學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 建構社會價值創造模型─以台灣上市公司為例
Modeling the social value creation: A case of listed companies in Taiwan作者 吳浩銓
Wu, Hao Chuan貢獻者 王信實
Wang, Shinn Shyr
吳浩銓
Wu, Hao Chuan關鍵詞 企業社會責任
社會價值
社會企業光譜
混合寡占理論
BLP需求估計方法
CSR
Social value
Social enterprise spectrum
Mixed oligopoly
BLP demand estimation日期 2018 上傳時間 2-Mar-2018 11:55:54 (UTC+8) 摘要 近期關於組織目標的研究指出，傳統以營利為目的的公司，隨著政府與大眾對於社會議題的日益關注而開始履行企業社會責任；另一方面，傳統以解決社會問題為目的的非營利組織，為了處理資金問題而開始從事營利行為。因為營利與非營利組織的分界開始模糊，各種混合型態的組織跟著出現，構成了一個組織目標的光譜。然而，這個概念上的目標光譜並不容易呈現，目前針對社會價值的創造(Social Value Creation，簡稱SVC)在量化上的分析成果亦有限。本研究從產業經濟學的混合寡占理論出發，提出一個「SVC投資市場」以衡量組織對於社會價值的重視程度，並使用觀察到的資料描繪出SVC投資市場中的需求。再透過組織目標函數的設定以及在市場中競爭的結果，推估組織考量社會價值的比重，找出組織在目標光譜中的位置。本研究針對台灣上市公司的企業社會責任報告書資料以及財報資料進行分析後發現，目前台灣上市公司的消費者並不太重視公司的SVC活動。政府若欲提升公司對於SVC的重視程度，可以嘗試藉由改變消費者的購買決策來影響公司的目標決策。 參考文獻 中文文獻NPOst編輯室(2017)。透視B型企業：究竟是共益企業，還是行銷手段？檢自：http://npost.tw/archives/33222江明修(審訂)(2004)。企業型非營利組織(原作者：J. G. Dees, J. Emerson, & P. Economy)。台北市：智勝文化(原著出版年：2001)邢瑜(2015)。台灣社會企業的認知與圖像建構。未出版之博士論文，國立台北大學，公共行政暨政策學系，新北市。官有垣(2000)。非營利組織在臺灣的發展：兼論政府對財團法人基金會的法令規範。中國行政評論，10，75-110。易明秋(2013)。公司社會責任的實驗品──美國社會型企業制度。成大法學，26，59-144。陳金貴(2002)。非營利組織社會企業化經營探討。新世紀智庫論壇，19，39-51。蔡嘉昇(2014)。從國外立法看臺灣社會企業之法制發展。會計研究月刊，348，74-79。劉承愚(2002)。非營利組織法律的定位。益思科技法律事務所。英文文獻Alter, K. (2007). Social enterprise typology. Washington, DC: Virtue Ventures LLC.André, R. (2012). Assessing the accountability of the benefit corporation: Will this new gray sector organization enhance corporate social responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 110(1), 133-150.Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C. (2007). Endogenous timing in a mixed duopoly: Price competition. Journal of Economics, 91(3), 263–272.Barros, F. (1995). Incentive schemes as strategic variables: An application to a mixed duopoly. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 373-386.Beltratti, A. (2005). The complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. The Geneva Papers, 30, 373–386.Berry, S., Levinsohn, J. & Pakes, A. (1995). Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica, 63(4), 841-890.Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2008). Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 1325–1343.Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10, 51–55.Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 42-56.Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2010). Conceptions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences and divergences. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 32–53Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16, 417–436.Fershtman, C. (1985). Managerial incentives as a strategic variable in duopolistic environment. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 3, 245-253.Fershtman, C., & Judd, K. L. (1987). Equilibrium incentives in oligopoly. The American Economic Review, 77(5), 927-940.Garcia-Castro, R., Ariño, M. A., & Canela, M. A. (2010). Does social performance really lead to financial performance? Accounting for endogeneity. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 107–126.Goering, G. E. (2007). The strategic use of managerial incentives in a non-profit firm mixed duopoly. Managerial and Decision Economics, 28, 83–91.Jae-Joon Han, J. J., Kim, H. J., & Yu, J. (2016). Empirical study on relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance in Korea. Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, 1(1), 61–76.Kopel, M., & Brand, B. (2012). Socially responsible firms and endogenous choice of strategic incentives. Economic Modelling, 29, 982–989.Matsumura, T. (1998). Partial privatization in mixed duopoly. Journal of Public Economics, 70, 473–483.Merrill, W. C., & Schneider, N. (1966). Government firms in oligopoly industries: A short-run analysis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(3), 400-412.Nelling, E., & Webb, E. