1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 股權結構對企業社會責任及公司績效關聯性之影響
The Impact of Ownership Structure on the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performance
作者 李昀軒
Lee, Yun-Hsuan
貢獻者 岳夢蘭
Yueh, Meng-Lan
李昀軒
Lee, Yun-Hsuan
關鍵詞 企業社會責任
股權結構
公司績效
Corporate social responsibility
Ownership structure
Firm performance
日期 2022
上傳時間 1-Aug-2022 17:17:42 (UTC+8)
摘要 近年來，由於全球貧富差距逐漸擴大、自然環境日益被破壞，以及因無良廠商所造成的社會或食安問題層出不窮，因此有關企業社會責任的議題更加受到民眾與相關學者之重視。本研究以台灣上市公司為樣本，利用台灣證券交易所揭露之公司治理評鑑指標作為企業社會責任之代理變數，旨在探討股權結構對企業社會責任與公司績效關聯性之影響。此外，由於公司投入企業社會責任之效益或許非短期可顯現，故本研究將實證模型分為長期績效與短期績效，以彌補使用單一績效指標之不足。
實證結果發現，企業社會責任與公司長期績效呈顯著正相關，即公司善盡企業社會責任有助於提升長期績效表現；其次，機構法人持股和企業社會責任之交互作用，以及經理人持股和企業社會責任之交互作用皆與公司長期績效呈顯著正相關，大股東持股和企業社會責任之交互作用則與公司短期績效呈顯著正相關。表示機構法人持股比率愈高，有助於提升資訊透明度與利害關係人對公司之良好印象，進而增加公司長期績效表現；大股東持股比率愈高，與企業社會責任所產生之綜效雖然可顯現於短期績效，但長期可能會產生負面的影響；而經理人持有股數愈多，其利益將與股東趨於一致，進而降低代理問題、提高公司價值與增進企業永續性。
Recently, due to the widening gap between the rich and poor in the world, the destruction of natural environment, and the emergence of social or food safety problems caused by unscrupulous businessmen, the issue of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has attracted more attention from the public and related scholars. This study takes Taiwan listed companies as the research sample, using the index of corporate governance disclosed by the Taiwan Stock Exchange as the proxy variable of CSR. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of ownership structure on the relationship between CSR and firm performance. In addition, since the benefits of companies investing in CSR may not be manifested in the short-term, we divide empirical model into long-term and short-term performance to make up for the lack of using a single performance indicator.
The empirical results show that CSR is positively and significantly with long-term performance, which means companies investing in CSR will improve its long-term performance. Secondly, both of the interaction between institutional ownership and CSR, and the interaction between managerial ownership and CSR have positive significance effects on long-term performance, while the interaction of major shareholder ownership and CSR has positive significance effects on short-term performance. These results suggest that the higher holding of institutional investors, the better enhancement to information transparency and stakeholders’ positive impression. The higher holding of major shareholders, the synergy will be shown in the short-term, while it may have negative effects in the long-term. The more shares held by managers, the more their interests will be aligned with shareholders, thereby reducing agency problems, increasing firm value and enhancing corporate sustainability.
參考文獻 池祥萱、繆文娟、莊瀅臻 (2014)，「企業社會責任對於公司財務績效之影響是雙面刃嗎？來自全球 500 大公司的證據」，管理學報第三十一卷第一期，頁1-19。
陸芊螢、陳莛之 (2014)，「公司治理，資訊透明度與機構投資人持股之關聯性」，華人前瞻研究第十卷第二期，頁1-17。
葉月女 (2003)，「我國證券市場三大機構投資人與一般投資人對股市波動性影響之探討」，淡江大學財務金融學系碩士論文。
廖秀梅、李建然、吳祥華 (2006)，「董事會結構特性與公司績效關係之研究–兼論台灣家族企業因素的影響」，東吳經濟商學學報第五十四期，頁117-160。
Adams, M., & Hardwick, P. (1998). An analysis of corporate donations: United Kingdom evidence. Journal of management Studies, 35(5), 641-654.
