ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS' BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA

Copyright © Author(s) 2025. All Rights Reserved. Published by GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE. | Int. Journal of Business Management Page 108 of 133 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA By: UDOH, Rose Gabriel Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management Sciences, Akwa Ibom State University, Obio Akpa Campus Ph.:+234 0803-5749726 OKPO, Sunday Asukwo Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management Sciences, Akwa Ibom State University, Obio Akpa Campus Email: sundayo[email protected].ng Ph.:+234-0803-7864-947. EMENYI, Emmanuel Okon Department of Accounting, Faculty of Management Sciences, Akwa Ibom State University Obio Akpa Campus. Email: [email protected], Ph.:+234-0803-0989-037 Abstract The disclosure of environmental remediation costs usually sends signal to the stakeholders of how responsible the firm is. This study was therefore conducted to investigate the relationship between disclosure of remediation costs and the behaviour of investors in the capital market. The independent variable of the study was the environmental remediation costs disclosure which was proxied by environmental clean costs disclosure, waste management cost disclosure, environmental safety costs disclosure, community development cost disclosure and pollution control cost disclosure; while the dependent variable was the investor’s behaviour which was proxied by market capitalisation. The population of the study comprised of nine (9) listed oil and gas firms in the Nigerian Exchange Group as at 2023 of which the whole population was used for the study. The study adopted ex post facto research design as data were obtained from published financial statements of the selected firms for the years’ 2014 to 2023 using contents analysis. The data were analysed with descriptive statistics, correlation and regression using SPSS version 10. The results of analysis indicate that environmental clean-up costs disclosure and waste management costs disclosure shows significant positive relationship with market capitalisation while environmental safety costs disclosure and community development cost disclosure show insignificant negative relationship with market capitalisation. It was concluded that the disclosure of remediation ARTICLE ID: #02131 10.5281/ZENODO.17465002 VOL. 08 ISSUE 09 SEPT-2025 e-ISSN 3027-0537 p-ISSN 3027-0375 Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management costs have significant relationship with investor’s behaviour in the capital market. Arising from the findings and conclusion of the study, it was recommended, amongst others, that oil and gas firms should not only prioritize the restoration of the environment but should also disclose the costs of such restoration in order to project their image to the stakeholders. Keywords: Remediation cost disclosure, investors’ behaviour, market capitalisation, waste management cost disclosure. How to cite: Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 INTRODUCTION Restoration of environment by firms has become a cardinal responsibility of companies and it is of interest not only to local communities but also to outside stakeholders. This stems from the fact that activities of firms, particularly oil and gas firms have created very serious negative impact on the environment. In the past environments were exploited and left unattended to by firms. However, in recent times through the activities or advocacies of nongovernmental organisations and other stakeholders, the attention of the global community has been directed to how the environment can be replenished and restored for the future generation. Consequently, firms have been under pressure by stakeholders to show their efforts in restoring the environment in order for future generation to inherit. Firms usually communicate to stakeholders their contributions to the environment through disclosure in annual reports and accounts. The oil and gas industry and others whose activities are directly or indirectly affected by the environment and who affect the environment by their activities have come under examination for their environmental impact and disclosure practices. As documented by Nwachukwu and Chinedu-Eze (2020) the environmental consequences associated with oil extraction and production in Nigeria cannot be ignored. Consequently, Okolie, et al, (2020) drew attention to the instances of oil spills, flaring, and deforestation which have raised serious concerns among stakeholders both locally and internationally, leading to the demands for greater transparency and accountability from the operators of oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The various environmental degradation activities have compelled firms to invest huge sums of money to address the environmental problems created by the firms. These invested amounts are what constitute environmental restoration costs. Environmental restoration or remediation costs include funds expended on such activities like following laws about the environment, fixing pollution problems, and paying fines for breaking the rules (Okafor, 2018). But sometimes, companies don't think about how their activities are hurting nature when they figure out how much returns the firms are making. This can lead to mistakes and make it seem like companies are generating more returns than they really are. In another Page No. 109 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm development even when some firms are committing huge sums of money into the replenishment of the environment, they are rarely not recognized because the information is not usually in the public purview. Thus the need to publicly disclose such financial commitment of firms in their annual reports have become imperative. The various sections of Nigeria as a nation have been the center of numerous environmental disasters occasioned by oil spills (caused by pipeline leakages and illegal oil bunkering), construction activities, manufacturing activities and processing activities. These incidents have led to immense damage to the region's fragile ecosystems leading to contamination of water bodies resulting in severe health consequences for local communities (Agbonkhese, et al, 2019). Such events have not only highlighted the urgency of addressing environmental issues but also emphasized the need for transparent reporting and accountability within the oil and gas sector. The international and local investors as well as financial institutions have recognized the importance of sustainable investments which incorporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors into their decision-making processes. The growing demand for responsible investments has led to increased investigation into the companies' environmental practices and their disclosure of such information. Due