1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 採SASB準則下ESG重大性議題與機構投資人之探討
A study of Material ESG SASB Factors and Institutional Ownership
作者 黃浩瑜
Huang, Hao-Yu
貢獻者 楊曉文
黃浩瑜
Huang,Hao-Yu
關鍵詞 機構投資人
ESG
SASB
重大性議題
Institutional ownership
ESG
SASB
Material issues
日期 2022
上傳時間 1-Aug-2022 17:28:07 (UTC+8)
摘要 SASB準則及氣候風險揭露在金融業跟投資界重要性日益增加，然而過去大多文獻皆探討機構投資人持股比例與ESG分數之關聯性，而較少研究與SASB準則關聯文獻，因此本文將著重於機構投資人持股如何影響公司在SASB準則提及之重大性議題之表現。本文將2012年至2018年台灣的上市櫃公司當作樣本，利用Bloomberg的ESG資料庫及SASB準則所提及各行業的重大性議題，端看機構投資人持股比例與公司是否揭露SASB準則及SASB表現之關聯。
本文從回歸結果得到機構投資人持股比例較高時，公司不只更有意願揭露SASB準則提及項目，在ESG的項目揭露數以及重大性議題的表現也皆會較佳。另機構投資人持股比例越高，公司在重大性議題上表現較可能優於同行業平均及提升下年的SASB分數，代表機構投資人對於重大性ESG議題上確實有一定影響力，促使企業積極改善公司在重大性議題上之表現，機構投資人亦會促使公司揭露氣候風險相關議題，在社會責任報告書中揭露相關議題。機構投資人促使企業積極改善公司在重大性議題上及氣候風險之揭露及表現，不僅滿足投資人的資訊需求，也利於企業向投資者展現公司長期之價值及往永續目標邁進。
The importance of the SASB Standard and climate risk for financial industry and investment communities has grown exponentially. However, in the past, most of the papers has discussed the relationship between institutional ownership and ESG scores, and less research has been done on the relationship between institutional ownership and SASB standards. Therefore, this paper will focus on how institutional ownership affect the company`s performance on the issues mentioned in the SASB standard(material issues). This article takes listed companies in Taiwan from 2012 to 2018 and Bloomberg`s ESG database as a sample, and then research about if the company has disclosed material issues and the performance of SASB standard.
The results of the study found that the higher the institutional ownership, not only more willing to disclose material issues, but the better the company`s performance in ESG disclosure and material issues. At the same time, the empirical results also found that the higher the institutional ownership, the more likely the company`s performance on material issues is better than the industry average and the SASB score for the next year will be improved, which means that institutional investors are really interested in SASB issues. Institutional investors will also urge companies to disclose climate risk-related issues, and disclose climate risk issues in social responsibility reports, urging companies to actively improve the company`s performance on major issues. Institutional investors not only meet investors` information needs, but also be helpful for companies to show investors the long-term value of the company and move towards sustainable goals.
參考文獻 Aggarwal, R., Erel, I., Ferreira, M., & Matos, P. (2011). Does governance travel around the world? Evidence from institutional investors. Journal of financial economics, 100(1), 154-181.
Ameli, N., Drummond, P., Bisaro, A., Grubb, M., & Chenet, H. (2020). Climate finance and disclosure for institutional investors: why transparency is not enough. Climatic Change, 160(4), 565-589.
Barko, T., Cremers, M., & Renneboog, L. (2021). Shareholder engagement on environmental, social, and governance performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-36.
Benlemlih, M., Arif, M., & Nadeem, M. (2022). Institutional Ownership and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Comparative Study of the UK and the USA. British Journal of Management.
Buchanan, B., Cao, C. X., & Chen, C. (2018). Corporate social responsibility, firm value, and influential institutional ownership. Journal of Corporate Finance, 52, 73-95.
Burns, N., Kedia, S., & Lipson, M. (2010). Institutional ownership and monitoring: Evidence from financial misreporting. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(4), 443-455.
Busco, C., Consolandi, C., Eccles, R. G., & Sofra, E. (2020). A preliminary analysis of SASB reporting: Disclosure topics, financial relevance, and the financial intensity of ESG materiality. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 32(2), 117-125.
Cantele, S., Tsalis, T. A., & Nikolaou, I. E. (2018). A new framework for assessing the sustainability reporting disclosure of water utilities. Sustainability, 10(2), 433.
Chen, T., Dong, H., & Lin, C. (2020). Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 135(2), 483-504.