Agrawal, A., & Knoeber, C. R. (1996). Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. Journal of financial and quantitative analysis, 31(3), 377-397.
Agrawal, A., & Mandelker, G. N. (1990). Large shareholders and the monitoring of managers: The case of antitakeover charter amendments. Journal of Financial and Quantitative analysis, 25(2), 143-161.
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: a review and agenda for future research. Journal of occupational health psychology, 5(2), 278.
Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.
Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of business ethics, 97(1), 71-86.
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Bushee, B. J. (1998). The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. Accounting review, 305-333.
Cardebat, J. M., & Sirven, N. (2010). What corporate social responsibility reporting adds to financial return?. Journal of Economics and International Finance, 2(2), 020-027.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & society, 38(3), 268-295.
Chang, Y. C., Yu, S. Y., & Chen, R. S. (2010). Industry Concentration, Profitability and Stock Returns. In 2010 3rd International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering (Vol. 3, pp. 45-48). IEEE.
Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., Park, J. H., & Jang, M. G. (2017). Exploring the relationship between board characteristics and CSR: Empirical evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(2), 225-242.
Chen, C., Roger, Y., Tang, H. W., & Hung, S. W. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and firm performance. Journal of American Business Review, Cambridge, 2, 181–188.
Chen, W. P., Chung, H., Hsu, T. L., & Wu, S. (2010). External financing needs, corporate governance, and firm value. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(3), 234-249.
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of financial Economics, 58(1-2), 81-112.
Córdoba, J. R., & Campbell, T. (2007). Implementing CSR initiatives-the contribution of systemic thinking. Pensamiento & gestión, (23), 112-130.
Dahlquist, M., & Robertsson, G. (2001). Foreigners trading and price effects across firms. Available at SSRN 290960.
Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of political economy, 93(6), 1155-1177.
Dowell, G., Hart, S., & Yeung, B. (2000). Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy market value?. Management science, 46(8), 1059-1074.
Eccles, R. G., & Serafeim, G. (2011). Accelerating the adoption of integrated reporting. InnoVatio Publishing Ltd.
El-Gazzar, S. M. (1998). Predisclosure information and institutional ownership: A cross-sectional examination of market revaluations during earnings announcement periods. Accounting Review, 119-129.
Elyasiani, E., & Jia, J. (2010). Distribution of institutional ownership and corporate firm performance. Journal of banking & finance, 34(3), 606-620.
Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of political economy, 88(2), 288-307.
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. The journal of law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325.
Florea, L., Cheung, Y. H., & Herndon, N. C. (2013). For all good reasons: Role of values in organizational sustainability. Journal of business ethics, 114(3), 393-408.
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to maximise its profits. New York Times Magazine, September, 13, 33.
Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic management journal, 30(4), 425-445.
Hajawiyah, A., Adhariani, D., & Djakman, C. (2018). The sequential effect of CSR and COE: family ownership moderation. Social Responsibility Journal.
Hill, C. W., & Snell, S. A. (1989). Effects of ownership structure and control on corporate productivity. Academy of Management journal, 32(1), 25-46.
Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American economic review, 76(2), 323-329.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Jensen, M. C., & Ruback, R. S. (1983). The market for corporate control: The scientific evidence. Journal of Financial economics, 11(1-4), 5-50.
Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2011). Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 103(3), 351-383.
Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of management journal, 42(5), 564-576.
Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of management journal, 31(3), 570-598.
Keim, G. D. (1978). Corporate social responsibility: An assessment of the enlightened self-interest model. Academy of management review, 3(1), 32-39.
Konar, S., & Cohen, M. A. (2001). Does the market value environmental performance?. Review of economics and statistics, 83(2), 281-289.
Li, Y., Gong, M., Zhang, X. Y., & Koh, L. (2018). The impact of environmental, social, and governance disclosure on firm value: The role of CEO power. The British Accounting Review, 50(1), 60-75.
López-Iturriaga, F. J., & López-de-Foronda, Ó. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and reference shareholders: An analysis of European multinational firms. Transnational Corporations Review, 3(3), 17-33.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification?. Strategic management journal, 21(5), 603-609.