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: The ‘‘virtuous circle’’ revisited. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 32(2), 197–209.Nevo, A. (2000). A practitioner’s guide to estimation of random-coefficients logit models of demand. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 9(4), 513–548.Pal, D. (1998). Endogenous timing in a mixed oligopoly. Economics Letters, 61, 181–185.Rasmusen, E. (2007). The BLP method of demand curve estimation in industrial organization. Working paper.Salamon, L. M., Anheier, H. K., List, R., Toepler, S., S. Wojciech Sokolowski, S. W., & Associates (1999). Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Center for civil Society Studies.Wang, S-S., Stiegert, K. W., & Dhar, T. P. (2010). Strategic pricing behavior under asset value maximization. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58, 151–170. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
經濟學系
105258001資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105258001 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 王信實 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Wang, Shinn Shyr en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 吳浩銓 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Wu, Hao Chuan en_US dc.creator (作者) 吳浩銓 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Wu, Hao Chuan en_US dc.date (日期) 2018 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Mar-2018 11:55:54 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Mar-2018 11:55:54 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Mar-2018 11:55:54 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0105258001 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/116114 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 經濟學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 105258001 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近期關於組織目標的研究指出，傳統以營利為目的的公司，隨著政府與大眾對於社會議題的日益關注而開始履行企業社會責任；另一方面，傳統以解決社會問題為目的的非營利組織，為了處理資金問題而開始從事營利行為。因為營利與非營利組織的分界開始模糊，各種混合型態的組織跟著出現，構成了一個組織目標的光譜。然而，這個概念上的目標光譜並不容易呈現，目前針對社會價值的創造(Social Value Creation，簡稱SVC)在量化上的分析成果亦有限。本研究從產業經濟學的混合寡占理論出發，提出一個「SVC投資市場」以衡量組織對於社會價值的重視程度，並使用觀察到的資料描繪出SVC投資市場中的需求。再透過組織目標函數的設定以及在市場中競爭的結果，推估組織考量社會價值的比重，找出組織在目標光譜中的位置。本研究針對台灣上市公司的企業社會責任報告書資料以及財報資料進行分析後發現，目前台灣上市公司的消費者並不太重視公司的SVC活動。政府若欲提升公司對於SVC的重視程度，可以嘗試藉由改變消費者的購買決策來影響公司的目標決策。 zh_TW dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第二章 文獻回顧 4第一節 混合寡占理論 4第二節 企業社會責任、非營利組織、社會企業與公益公司 5第三節 組織類型光譜 11第三章 資料介紹 14第四章 研究方法 17第一節 組織目標之θ光譜 17第二節 消費者剩餘之意義與商品市場架構的問題 18第三節 重新定義市場 19第四節 市場需求的估計方法 22第五節 將BLP估計方法應用於SVC投資市場 24第六節 商品特徵 26第七節 工具變數與成本特徵 28第八節 使用公司目標函數計算θf 31第五章 模型結果 33第一節 敘述統計 33第二節 BLP估計結果 36第三節 θ的計算 39第六章 結論 46第一節 主要研究結果與貢獻 46第二節 研究限制與未來研究方向 47參考文獻 51 zh_TW dc.format.extent 1359285 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105258001 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 企業社會責任 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會價值 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會企業光譜 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 混合寡占理論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) BLP需求估計方法 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) CSR en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Social value en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Social enterprise spectrum en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Mixed oligopoly en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) BLP demand estimation en_US dc.title (題名) 建構社會價值創造模型─以台灣上市公司為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Modeling the social value creation: A case of listed companies in Taiwan en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文文獻NPOst編輯室(2017)。透視B型企業：究竟是共益企業，還是行銷手段？檢自：http://npost.tw/archives/33222江明修(審訂)(2004)。