to the complexities of investment decision, investors are now seeking for additional reliable and verifiable environmental data to make informed investment decisions and mitigate risk. Adegbite, et al, (2020) explored the relationship between corporate environmental information disclosure and market value in Nigeria's oil and gas sector. Their findings indicated a positive correlation between environmental information disclosure and market value, highlighting the importance of transparent reporting on environmental issues in enhancing firm performance and investor sentiment. Though there are various studies which have investigated the impact of environmental information disclosure practices generally in the Nigerian oil and gas sector, most of the findings have been sketchy and inconclusive. Some found a significant relationship between environmental information disclosure and market value of oil and gas firms (Okpo, et al, 2024; Aliyu, et al, 2022; other have found negative relationship (Oraka & Egbumike,2016) and others reveal mixed results (Solomon, 2020). Thus further investigation of the impact of environmental information disclosure on the market value of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria is warranted. The inadequate disclosure of environmental information by listed oil and gas firms has become a critical issue, as it affects not only the natural environment but also their market value and reputation. The lack of comprehensive and standardized environmental information disclosure practices within the Nigerian oil and gas sector hinder stakeholders from accurately assessing the environmental performance of listed firms. Consequently, this uncertainty has contributed to instability in the market values of companies that fail to disclose their environmental practices adequately. The absence of consistent environmental reporting guidelines and regulations in Nigeria creates a fragmented landscape, making it challenging for investors to compare and evaluate the environmental performance of different firms (Adewumi, 2019). This lack of harmonization raises concerns about information accuracy, reliability, and comparability, Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management negatively impacting investor confidence. Secondly, inadequate environmental disclosures diminish the ability of investors and financial institutions to assess the long-term sustainability of oil and gas firms. Without complete and reliable information, investors may struggle to identify potential risks associated with regulatory non-compliance, resource depletion, or climate change impacts (Dietz & Mulder, 2016). Consequently, this uncertainty can contribute to reduced interest in oil and gas companies that fail to disclose their environmental remediation costs adequately. Although several studies have examined the relationship between environmental disclosure and firm value, there is a noticeable gap in literature concerning research on the relationship between environmental remediation cost disclosures and investors’ behaviour in the oil and gas firms in Nigeria. To bridge the gap in existing literature, this research study was conducted to examine and shed light on how environmental remediation costs disclosure will motivate investors to desire to invest in the Nigerian oil and gas firms with particular emphasis on the remediation costs of waste management, clean-up and employee safety, health and community development. By addressing this problem, the study aims to provide valuable insights for policymakers, investors, and industry stakeholders in fostering sustainable practices and enhancing the overall performance and reputation of the sector. This study demonstrates empirical relationship between environmental remediation cost disclosure and investor’s behaviour. Review of Literature Environmental restoration costs disclosure Environmental restoration can also be called environmental replenishment, environmental conservation, environmental protection as well as environmental remediation. It involves the process of removing, reducing, or neutralizing pollutants or contaminants in soil, water and air to safeguard human health and the environment. This process encompasses actions such as the removal of pollution from environmental media like soil, groundwater, sediment, or surface water. Aremu and Adegbie (2024) document that environmental conservation cost is used to describe the sum of money spent on operations that aim to protect the environment, such as disaster preparedness, damage mitigation, and restoration. In the same vein Ajah and Adegbie (2023) refers to environmental conservation cost as the money a business puts into non-current assets for the benefits of the environment. Environmental costs include prevention cost which is the cost associated with the prevention of natural disasters, accumulation of harmful waste, recycling of waste products, training of employees, funding of environmental research and fines or penalties for violation of regulations, laws and standards. The benefits of environmental remediation are multifaceted, including the protection of human health and the environment, restoration of contaminated land for reuse, improvement of air and water quality, and preservation of natural resources, which ultimately enhance economic development opportunities (UNEP, 2016). The environmental remediation costs encompasses the totality of costs involved in the remediation and restoration of environmental costs. Adejola (2013) as cited in Okere et al., (2022) categorized environmental costs as capital or recurrent which are incurred by a firm to ensure that Page No. 111 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm organizations’ activities do not cause harm to the environment or replenishment damage to the environment resulting from the firm’s activities. In Nigeria, environmental remediation is a significant concern due to pollution and contamination resulting from activities such as oil spills, gas flaring, and improper waste disposal (UNDP, 2017). Initiatives like the establishment of the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA) in 2006 and projects like the Ogoni Cleanup Project demonstrate the Nigerian government's efforts to address environmental degradation. However, the challenges have persisted and many communities continue have continued to suffer adverse effects, indicating the need for more effective and timely remediation efforts (UNDP, 2017). Environmental remediation costs disclosure refers to the disclosure of information relating to the costs incurred in remediating or restoring the environment. It encompasses making information available publicly on the costs incurred by firms in restoring the environment. Mostly these are usually publicized in the annual reports and accounts of firms. Agubosim (2021) documents that in the face of multiple environmental problems, responsible