practices and corporate financial performance: positive, negative or no impact. The percentage of articles that reported a positive relationship was 78% out of the total 132 articles (see Figure 5). Those that reported a no-impact relationship were 7%. Articles that reported both a positive and negative relationship were 6%, where some of the studied sustainability practices resulted in a positive impact, while others resulted in a negative relationship. Negative impact was reported in 6% of the articles, while those that reported both a positive and no impact relationship were at 2%. Articles that report a mixed result of positive, negative, and a no-impact relationship were 2% of the entire population of articles. The results of the distribution of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance suggest that a positive relationship is more probable between sustainability practices and corporate financial performance. Several reasons are suggested, which contribute to the differing results. First, the subject articles use different research methodologies and study designs, especially in terms of measurements of the dependent variable corporate financial performance. Moreover, the results they obtain are representative of the specific data, industry, firm size, or market they examined. Despite those differences, a positive impact of sustainability on corporate financial performance dominates the literature.
Market Valuation, Cash Flow, etc. appear later in the time periods especially from 2012-2013 onward. The surge in the literature that started in the time period 2012-2013 coincides with a surge in the number of unique financial measurements used. Several market-related financial measures started to appear for the first time in the publications in 2012-2013, such as market return, market share, market valuation, market share, etc. In search for more reflective measures of corporate financial performance in relation to sustainability practices, the literature increasingly used market-based financial measures. Those measures offer a better ability to predict long-term corporate financial performance [9].

Impact of Sustainability Practices on Corporate Financial Performance
The articles were distributed in different combinations of the three possible outcomes of a relationship between sustainability practices and corporate financial performance: positive, negative or no impact. The percentage of articles that reported a positive relationship was 78% out of the total 132 articles (see Figure 5). Those that reported a no-impact relationship were 7%. Articles that reported both a positive and negative relationship were 6%, where some of the studied sustainability practices resulted in a positive impact, while others resulted in a negative relationship. Negative impact was reported in 6% of the articles, while those that reported both a positive and no impact relationship were at 2%. Articles that report a mixed result of positive, negative, and a no-impact relationship were 2% of the entire population of articles. The results of the distribution of sustainability impact on corporate financial performance suggest that a positive relationship is more probable between sustainability practices and corporate financial performance. Several reasons are suggested, which contribute to the differing results. First, the subject articles use different research methodologies and study designs, especially in terms of measurements of the dependent variable corporate financial performance. Moreover, the results they obtain are representative of the specific data, industry, firm size, or market they examined. Despite those differences, a positive impact of sustainability on corporate financial performance dominates the literature.

Discussion
Literature moved from studying the impact of single sustainability dimensions on corporate financial performance towards a more encompassing total sustainability impact, which later morphed into a strictly environmental-social combination, such as in CSR. The problem with this approach is that the environmental part of CSR is small, and can easily miss the full impact of environmental sustainability. This, however, seems to be compensated for by a healthy number of articles that have continued to appear in the last six years on the single dimension of environmental sustainability, in comparison to either of the single economic or social dimensions of sustainability.
Literature continues to add new financial measures, especially market-based ones, when examining the impact of sustainability practices on corporate financial performance. Although some accounting financial measures continue to dominate the spectrum of measures in literature, we are yet to witness a universal agreement among researchers on what constitutes a suitable suite of financial measures. Market-based financial measures complement accounting measures, by offering better insights on corporate performance that incorporate future performance expectations. Market-based financial measures contribute to the sharp rise in the number of unique measures starting in 2012. This sharp rise coincided with another sharp rise in the number of articles on the sustainability impact on corporate financial performance during the same time period. While those trends were taking place, another interesting trend appeared, when the literature started moving towards consolidating a holistic sustainability approach to corporate performance with a social-environmental combination. The problem with this combination approach is that it overlooks economical sustainability while closely resembling CSR, which underplays the environmental sustainability.
The literature exhibits an overwhelmingly positive relationship between sustainability practices and corporate financial performance. A minority of literature reports a negative or mixed relationship, or reports no significant relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance. There are several contributing factors to this variation in results. First, the use of different research methodologies in literature is a direct contributor [18]. Another contributing factor to the variation in results includes the varying financial measures used to assess performance. Similarly, differences in firm size, industry, and analyzed sustainability practices all contribute to the variation in results regarding the relationship between corporate sustainability practices and financial performance [39].
The number of publications from countries with developing economies continues to lag behind those of developed economies [40]. A gap in literature exists for publications that examine the subject of corporate sustainability impact on financial performance in countries of developing economies. Further research is needed for countries of developing economies.
The review outcomes are limited to the databases and the top-tiered journals examined, as well as to the time boundaries described. This review does not include the entire possible universe of literature on the topic. These limitations can influence the outcomes of this research. However, several opportunities exist to expand the coverage of the subject.
Literature trends are gravitating towards CSR as a replacement for a holistic sustainability notion when it comes to examining sustainability impact on corporate financial performance. This shift risks oversimplifying corporate sustainability into CSR. The problem with CSR is that it is mostly about the social element of sustainability, and little to nothing about environmental and economic dimensions. This problem is further amplified by the lagging number of theoretical research in the literature, which is still struggling to establish a universal definition for corporate sustainability between the three competing dimensions of sustainability. Research is needed not only to consolidate this competition between the dimensions of sustainability, but also to synthesize a universal understanding of corporate sustainability within the proposed framework (see Figure 6). This is also directly linked to the still-missing consensus in selecting corporate financial measures when examining the impact of sustainability. The role of moderating variables like firm size, economy, and industry type need to be further examined in different contexts, not only to broaden the applicability of research, but also to identify potential groupings along the lines of those variables. Identifying those groups can help produce customized universal sets of measures and methodologies to analyze the subject relationship and reduce variation in results. Further research is needed to map out and categorize suitable corporate financial measures, and how they relate to sustainability practices. Finally, more research is needed to examine the impact of total sustainability, in order to closely establish the combined effect of all three dimensions. This is needed not only to improve our understanding of the relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance, but also to reduce variation in theory and results.
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 26 the subject relationship and reduce variation in results. Further research is needed to map out and categorize suitable corporate financial measures, and how they relate to sustainability practices. Finally, more research is needed to examine the impact of total sustainability, in order to closely establish the combined effect of all three dimensions. This is needed not only to improve our understanding of the relationship between corporate sustainability and financial performance, but also to reduce variation in theory and results. Author Contributions: Ali Alshehhi and Haitham Nobanee conceived and designed this research; Nilesh Khare also contributed to research idea. Ali Alshehhi performed the research and analyzed the data; Haitham Nobanee contributed analysis tools and editing. Ali Alshehhi and Haitham Nobanee wrote the paper. Nilesh Khare helped build the idea further and offered critical editing support.

Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A