企業型非營利組織(原作者：J. G. Dees, J. Emerson, & P. Economy)。台北市：智勝文化(原著出版年：2001)邢瑜(2015)。台灣社會企業的認知與圖像建構。未出版之博士論文，國立台北大學，公共行政暨政策學系，新北市。官有垣(2000)。非營利組織在臺灣的發展：兼論政府對財團法人基金會的法令規範。中國行政評論，10，75-110。易明秋(2013)。公司社會責任的實驗品──美國社會型企業制度。成大法學，26，59-144。陳金貴(2002)。非營利組織社會企業化經營探討。新世紀智庫論壇，19，39-51。蔡嘉昇(2014)。從國外立法看臺灣社會企業之法制發展。會計研究月刊，348，74-79。劉承愚(2002)。非營利組織法律的定位。益思科技法律事務所。英文文獻Alter, K. (2007). Social enterprise typology. Washington, DC: Virtue Ventures LLC.André, R. (2012). Assessing the accountability of the benefit corporation: Will this new gray sector organization enhance corporate social responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 110(1), 133-150.Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C. (2007). Endogenous timing in a mixed duopoly: Price competition. Journal of Economics, 91(3), 263–272.Barros, F. (1995). Incentive schemes as strategic variables: An application to a mixed duopoly. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 373-386.Beltratti, A. (2005). The complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. The Geneva Papers, 30, 373–386.Berry, S., Levinsohn, J. & Pakes, A. (1995). Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica, 63(4), 841-890.Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2008). Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 1325–1343.Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10, 51–55.Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 42-56.Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2010). Conceptions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences and divergences. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 32–53Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16, 417–436.Fershtman, C. (1985). Managerial incentives as a strategic variable in duopolistic environment. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 3, 245-253.Fershtman, C., & Judd, K. L. (1987). Equilibrium incentives in oligopoly. The American Economic Review, 77(5), 927-940.Garcia-Castro, R., Ariño, M. A., & Canela, M. A. (2010). Does social performance really lead to financial performance? Accounting for endogeneity. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 107–126.Goering, G. E. (2007). The strategic use of managerial incentives in a non-profit firm mixed duopoly. Managerial and Decision Economics, 28, 83–91.Jae-Joon Han, J. J., Kim, H. J., & Yu, J. (2016). Empirical study on relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance in Korea. Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, 1(1), 61–76.Kopel, M., & Brand, B. (2012). Socially responsible firms and endogenous choice of strategic incentives. Economic Modelling, 29, 982–989.Matsumura, T. (1998). Partial privatization in mixed duopoly. Journal of Public Economics, 70, 473–483.Merrill, W. C., & Schneider, N. (1966). Government firms in oligopoly industries: A short-run analysis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(3), 400-412.Nelling, E., & Webb, E. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: The ‘‘virtuous circle’’ revisited. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 32(2), 197–209.Nevo, A. (2000). A practitioner’s guide to estimation of random-coefficients logit models of demand. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 9(4), 513–548.Pal, D. (1998). Endogenous timing in a mixed oligopoly. Economics Letters, 61, 181–185.Rasmusen, E. (2007). The BLP method of demand curve estimation in industrial organization. Working paper.Salamon, L. M., Anheier, H. K., List, R., Toepler, S., S. Wojciech Sokolowski, S. W., & Associates (1999). Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Center for civil Society Studies.Wang, S-S., Stiegert, K. W., & Dhar, T. P. (2010). Strategic pricing behavior under asset value maximization. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58, 151–170. zh_TW