organisations operating in the environment tend to incur reasonable costs geared towards sustaining the continuity of the resources of the environment needed by future generations. These costs have been the yardstick or performance evaluation over corporate responsibility and now duty bound to be incorporated in the company’s annual reports. Waste management cost disclosure Waste management cost disclosure can be described as the disclosure of information regarding the disclosure of information in annual reports about the totality of costs incurred by organisations to manage and control waste material emanating from the activities of the firm. The importances of disclosing information about waste are numerous. Fist and most importantly is to communicate to interested stakeholders that the firm is socially responsible by incurring cost on waste management so as to remediate the environment. The effect of this is to motivate the investors to desire to invest in the firm. Environmental clean-up cost disclosure This can be seen as the disclosure of information in annual reports and accounts of firms about the costs incurred by firms in mopping up the environmental mess generated by the activities of the firm. Environmental clean-up cost includes expenses related to the removal and remediation of hazardous materials and pollutants from the environment, covering activities like site investigation, clean-up design, monitoring, and post-clean-up actions. Clean-up costs vary based on contamination type and extent, site accessibility, and clean-up complexity (U.S. EPA, 2021). In Nigeria, factors influencing clean-up costs include contamination severity, site accessibility, resource availability, and legal frameworks (Olatunde et al., 2019; Osunyikanmi, 2021). While clean-up efforts offer benefits such as human health protection, environmental restoration, and economic and social advantages, challenges like limited resources and weak regulatory enforcement persist (Freedman & Shehadeh, 2019; Olatunde et al., 2019). Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management Environmental safety cost disclosure Environmental safety cost disclosure refers to disclosure of information regarding expenses associated with preventing, mitigating, and remediating environmental risks to ensure human health and environmental protection (EPA, 2022). These costs include implementing management systems, conducting impact assessments, monitoring environmental parameters, and implementing pollution control measures (EPA, 2022). In Nigeria, environmental safety is crucial given such challenges as air, water, and soil pollution, as well as inadequate hazardous waste management (Oyewole et al., 2020). Although the government has enacted regulations like the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) Act, weak enforcement remains an issue, necessitating collaborative efforts to improve environmental safety (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2007). Community development costs disclosure Firms usually contribute to the development of communities in which they operate as a very important aspect of corporate social responsibility. This is important because it is that aspect that ensures that the firms enjoy some reasonable level of peace. Tom and Attai (2014) as cited in Kornom-Gbaraba (2025) define community development as the process by which individuals, organisations, governments and private citizens work together to help a community reach its full potential, become more self-assured, and lead morally and purposefully lives as demonstrated by improvement in standard of living and quality of life. The relationship between the oil and gas firms have been anything but cordial. This is due to incessant demands from the communities in which the firms operate. Thus many companies initiate community relations by establishing company community relations initiate in order to breach the gap between them and the oil and gas firms. To sustain the activities of this body, firms usually channel some funds to address the needs of the community in such areas as pipe borne water, sanitation and others. These costs constitute the community relations costs. A study by Yusuf and Dandago (2023) revealed the existence of the positive relationship between community relations cost disclosure and firm’s value. Their findings highlighted the importance of community relations cost disclosure in shaping the market value of firms. Pollution control cost disclosure Pollution arises most of the times from the activities of companies. Also the pollution are waste which originate from the activities of companies. Pollution control cost represents expenses incurred by firms in controlling pollution that arises as a result of the activities of the companies. Thus pollution control cost disclosure is the process by which companies report or disclose in annual reports and accounts the expenses incurred in curtailing the effect of pollution on the environment. It involves the expenses incurred by companies to mitigate the effect of pollution arising from the activities of the companies. According to Dissanayake et al (2019) as cited in Oshiole (2024) defines environmental pollution as any activity, by companies or individuals, which compromises the health and/or environment of other persons in a localized area, where the causal link is clearly established. Oshiole (2024) describes Page No. 113 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm pollution control as an essential task where waste products enter the environment in various forms and threaten the quality of air, land, and water. Onyema et al (2025) documents that pollution control disclosure is the disclosure strategies to increase the information needed for pollution control of the environment. The information is meant to be disclosed for public consumption on how the environmental pollution are controlled in the interest of the public. It can also be defined as the disclosure of the process of reducing waste and control its impact on the environments (Victoria et al, 2022). Overview of investor’s behaviour in the capital market Investors’ behaviour can be seen as the exploration of the emotional responsiveness pertaining to attitude exhibited by individuals, financial experts, and traders during the financial planning and investment management process (Baker & Ricciardo, 2014). The decision making process of investors incorporates both quantitative (objective) and qualitative (subjective) aspects that is based on the features of investment product or financial services. Generally, the behaviour of investors flow from the psychological and emotional perception above all other considerations. Investment in the capital market involves committing the resources of individuals or organisations to projects that are long term in nature and whose returns accumulate gradually over time. Errors arising from decisions leading to investment