Chen, X., Harford, J., & Li, K. (2007). Monitoring: Which institutions matter?. Journal of financial Economics, 86(2), 279-305.
Cheng, X., Wang, H. H., & Wang, X. (2021). Common Institutional Ownership and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Banking & Finance, 106218.
Consolandi, C., Eccles, R. G., & Gabbi, G. (2020). How material is a material issue? Stock returns and the financial relevance and financial intensity of ESG materiality. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 1-24.
Cordeiro, J. J., & Tewari, M. (2015). Firm characteristics, industry context, and investor reactions to environmental CSR: A stakeholder theory approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(4), 833-849.
Crane, A. D., Michenaud, S., & Weston, J. P. (2016). The effect of institutional ownership on payout policy: Evidence from index thresholds. The Review of Financial Studies, 29(6), 1377-1408.
Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The accounting review, 86(1), 59-100.
Dimson, E., Karakaş, O., & Li, X. (2015). Active ownership. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(12), 3225-3268.
Dyck, A., Lins, K. V., Roth, L., & Wagner, H. F. (2019). Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 131(3), 693-714.
Elyasiani, E., & Jia, J. (2010). Distribution of institutional ownership and corporate firm performance. Journal of banking & finance, 34(3), 606-620.
Elyasiani, E., Jia, J. J., & Mao, C. X. (2010). Institutional ownership stability and the cost of debt. Journal of Financial Markets, 13(4), 475-500.
Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 38, 45-64.
Ferrell, A., Liang, H., & Renneboog, L. (2016). Socially responsible firms. Journal of
Financial Economics, 122(3), 585-606.
Flammer, C. (2015). Does product market competition foster corporate social responsibility? Evidence from trade liberalization. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10), 1469-1485.
Fu, X., Tang, T., & Yan, X. (2019). Why do institutions like corporate social responsibility investments? Evidence from horizon heterogeneity. Journal of Empirical Finance, 51, 44-63.
Grewal, J., Hauptmann, C., & Serafeim, G. (2021). Material sustainability information and stock price informativeness. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(3), 513-544.
Harjoto, M. A., & Jo, H. (2015). Legal vs. normative CSR: Differential impact on analyst dispersion, stock return volatility, cost of capital, and firm value. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1), 1-20.
Hartzell, J. C., & Starks, L. T. (2003). Institutional investors and executive compensation. The journal of finance, 58(6), 2351-2374.
Henriksson, R., Livnat, J., Pfeifer, P., & Stumpp, M. (2019). Integrating ESG in portfolio construction. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 45(4), 67-81.
Hwang, C. Y., Titman, S., & Wang, Y. (2021). Investor Tastes, Corporate Behavior, and Stock Returns: An Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility. Management Science.
ing 2020. Available at: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/
Khan, M., Serafeim, G., & Yoon, A. (2016). Corporate sustainability: First evidence on materiality. The accounting review, 91(6), 1697-1724.
KPMG, 2020. The Time Has Come: The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Report-
Li, Z., Wang, P., & Wu, T. (2021). Do foreign institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? Evidence from listed firms in China. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 48(1-2), 338-373.
Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2017). Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis. the Journal of Finance, 72(4), 1785-1824.
Madison, N., & Schiehll, E. (2021). The Effect of Financial Materiality on ESG Performance Assessment. Sustainability, 13(7), 3652.
Neubaum, D. O., & Zahra, S. A. (2006). Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon, activism, and coordination. Journal of Management, 32(1), 108-131.
Nofsinger, J. R., Sulaeman, J., & Varma, A. (2019). Institutional investors and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Finance, 58, 700-725.
Owen, D. (2005). CSR after Enron: A role for the academic accounting profession?. European Accounting Review, 14(2), 395-404.
Preston, L. E., & O`bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
Rodriguez, A., Cotran, H., & Stewart, L. S. (2017). Evaluating the effectiveness of sustainability disclosure: Findings from a recent SASB study. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 29(2), 100-108.