Palia, D., & Lichtenberg, F. (1999). Managerial ownership and firm performance: A re-examination using productivity measurement. Journal of Corporate Finance, 5(4), 323-339.
Pound, J. (1988). Proxy contests and the efficiency of shareholder oversight. Journal of financial economics, 20, 237-265.
Preston, L. E., & O`bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (1998). The association between earnings sensitivity measures and market determined risk exposures: The case of oil price risk for petroleum refiners. Available at SSRN 145428.
Schuler, D. A., & Cording, M. (2006). A corporate social performance–corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of management Review, 31(3), 540-558.
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1986). Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of political economy, 94(3, Part 1), 461-488.
Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of business ethics, 17(2), 195-204.
Stulz, R. (1988). Managerial control of voting rights: Financing policies and the market for corporate control. Journal of financial Economics, 20, 25-54.
Teng, M. J. (2011). The effects of an environmental management system on intangible assets and corporate value: Evidence from Taiwan’s manufacturing firms. Asian Business & Management, 10(3), 381-404.
Tsoutsoura, M. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic management journal, 18(4), 303-319.
Wruck, K. H. (1989). Equity ownership concentration and firm value: Evidence from private equity financings. Journal of Financial economics, 23(1), 3-28.
Zahra, S. A. (1993). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship, and financial performance: A taxonomic approach. Journal of business venturing, 8(4), 319-340.
Zantout, Z. Z. (1997). A test of the debt‐monitoring hypothesis: The case of corporate R&D expenditures. Financial Review, 32(1), 21-48.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
財務管理學系
109357004
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109357004
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 岳夢蘭zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Yueh, Meng-Lanen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 李昀軒zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lee, Yun-Hsuanen_US
dc.creator (作者) 李昀軒zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Lee, Yun-Hsuanen_US
dc.date (日期) 2022en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Aug-2022 17:17:42 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Aug-2022 17:17:42 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Aug-2022 17:17:42 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0109357004en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141016-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 財務管理學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 109357004zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近年來，由於全球貧富差距逐漸擴大、自然環境日益被破壞，以及因無良廠商所造成的社會或食安問題層出不窮，因此有關企業社會責任的議題更加受到民眾與相關學者之重視。本研究以台灣上市公司為樣本，利用台灣證券交易所揭露之公司治理評鑑指標作為企業社會責任之代理變數，旨在探討股權結構對企業社會責任與公司績效關聯性之影響。此外，由於公司投入企業社會責任之效益或許非短期可顯現，故本研究將實證模型分為長期績效與短期績效，以彌補使用單一績效指標之不足。
實證結果發現，企業社會責任與公司長期績效呈顯著正相關，即公司善盡企業社會責任有助於提升長期績效表現；其次，機構法人持股和企業社會責任之交互作用，以及經理人持股和企業社會責任之交互作用皆與公司長期績效呈顯著正相關，大股東持股和企業社會責任之交互作用則與公司短期績效呈顯著正相關。表示機構法人持股比率愈高，有助於提升資訊透明度與利害關係人對公司之良好印象，進而增加公司長期績效表現；大股東持股比率愈高，與企業社會責任所產生之綜效雖然可顯現於短期績效，但長期可能會產生負面的影響；而經理人持有股數愈多，其利益將與股東趨於一致，進而降低代理問題、提高公司價值與增進企業永續性。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Recently, due to the widening gap between the rich and poor in the world, the destruction of natural environment, and the emergence of social or food safety problems caused by unscrupulous businessmen, the issue of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has attracted more attention from the public and related scholars. This study takes Taiwan listed companies as the research sample, using the index of corporate governance disclosed by the Taiwan Stock Exchange as the proxy variable of CSR. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of ownership structure on the relationship between CSR and firm performance. In addition, since the benefits of companies investing in CSR may not be manifested in the short-term, we divide empirical model into long-term and short-term performance to make up for the lack of using a single performance indicator.