in any firm may threaten the survival of such organisations and consequently thorough appraisal of such investment must be carried before embarking on it. The investors are usually considered to be rational with the objective of maximizing their wealth. Consequently, their investment strategies are anchored solely on risk-return trade-off and in strict compliance with basic finance rules. Investors usually take many factors into consideration in their investment decisions. Hussein (2007) argued that investors usually consider the marketability of the firm’s stock, get rich syndrome of investors, expectations of corporate returns, past performances of the firm’s stock, government interest and availability of organized financial markets in their decision to invest in any company stock. There are various methods of measuring the behaviour of investors in the capital markets. However, this study will adopt market capitalisation in line with the prior studies of Okpo (2024). This is because market capitalisation has been found to be the most realistic considering that it is coming from the market. Market capitalization Market capitalization represents the total value of a company’s outstanding shares of stock, calculated by multiplying the current market price per share by the total number of shares outstanding. It is a key metric used by investors and analysts to assess the size, financial performance, and overall worth of a firm. The concept of market capitalization is crucial when considering the environmental information disclosure of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. When companies voluntarily or mandatorily disclose information regarding their environmental performance, such as emissions, waste management practices, and compliance with environmental regulations, it affects how investors perceive the firm's environmental risks and opportunities management. Studies by Ijeoma and Uwuigbe (2020) found a positive relationship between environmental information disclosure and market capitalization. Their Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management findings imply that companies that disclose environmental information are seen as more transparent, responsible, and better positioned to proactively manage environmental risks, leading to an increase in market capitalization. Theoretical framework This study was anchored on stakeholder theory propounded by R. Edward Freeman in 1984. The theory identifies that organizations have a responsibility to consider the interests and concerns of various stakeholders, including investors, employees, customers, and communities. Oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria face increasing pressure to address environmental concerns and demonstrate their commitment to sustainability. Stakeholder Theory suggests that these firms should actively engage with their stakeholders and take into account their interests and expectations, including disclosing relevant environmental information. By disclosing environmental information, oil and gas companies can address stakeholder concerns and build trust (Aliyu, et al., 2022). Stakeholders such as investors and consumers are increasingly interested in the environmental impact of the companies they invest in or purchase products from. By providing transparent information regarding their environmental performance and practices, oil and gas firms can demonstrate their commitment to responsible operations, which can enhance stakeholder trust and positively impact market value. Afolayan and Adegbemi (2019) in their study found that environmental information disclosure positively influences the market value of oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The results showed that companies that disclosed more environmental information experienced higher market value. Additionally, the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) implemented the Sustainability Disclosure Guidelines in 2015, which encourage listed companies to disclose relevant environmental information, among other sustainability aspects. This guideline aligns with the principles of Stakeholder Theory, as it recognizes the importance of considering stakeholder interests and expectations, including environmental concerns. Overall, Stakeholder Theory provides a framework for understanding the relationship between environmental information disclosure and the market value of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. By actively engaging with stakeholders and addressing their concerns through transparent disclosure, companies can build trust, enhance their reputation, and potentially increase market value. Empirical Review A review of extant literature reveal that there have been several empirical studies regarding the relationship between environmental remediation costs on the in the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. Ogbulafor et al (2025) investigated the effect of environmental cost disclosure particularly waste management costs, on the financial performance of listed manufacturing firms in Nigeria. The study adopted ex post facto research design with data extracted from annual financial statements and sustainability reports of 12 purposively selected firms across six manufacturing sectors for the period 2015 to 2024. The data were analysed with Page No. 115 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm descriptive and inferential statistics including correlation and panel generalized method of moments regression. The findings revealed that correlation analysis waste management cost had statistically significant positive relationship with return on equity; while regression results showed that waste management cost had a significant positive effect on return on equity and return on asset. Emenyi et al (2025) examined the relationship between environmental accounting disclosure and cost of capital of listed consumer goods companies in Nigeria. The population of the study comprised of listed consumer goods firms in Nigeria. The study adopted ex post facto research design as data were extracted from the annual reports and accounts of 18 listed consumer goods firms in Nigeria from 2014 to 2023. The data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics and panel multiple regression with the aid of E-views. The findings of the study revealed that environmental accounting risk disclosure and waste management disclosure have significant negative relationship with cost of equity of listed consumer goods firms in Nigeria; while greenhouse gas emission has non-significant relationship with cost of equity; health and safety disclosure has significant relationship with cost of equity of consumer goods firm in Nigeria. The study concluded that environmental accounting disclosure significantly influences cost of equity of listed consumer goods firms in Nigeria. Kornom-Gbaraba, et al (2025) conducted a study on the impact of