Siegel, D. S., & Vitaliano, D. F. (2007). An empirical analysis of the strategic use of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16(3), 773-792.
the-time-has-come.pdf
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of management journal, 40(3), 658-672.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2021), The reality of materiality: insights from real-world applications of ESG materiality assessments, http://www.wbcsd.org/work-program/business-role/previous-work/corporate-social-responsibility .as p x
陳振遠、王健聰、洪世偉(2017)，公司治理對於企業社會責任、公司價值之影響 中山管理評論，25(1)，135-176
黃正忠、林泉興、謝孟哲（2017）。企業如何整合運用GRI準測及TCFD指引報導氣候變遷議題。證券服務，(660)，56-62。
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
金融學系
109352005
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109352005
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 楊曉文zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 黃浩瑜zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Huang,Hao-Yuen_US
dc.creator (作者) 黃浩瑜zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Huang, Hao-Yuen_US
dc.date (日期) 2022en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Aug-2022 17:28:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Aug-2022 17:28:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Aug-2022 17:28:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0109352005en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141057-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 金融學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 109352005zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) SASB準則及氣候風險揭露在金融業跟投資界重要性日益增加，然而過去大多文獻皆探討機構投資人持股比例與ESG分數之關聯性，而較少研究與SASB準則關聯文獻，因此本文將著重於機構投資人持股如何影響公司在SASB準則提及之重大性議題之表現。本文將2012年至2018年台灣的上市櫃公司當作樣本，利用Bloomberg的ESG資料庫及SASB準則所提及各行業的重大性議題，端看機構投資人持股比例與公司是否揭露SASB準則及SASB表現之關聯。
本文從回歸結果得到機構投資人持股比例較高時，公司不只更有意願揭露SASB準則提及項目，在ESG的項目揭露數以及重大性議題的表現也皆會較佳。另機構投資人持股比例越高，公司在重大性議題上表現較可能優於同行業平均及提升下年的SASB分數，代表機構投資人對於重大性ESG議題上確實有一定影響力，促使企業積極改善公司在重大性議題上之表現，機構投資人亦會促使公司揭露氣候風險相關議題，在社會責任報告書中揭露相關議題。機構投資人促使企業積極改善公司在重大性議題上及氣候風險之揭露及表現，不僅滿足投資人的資訊需求，也利於企業向投資者展現公司長期之價值及往永續目標邁進。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The importance of the SASB Standard and climate risk for financial industry and investment communities has grown exponentially. However, in the past, most of the papers has discussed the relationship between institutional ownership and ESG scores, and less research has been done on the relationship between institutional ownership and SASB standards. Therefore, this paper will focus on how institutional ownership affect the company`s performance on the issues mentioned in the SASB standard(material issues). This article takes listed companies in Taiwan from 2012 to 2018 and Bloomberg`s ESG database as a sample, and then research about if the company has disclosed material issues and the performance of SASB standard.
The results of the study found that the higher the institutional ownership, not only more willing to disclose material issues, but the better the company`s performance in ESG disclosure and material issues. At the same time, the empirical results also found that the higher the institutional ownership, the more likely the company`s performance on material issues is better than the industry average and the SASB score for the next year will be improved, which means that institutional investors are really interested in SASB issues. Institutional investors will also urge companies to disclose climate risk-related issues, and disclose climate risk issues in social responsibility reports, urging companies to actively improve the company`s performance on major issues. Institutional investors not only meet investors` information needs, but also be helpful for companies to show investors the long-term value of the company and move towards sustainable goals.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 摘要 II
ABSTRACT III
目錄 IV
表目錄 V
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二章 文獻探討 3
第一節 企業社會責任與財務方面之關聯性 3
第二節 機構投資人持股對CSR的影響 5
第三節 SASB相關文獻 7
第四節 氣候風險揭露相關文獻 10
第三章 研究方法 11
第一節 研究樣本 11
第二節 研究假說 11
第三節 變數衡量 12
第四節 實證模型 18
第肆章 實證結果 19
第一節 敘述統計 19
第二節 相關係數 21
第三節 實證結果分析 22
第四節 穩健性測試 32
第伍章 結論 36
第一節 研究結論 36
第二節 研究限制與建議 37
參考文獻 38		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1922907 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109352005en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 機構投資人zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) ESGzh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) SASBzh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 重大性議題zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Institutional ownershipen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) ESGen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) SASBen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Material issuesen_US
dc.title (題名) 採SASB準則下ESG重大性議題與機構投資人之探討zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A study of Material ESG SASB Factors and Institutional Ownershipen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Aggarwal, R., Erel, I., Ferreira, M., & Matos, P. (2011). Does governance travel around the world? Evidence from institutional investors. Journal of financial economics, 100(1), 154-181.
Ameli, N., Drummond, P., Bisaro, A., Grubb, M., & Chenet, H. (2020). Climate finance and disclosure for institutional investors: why transparency is not enough. Climatic Change, 160(4), 565-589.