The empirical results show that CSR is positively and significantly with long-term performance, which means companies investing in CSR will improve its long-term performance. Secondly, both of the interaction between institutional ownership and CSR, and the interaction between managerial ownership and CSR have positive significance effects on long-term performance, while the interaction of major shareholder ownership and CSR has positive significance effects on short-term performance. These results suggest that the higher holding of institutional investors, the better enhancement to information transparency and stakeholders’ positive impression. The higher holding of major shareholders, the synergy will be shown in the short-term, while it may have negative effects in the long-term. The more shares held by managers, the more their interests will be aligned with shareholders, thereby reducing agency problems, increasing firm value and enhancing corporate sustainability.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 謝辭 I
摘要 II
Abstract III
目錄 IV
表目錄 V
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究架構 3
第貳章 文獻回顧與研究假說 4
第一節 企業社會責任 4
第二節 企業社會責任與公司績效 6
第三節 股權結構與公司績效 8
第四節 假說發展 10
第參章 研究方法與設計 13
第一節 資料來源與研究期間 13
第二節 變數定義與說明 13
第三節 研究方法與模型 17
第肆章 實證結果與分析 20
第一節 敘述統計分析 20
第二節 共線性分析 21
第三節 實證結果分析 23
第四節 穩健性檢定 27
第伍章 結論與建議 33
第一節 結論 33
第二節 研究限制與建議 34
參考文獻 35
附錄 42		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1749697 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109357004en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 企業社會責任zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 股權結構zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公司績效zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Corporate social responsibilityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Ownership structureen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Firm performanceen_US
dc.title (題名) 股權結構對企業社會責任及公司績效關聯性之影響zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Impact of Ownership Structure on the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performanceen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 池祥萱、繆文娟、莊瀅臻 (2014)，「企業社會責任對於公司財務績效之影響是雙面刃嗎？來自全球 500 大公司的證據」，管理學報第三十一卷第一期，頁1-19。
陸芊螢、陳莛之 (2014)，「公司治理，資訊透明度與機構投資人持股之關聯性」，華人前瞻研究第十卷第二期，頁1-17。
葉月女 (2003)，「我國證券市場三大機構投資人與一般投資人對股市波動性影響之探討」，淡江大學財務金融學系碩士論文。
廖秀梅、李建然、吳祥華 (2006)，「董事會結構特性與公司績效關係之研究–兼論台灣家族企業因素的影響」，東吳經濟商學學報第五十四期，頁117-160。
Adams, M., & Hardwick, P. (1998). An analysis of corporate donations: United Kingdom evidence. Journal of management Studies, 35(5), 641-654.
Agrawal, A., & Knoeber, C. R. (1996). Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. Journal of financial and quantitative analysis, 31(3), 377-397.
Agrawal, A., & Mandelker, G. N. (1990). Large shareholders and the monitoring of managers: The case of antitakeover charter amendments. Journal of Financial and Quantitative analysis, 25(2), 143-161.
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: a review and agenda for future research. Journal of occupational health psychology, 5(2), 278.
Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.
Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of business ethics, 97(1), 71-86.
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Bushee, B. J. (1998). The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. Accounting review, 305-333.
Cardebat, J. M., & Sirven, N. (2010). What corporate social responsibility reporting adds to financial return?. Journal of Economics and International Finance, 2(2), 020-027.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & society, 38(3), 268-295.
Chang, Y. C., Yu, S. Y., & Chen, R. S. (2010). Industry Concentration, Profitability and Stock Returns. In 2010 3rd International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering (Vol. 3, pp. 45-48). IEEE.
Chang, Y. K., Oh, W. Y., Park, J. H., & Jang, M. G. (2017). Exploring the relationship between board characteristics and CSR: Empirical evidence from Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(2), 225-242.
Chen, C., Roger, Y., Tang, H. W., & Hung, S. W. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and firm performance. Journal of American Business Review, Cambridge, 2, 181–188.
Chen, W. P., Chung, H., Hsu, T. L., & Wu, S. (2010). External financing needs, corporate governance, and firm value. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(3), 234-249.
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of financial Economics, 58(1-2), 81-112.
Córdoba, J. R., & Campbell, T. (2007). Implementing CSR initiatives-the contribution of systemic thinking. Pensamiento & gestión, (23), 112-130.