community development cost disclosure on the corporate financial performance of quoted oil and gas companies in Nigeria. The study period covers five years from 2018 to 2022. The study adopted ex-post facto research design as secondary data sourced from Nigeria Exchange Group were employed. A sample of seven companies quoted on the stock exchange during the period were used. The data collected analysed using ordinary least square method and Eviews version 2.0. The results revealed that community development cost disclosure have positive but insignificant relationship with financial performance. Adepoju and Adeagbo (2025) investigated the effect of environmental disclosure on financial performance of manufacturing companies in Nigeria. The study adopted ex post facto research design as data for the study were obtained from the annual reports of manufacturing companies for the years 2017 to 2023. The data were analysed using multiple regression technique. The findings of the study revealed that environmental disclosure has a positive significant effect on firm performance. Oshiole (2024) examined the effect of community development cost and pollution control disclosure on market value of listed consumer and industrial goods firms in Nigeria covering a period of ten years from 2014 to 2023. The study adopted ex post facto research design while longitudinal panel design was used to analyze the data. The results of analysis revealed that community development cost and pollution control disclosure has a negative and insignificant effect on Tobin Q which was used to proxy market value of listed consumer and industrial goods firms in Nigeria. Okpo, et al (2024) conducted a study on the influence of sustainability performance on investors’ behaviour in the capital market. The independent variable of the study being sustainability performance was proxied by environmental, social and governance disclosures; while the dependent variable being investors’ behaviour was proxied by market Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management Model evaluation Residual and coefficient diagnostics were however conducted to assess the suitability of the model as stated in the previous section. These include normality test, multicollinearity test and heteroscedasticity test. Normality test The Jarque-Bera test was employed in this case. As applied, if the p-value associated with the Jarque-Bera test is below a predetermined significance level (p<0.05), then we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the data do not follow a normal distribution. With a p-value of 0.058501, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the data were normally distributed. Multicollinearity test Variance inflation factors (VIF) Coefficient Uncentered Centered Variable Variance VIF VIF C 0.023578 4.222948 NA GHGED 0.025533 2.997949 1.032627 NATOD 0.025533 2.642260 1.115621 EFPD 0.025048 2.342878 1.119375 CDCD 0.12241 2.432226 1.091113 PCCD 0.02133 2.000121 1.110000 Source: Researcher’s computation using E-views 10.0 (2025) The VIF measures the extent to which the variance of the estimated regression coefficients is increased due to multicollinearity. A high VIF indicates a strong correlation between the predictor variables, suggesting severe multicollinearity issues. VIF value of less than 10.0 signifies that no severe multicollinearity exists in the model. With a centered variance inflation factor value of 1.03, 1.11 and 1.11, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the explanatory variables in the regression model are free from multicollinearity issues. Page No. 123 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm Heteroscedasticity test Cross-section dependence/ Heteroscedasticity test Test Statistic d.f. Prob. Breusch-Pagan LM 55.79719 36 0.0687 Pesaran scaled LM 1.272461 0.2032 Pesaran CD -1.024182 0.3057 Source: Researcher’s computation using E-views 10.0 (2025) The statistics and probability value associated with the Breusch-Pagan LM test otherwise known as the Breusch-Pagan Godfrey test help determine whether there is evidence of heteroscedasticity in the regression model. A low p-value (p<0.05) suggests evidence against the null hypothesis in favour of the alternate hypothesis which indicates the presence of heteroscedasticity in the regression model. With a p-value of 0.0687, there is sufficient evidence to accept the null hypothesis, thus, conclude that the predictor variables in the regression model were homoscedastic. Regression analysis The results of the panel multiple regression analysis are stated in table 4.5 below. Panel multiple regression results Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob. C 0.736435 0.153551 4.796043 0.0000 WMCD 0.591113 0.159791 3.699302 0.0004 ECCD 0.501969 0.159791 3.141422 0.0023 ESCD 0.236228 0.158267 1.492592 0.1392 CDCD 1.020211 0.022221 1.222342 0.1340 PCCD 0.420211 0.122321 1.522340 0.0940 R-squared 0.295517 Mean dependent var 1.537333 Adjusted R-squared 0.270942 S.D. dependent var 0.830202 Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management S.E. of regression 0.708867 Akaike info criterion 2.193130 Sum squared resid 43.21438 Schwarz criterion 2.304232 Log likelihood -94.69083 Hannan-Quinn criter. 2.237933 F-statistic 12.02511 Durbin-Watson stat 2.464991 Prob(F-statistic) 0.000001 Source: Researcher’s computation using E-views 10.0 (2025) From the regression results in the table above, when the independent variableswaste management costs disclosure (WMCD), environmental clean-up costs disclosure (ECCD), employee safety costs disclosure (ESCD) and community development cost disclosure (CDCD) are held constant (equal Zero), the dependent variable– market capitalization (MCAP) increased at a constant average of approximately 0.74. However, a unit rate of waste management costs disclosure (WMCD), environmental clean-up costs disclosure (ECCD), employee safety costs disclosure (ESCD) and community development cost disclosure (CDCD) stood at 0.59, 0.50, 0.24, 1.02 and 0.42 respectively. Test of hypotheses Each of the hypotheses in this study was tested based on the result obtained from the panel multiple regression analysis. The result that relate to these hypotheses is summarized in table above. Hypothesis one The hypothesis one for this study was stated in a null form as follows: H0: Waste management cost disclosure has no significant effect on the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. From the results of analysis the t-cal stood at 3.6993 at .05 significance level with t-tab value of 2.306 given at T0.05,9. Since the t-cal. is greater than t-tab the null hypothesis which states there is no significant relationship between waste management cost disclosure and market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria fails to hold, thus rejected. The rejection of the null hypothesis is further confirmed given that at tc of 0.059, its probability value (p-value = 