423 3.1 Direct effects on responsible firms Table 1 reports, for each event, the window in which the responsible firm reached its most adverse cumulative abnormal return (CAR), together with the corresponding p-value and the average response of peer firms. Figure 1 shows how CAR evolves across event windows for the responsible firms. Table 1 – Worst-window CAR results for responsible firms and average peer response Event Respo nsible firm Tic ker Worst windo w CA R (res pons ible) pvalu e Sig nif ica nc e Mea n CA R (pee rs) % Neg ativ e peer s % Sig nifi cant pee rs Interpr etation Bruma dinho dam collaps e VALE S.A. VA LE [-7,+7] - 0.20 7 0.02 5 5% 0.02 5 33. 3 0.0 Direct impact Samarc o (Maria na) tailings failure BHP Group BH P [- 21,+21] - 0.30 0 0.00 8 1% - 0.33 4 10 0.0 0.0 Direct impact + spillove r Juukan Gorge destruc tion Rio Tinto RIO [-3,+3] - 0.03 3 0.47 5 ns - 0.05 9 10 0.0 0.0 Modera te spillove r Konkol a acid spill (Zambi a) Vedan ta Resou rces VE D.L [-7,+7] - 0.06 6 0.63 5 ns - 0.04 6 66. 7 0.0 Modera te spillove r Tailing s spill in Brazil (Minas -Rio) Anglo Ameri can NG LO Y [- 14,+14] - 0.05 5 0.54 5 ns - 0.07 8 10 0.0 0.0 Modera te spillove r Yanaco cha mercur Newm ont Corpo NE M [- 21,+21] - 0.28 7 0.28 4 ns - 0.09 8 50. 0 0.0 Limited evidenc e
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2