Dahlquist, M., & Robertsson, G. (2001). Foreigners trading and price effects across firms. Available at SSRN 290960.
Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of political economy, 93(6), 1155-1177.
Dowell, G., Hart, S., & Yeung, B. (2000). Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy market value?. Management science, 46(8), 1059-1074.
Eccles, R. G., & Serafeim, G. (2011). Accelerating the adoption of integrated reporting. InnoVatio Publishing Ltd.
El-Gazzar, S. M. (1998). Predisclosure information and institutional ownership: A cross-sectional examination of market revaluations during earnings announcement periods. Accounting Review, 119-129.
Elyasiani, E., & Jia, J. (2010). Distribution of institutional ownership and corporate firm performance. Journal of banking & finance, 34(3), 606-620.
Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of political economy, 88(2), 288-307.
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. The journal of law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325.
Florea, L., Cheung, Y. H., & Herndon, N. C. (2013). For all good reasons: Role of values in organizational sustainability. Journal of business ethics, 114(3), 393-408.
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to maximise its profits. New York Times Magazine, September, 13, 33.
Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic management journal, 30(4), 425-445.
Hajawiyah, A., Adhariani, D., & Djakman, C. (2018). The sequential effect of CSR and COE: family ownership moderation. Social Responsibility Journal.
Hill, C. W., & Snell, S. A. (1989). Effects of ownership structure and control on corporate productivity. Academy of Management journal, 32(1), 25-46.
Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American economic review, 76(2), 323-329.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Jensen, M. C., & Ruback, R. S. (1983). The market for corporate control: The scientific evidence. Journal of Financial economics, 11(1-4), 5-50.
Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2011). Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 103(3), 351-383.
Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of management journal, 42(5), 564-576.
Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of management journal, 31(3), 570-598.
Keim, G. D. (1978). Corporate social responsibility: An assessment of the enlightened self-interest model. Academy of management review, 3(1), 32-39.
Konar, S., & Cohen, M. A. (2001). Does the market value environmental performance?. Review of economics and statistics, 83(2), 281-289.
Li, Y., Gong, M., Zhang, X. Y., & Koh, L. (2018). The impact of environmental, social, and governance disclosure on firm value: The role of CEO power. The British Accounting Review, 50(1), 60-75.
López-Iturriaga, F. J., & López-de-Foronda, Ó. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and reference shareholders: An analysis of European multinational firms. Transnational Corporations Review, 3(3), 17-33.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification?. Strategic management journal, 21(5), 603-609.
Palia, D., & Lichtenberg, F. (1999). Managerial ownership and firm performance: A re-examination using productivity measurement. Journal of Corporate Finance, 5(4), 323-339.
Pound, J. (1988). Proxy contests and the efficiency of shareholder oversight. Journal of financial economics, 20, 237-265.
Preston, L. E., & O`bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (1998). The association between earnings sensitivity measures and market determined risk exposures: The case of oil price risk for petroleum refiners. Available at SSRN 145428.
Schuler, D. A., & Cording, M. (2006). A corporate social performance–corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of management Review, 31(3), 540-558.
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1986). Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of political economy, 94(3, Part 1), 461-488.
Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of business ethics, 17(2), 195-204.
Stulz, R. (1988). Managerial control of voting rights: Financing policies and the market for corporate control. Journal of financial Economics, 20, 25-54.
Teng, M. J. (2011). The effects of an environmental management system on intangible assets and corporate value: Evidence from Taiwan’s manufacturing firms. Asian Business & Management, 10(3), 381-404.
Tsoutsoura, M. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic management journal, 18(4), 303-319.
Wruck, K. H. (1989). Equity ownership concentration and firm value: Evidence from private equity financings. Journal of Financial economics, 23(1), 3-28.
Zahra, S. A. (1993). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship, and financial performance: A taxonomic approach. Journal of business venturing, 8(4), 319-340.
Zantout, Z. Z. (1997). A test of the debt‐monitoring hypothesis: The case of corporate R&D expenditures. Financial Review, 32(1), 21-48.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202200729en_US