0.0004) is less than 0.05. Hypothesis two The null hypothesis two of this study was stated as follows: H0: Environmental clean-up cost disclosure does not significantly affect the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The result of the t-test carried out at .05 significance level stood at t-cal of 3.1414 with the ttab value of 2.306.Since the t-cal of 3.1414 is greater than t-tab value of 2.306 given at T0.05,9, Page No. 125 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm the null hypothesis which states there is no significant relationship between environmental clean-up cost disclosure and market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria fails to hold, thus rejected. The null hypothesis is further rejected given that at T0.05,9, its probability value (p-value = 0.0023) is less than 0.05. Hypothesis three The null hypothesis three of this study was stated as follows: H0: Employee safety cost disclosure has no significant effect on the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. From the result of analysis in the table above, the test was carried out at .05 significance level with t-cal of 1.4925 with t-tab of 2.306. Since the t-cal of 1.4925 was less than t-tab given at tc-2.306 the null hypothesis which states there is no significant relationship between employee safety cost disclosure (ESCD) and market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria holds, thus accepted. The null hypothesis is further accepted given that the probability value (p-value = 0.1392) was greater than 0.05. Hypothesis four The null hypothesis four of this study was stated follows: H04: Community developments cost disclosure has no significant effect on the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. From the result above, the t-cal stood at 1.222 is less than t-tab of 2.306 at 0.05 level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis which states there is no significant relationship between community relations cost disclosure (CDCD) and market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria holds, thus accepted. The null hypothesis is further accepted given that its probability value (p-value = 0.1392) is greater than 0.05. Hypothesis five The hypothesis five of this study was stated in a null form as follows: H0: Pollution control cost disclosure has no significant effect on the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. From the result above, the T-cal of 1.52125 is less than t-tab given at tc-0.05,9. Hence, the null hypothesis which states there is no significant relationship between employee safety cost disclosure (ESCD) and market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria holds, thus accepted, and the alternative hypothesis rejected. The null hypothesis is further accepted given that at T0.05,9, its probability value (p-value = 0.0940) is greater than 0.05. Discussion of findings The coefficients of the results of analysis of data were extracted and fitted into the multiple regression model earlier formulated as below: MCAP = 0.736435 + 0.591WMCD + 0.501ECCD + 0.236ESCD + 1.020CDCD + 1.420PCCD + μ. Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management From the results of regression analysis in table 4.5 above, the coefficient of determination of the relationship between environmental cost disclosure and market capitalisation stood at 0.296 indicating that 29.6 percent of changes in market capitalisation is accounted for by changes in environmental cost disclosure; while 70.0 percent is accounted for by other factors outside environmental cost disclosure. The discussions of specific hypothesis are made hereunder. Waste management costs disclosure and market capitalization The study findings documented that waste management costs disclosure (WMCD) has a significant positive relationship with market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The coefficient of 0.5911 indicates that for every unit increase in waste management costs disclosure, the market capitalization of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria is expected to increase by 0.5911. The findings suggest that investors view such disclosures as an indicator of a firm’s commitment to environmental sustainability and social responsibility, which can lead to increased trust and confidence in the firm, positively affecting its market value. Furthermore, with the increasing awareness and concern about climate change, environmental sustainability has become an essential consideration for investors in making investment decisions. Hence, firms that are proactive in disclosing their greenhouse gas emissions are perceived as more sustainable and likely to perform better in the long run. This position however aligns with majority of extant studies. These studies include Aliyu, et al., (2022), Yayaya (2018), Oti and Ogar (2018), Mohan et al., (2019), Emmanuel, et al., (2019), Ezeagba, et al., (2017), Ahmed, et al., (2016) alongside Ofregbu and Aminoritse (2016) Environmental cleanup costs disclosure and market capitalization Environmental clean-up costs disclosure (ECCD) has a significant positive relationship with market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. With a coefficient of 0.5019, a unit increase in environmental clean-up costs disclosure is associated with a 0.5019 increase in market capitalization. The findings imply that firms that disclose information about environmental clean-up costs, such as oil spills, pipeline leaks, and other related incidents, tend to have higher market value as investors perceive them as being more transparent and accountable. Effective disclosure of environmental cleanup costs also indicates that a firm has robust risk management practices and is taking proactive measures to minimize the negative environmental impacts of its operations. This is in line with the findings of Oraka and Egbumike (2016). Oraka and Egbumike (2016) found out that environmental disclosures, natural occurrence disclosure has significant effect on total assets turnover and returns on equity, and no significant effect was found for cash flow ratio and current ratio of manufacturing companies in Nigeria. Employee safety costs disclosure and market capitalization The study also revealed that employee and safety costs disclosure (ESCD) has an insignificant positive relationship with market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The coefficient of 0.2362 suggests that a unit increase in environmental Page No. 127 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm fines and penalties disclosure leads to a 0.2362 increase in market capitalization. However, since the relationship is statistically insignificant (p-value of 0.1392), it implies that such disclosures may not have a significant impact on the market value of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The findings suggest that investors may not view the disclosure of employee safety costs as relevant indicators of the firm’s sustainability or operational efficiency. Community development costs disclosure and market capitalization The study findings documented that community development costs disclosure (CDCD) has a significant positive relationship with market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The coefficient of 1.0202 indicates that for every unit increase in waste management costs disclosure, the market capitalization of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria is expected to increase by 1.0202. The findings suggest that investors view such disclosures as an indicator of a firm’s commitment to environmental sustainability and social responsibility, which can lead to increased trust and confidence in the firm, positively affecting its market value. Hence, firms that are proactive in disclosing their community development initiatives are perceived as more sustainable and likely to perform better in the long run. This position however aligns with majority of extant studies by Kornom-Agbaraba et al (2025) and Yusuf and Dandago (2023) who found a positive relationship between community development cost disclosure and financial performance of oil and gas firms. Pollution control cost disclosure and market capitalisation The findings of the study revealed that pollution control costs disclosure (PCCD) does not have any significant relationship with market capitalization (MCAP) of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. The coefficient of 0.4202 indicates that for every unit increase in pollution control costs disclosure, the market capitalization of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria is expected to increase by 0.4202. The findings suggest that investors view such disclosures as an indicator of a firm’s commitment to environmental sustainability and social responsibility, which can lead to increased trust and confidence in the firm, positively affecting its market value. Hence, firms that are proactive in disclosing their greenhouse gas emissions are perceived as more sustainable and likely to perform better in the long run. This position however aligns with majority of extant studies such as Aliyu, et al., (2022), Yayaya (2018), Oti and Ogar (2018), Mohan et al., (2019), Emmanuel, et al., (2019), Ezeagba, et al., (2017), Ahmed, et al., (2016) alongside Ofregbu and Aminoritse (2016). Conclusion and recommendations The findings of this study show that environmental remediation cost disclosure plays a significant role in determining the behaviour of investors in the listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. Thus the study concludes that disclosure of information on environmental remediation cost influences the behaviour of investors in the oil and gas firms in Nigeria. Arising from the findings and conclusion of this study, the following recommendations were proffered: 1. Companies should invest in environmental management practices to maintain environmental standards and comply with regulations. Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management 2. Companies should also invest in environmental cleanup efforts to avoid negative impacts on profitability. 3. Regulatory authorities should continue to enforce environmental regulations to ensure that companies are held accountable for their environmental impacts. 4. Oil and gas firms should increase the tempo of community relations in the communities they operate by engaging all relevant stakeholders including the youth. 5. Oil and gas firms should develop a policy of contributing to setting aside a part of the earnings for the purpose of controlling pollution. REFERENCES Adepoju, J. A. & Adeagbo, K. A. (2025). Effects of environmental disclosure on financial performance of manufacturing companies in Nigeria. Journal of Business Development and Management Research, 7 (7), 17 – 30/ Agubosim, D. O. C., Emeka-Nwokeji, N. A. & Orjinta, H. I. (2021). Environmental disclosure and profitability: evidence from oil and gas firms listed in Nigeria. The International Journal of Business & Management, 9 (3), 93 – 101. Aguguom, T. A. (2024). Environmental disclosure and sustainability reporting practice of listed manufacturing companies in Nigeria, Fuoye Journal of Accounting and Management, 7 (1), 89 – 104. Agbonkhese, E., Udisi, V., & Adegbite, E. (2019). Environmental disclosure, greenhouse gas emissions and market value of Nigerian listed oil and gas firms. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 17(4), 611-629. Agweda, F. E., Okoye, E. I., Amahalu, N. N. Egolum, P. & Chinyere, O. J. (2024). Environmental disclosure and market value added of listed industrial goods firms in Nigeria. Journal of Global Accounting, 10 (4), 69 – 84. Ajah, C. C. & Adegbie, F. F. (2023). Environmental conservation cost and the financial stability of business organisations in a competitive market. International Journal of Economics, Business Conservation Research, 7 (07), 245 - 261 Akpan, U., & Udoh, A. (2018). The impact of environmental regulation on the financial performance of firms in Nigeria. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 8(4), 166-172. Akpan, D. C, Akinninyi, P. E. & Inwang, P. E (2024). Effect of environmental disclosure on cost. International Journal of Economics, Business and Social Science Research, 2, 69-94. Alao, M. A., Oloke, C. O., Ayeni, O. O., & Aworinde, O. O. (2021). Cost of solid waste management in Nigeria: An assessment of determinants and solutions. Sustainable Cities and Society, 69, 102-804. Page No. 129 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm Albuquerque et al., 2017). Environmental management system and financial performance: A review of the French empirical evidence. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(5), 427438. Ali, A., & Al-Nsour, K. (2019). The effect of financial reporting quality and conservatism on profitability of Jordanian industrial firms. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 32(2), 12-29. Aliyu, M., Bappah, S., Orsaa, G., & Adamu S. (2022). Environmental sustainability disclosure and market value of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. GUSAU Journal of Accounting and Finance, 3(1), 22-34 Aremu, P. O. & Adegbie, F. F. (2024). Environmental conservation costs and sustainable business growth in listed oil and gas companies in Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, VIII (II), 1484 -1501. Cheska, D. P., Ronniell, M., & James, S. E. (2022). Impact of environmental accounting disclosures on profitability and firm value of petrochemical industry in the Philippines. In Proceedings of International Interdisciplinary Conference on Sustainable Development Goals (IICSDGs, 5(1), 126–135. Danso & Adomako, (2014). Waste management practices and firm performance of Indian small and medium enterprises: A structural equation modelling approach. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66(4), 541-566. Dietz, S. & Mulder, P. (2016). Reducing non-financial reporting fatigue: Evidence from a survey on corporate reporting. Ecological Economics, 12(7), 420-429. Emenyi, B. E., Emenyi, E. O. & Umoren, A. (2025). Environmental accounting disclosure and cost of capital of listed consumer goods companies in Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative Finance and Economics Research, 13 (1), 174 – 200. Emenyi, E. O. & Okpokpo, A. S. (2023). Environmental disclosure and the quality of financial reports of listed Nigeria manufacturing firms. British Journal of Marketing Studies, 11 (4), 18 – 53. Environmental Protection Agency. (2021). Waste Management Cost. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/waste-management-cost Eze, S., Okoye, P., & Uwuigbe, U. (2019). Relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance of Nigerian firms. Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(4), 112-125. Ezeagba, F., John-Akamelu, O., & Umeoduagu, G., (2017). Assessment of oil spill cleanup methods and the viability of bioremediation as a cleanup technique in Niger Delta Region of Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management, 21(4), 652-659. Federal Ministry of Environment. (2016). National Policy on Solid Waste Management. Retrieved from Rose Gabriel, U., Sunday Asukwo, O., & Emmanuel Okon, E. (2025). ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 8(9), 108-133. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17465002 © 2025 GLOBAL PUBLICATION HOUSE | International Journal of Business Management http://www.environment.gov.ng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8 2&Itemid=133 Freedman, J. L., & Shehadeh, L. A. (2019). The social and economic benefits of environmental cleanup. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(17), 17311-17319. Fizzah, M., Fangjun, W., Jiyuan, L., Muhammad, A. N. (2023). Impact of environmental disclosure on firm performance: The mediating role of green innovation, Spanish Accounting Review, 26(1), 14-26. Friske, S., Gromis di Trana, M., Tonelli, A., &Lucchese, A. (2023). The multi-faceted dimensions for the disclosure quality of non-financial information in revising directive 2014/95/EU. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(1), 274–300. Hailu and Katircioglu, (2016). The impact of intellectual capital on firms' financial performance: Evidence from Iran. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 14(2), 112-129. Haixia, W. and Jianping, L. (2022). The relationship between environmental disclosure and financial performance: mediating effect of economic development and information penetration. 116-142 https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2072355 Kornom-Gbaraba, M. E. & Chukwuemeka, J. (2022). Impact of waste management cost disclosure on corporate financial performance of quoted oil companies in Nigeria. British International Journal of Applied Economics, Finance and Accounting, 6 (02), 21 – 29. Kornom-Gbaraba, M. E., Olatunde, O & Yusuf, B. A. O. (2025). Impact of community development cost disclosure on corporate financial performance of quoted oil and gas companies in Nigeria. Journal of Accounting and Financial Management, 11 (1), 2695 – 2211. Nangih, E. Emeka-Nwokeji, N. A. & Peters, G. T. (2022). Environmental disclosures and earnings quality of listed consumer goods firms in Nigeria. Journal of Accounting Information and Innovation, 8 (4), 1 – 17. Nwachukwu, I. C., & Chinedu-Eze, V. C. (2020). Environmental fines and penalties: Implications for the financial performance of listed oil and gas firms in Nigeria. Journal of Social Science Studies, 7(4), 297-308. Nwachukwu, M. A., Emecheta, C. A., Okeke, E. C., & Onwukwe, S. O. (2021). Soil contamination and remediation strategies in Nigeria: a review. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 23, 101645. Ogbulafor, L. C., Ihendinihu, J. U. & Azubuike, J. U. (2025). Effect of environmental cost on the financial performance of listed manufacturing firms in Nigeria. Jalingo Journal of Social Sciences, 6 (4), 81 – 93. Page No. 131 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS DISCLOSURES AND INVESTORS’ BEHAVIOUR IN THE OIL AND GAS FIRMS IN NIGERIA Volume 8 Issue No 09 (2025) Access: https://gphjournal.org/index.php/bm Okafor, T.G. (2018). Environmental costs accounting and reporting on firm financial performance: A survey of Quoted Nigerian Oil Companies. International Journal of Finance and Accounting, 7(1), 1-6. Okafor, G. I., Anichebe, A. S., Emeka-Nwokeji N. A. & Agubata N. S. (2022). Sustainability environmental disclosure and financial performance of oil and gas companies in Nigeria. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 6(2),11-31 Okere, O.C., Nwite, S. C. & Agana, O. J. (2022). Environmental accounting costs and financial performance of selected quoted oil and gas companies in Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, VI (X), 174 – 187. Okolie, K., Chukwuemeka, E., & Agu, W. C. (2020). Environmental Information Disclosure and Firm Performance in the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry. SAGE Open, 10(1), 115. Okpo, S.A., Umoren, A. O. & Simeon, U. J. (2024). Gaining investor’s confidence through environmental information disclosure in annual reports of companies in Nigeria, International Journal of Advances in Management and Economics, 13 (02), 01 – 14. Okpo, S. A., Ukpong, E. G. & Otung, A. U. (2024). Sustainability reporting and investor’s behaviour in the oil and gas firms listed in the Nigerian capital market. European Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Research, 12 (6), 58 – 76. Olatunde, O. A., Owoade, O. K., Owoade, J. O., & Ojo, O. A. (2019). Review of environmental remediation techniques: a tool for environmental sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 234, 1329-1351. Onyema, C. C., Ayodele, O. & Adeniyi, A. M. (2025). Green accounting disclosure and firms value of oil and gas companies quoted on Nigeria Exchange Group. Nigerian Journal of Banking and Financial Issues, 11 (1), 152 – 168. Opuni-Frimpong, J. Akomaning, J. O. & Boafe, R. O. (2024). Environmental disclosure and financial performance amid banking crisis and Covid-19: evidence from Ghana. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 08, Oraka, A.Oo., & Egbunike, F.C (2016). Appraisal of environmental accounting information in the financial statements of consumer goods manufacturing companies in Nigeria. Journal of Social Development, 5(5), 6-24. Oshiole, B. V. (2024). Community development cost, pollution control disclosure and market value of listed consumer and industrial goods firms in Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, XI (X), 797 - 821. Osunyikanmi, A., (2021). Environmental liability and cost of cleanup in Nigeria: the legal framework. In A. O. Arowolo (Ed.), Waste Management in Developing Countries. Journal of International Accounting, 5(2), 27-49.