Barko, T., Cremers, M., & Renneboog, L. (2021). Shareholder engagement on environmental, social, and governance performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-36.
Benlemlih, M., Arif, M., & Nadeem, M. (2022). Institutional Ownership and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Comparative Study of the UK and the USA. British Journal of Management.
Buchanan, B., Cao, C. X., & Chen, C. (2018). Corporate social responsibility, firm value, and influential institutional ownership. Journal of Corporate Finance, 52, 73-95.
Burns, N., Kedia, S., & Lipson, M. (2010). Institutional ownership and monitoring: Evidence from financial misreporting. Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(4), 443-455.
Busco, C., Consolandi, C., Eccles, R. G., & Sofra, E. (2020). A preliminary analysis of SASB reporting: Disclosure topics, financial relevance, and the financial intensity of ESG materiality. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 32(2), 117-125.
Cantele, S., Tsalis, T. A., & Nikolaou, I. E. (2018). A new framework for assessing the sustainability reporting disclosure of water utilities. Sustainability, 10(2), 433.
Chen, T., Dong, H., & Lin, C. (2020). Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 135(2), 483-504.
Chen, X., Harford, J., & Li, K. (2007). Monitoring: Which institutions matter?. Journal of financial Economics, 86(2), 279-305.
Cheng, X., Wang, H. H., & Wang, X. (2021). Common Institutional Ownership and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Banking & Finance, 106218.
Consolandi, C., Eccles, R. G., & Gabbi, G. (2020). How material is a material issue? Stock returns and the financial relevance and financial intensity of ESG materiality. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 1-24.
Cordeiro, J. J., & Tewari, M. (2015). Firm characteristics, industry context, and investor reactions to environmental CSR: A stakeholder theory approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(4), 833-849.
Crane, A. D., Michenaud, S., & Weston, J. P. (2016). The effect of institutional ownership on payout policy: Evidence from index thresholds. The Review of Financial Studies, 29(6), 1377-1408.
Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The accounting review, 86(1), 59-100.
Dimson, E., Karakaş, O., & Li, X. (2015). Active ownership. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(12), 3225-3268.
Dyck, A., Lins, K. V., Roth, L., & Wagner, H. F. (2019). Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 131(3), 693-714.
Elyasiani, E., & Jia, J. (2010). Distribution of institutional ownership and corporate firm performance. Journal of banking & finance, 34(3), 606-620.
Elyasiani, E., Jia, J. J., & Mao, C. X. (2010). Institutional ownership stability and the cost of debt. Journal of Financial Markets, 13(4), 475-500.
Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 38, 45-64.
Ferrell, A., Liang, H., & Renneboog, L. (2016). Socially responsible firms. Journal of
Financial Economics, 122(3), 585-606.
Flammer, C. (2015). Does product market competition foster corporate social responsibility? Evidence from trade liberalization. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10), 1469-1485.
Fu, X., Tang, T., & Yan, X. (2019). Why do institutions like corporate social responsibility investments? Evidence from horizon heterogeneity. Journal of Empirical Finance, 51, 44-63.
Grewal, J., Hauptmann, C., & Serafeim, G. (2021). Material sustainability information and stock price informativeness. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(3), 513-544.
Harjoto, M. A., & Jo, H. (2015). Legal vs. normative CSR: Differential impact on analyst dispersion, stock return volatility, cost of capital, and firm value. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1), 1-20.
Hartzell, J. C., & Starks, L. T. (2003). Institutional investors and executive compensation. The journal of finance, 58(6), 2351-2374.
Henriksson, R., Livnat, J., Pfeifer, P., & Stumpp, M. (2019). Integrating ESG in portfolio construction. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 45(4), 67-81.
Hwang, C. Y., Titman, S., & Wang, Y. (2021). Investor Tastes, Corporate Behavior, and Stock Returns: An Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility. Management Science.
ing 2020. Available at: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/
Khan, M., Serafeim, G., & Yoon, A. (2016). Corporate sustainability: First evidence on materiality. The accounting review, 91(6), 1697-1724.
KPMG, 2020. The Time Has Come: The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Report-
Li, Z., Wang, P., & Wu, T. (2021). Do foreign institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? Evidence from listed firms in China. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 48(1-2), 338-373.
Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2017). Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis. the Journal of Finance, 72(4), 1785-1824.
Madison, N., & Schiehll, E. (2021). The Effect of Financial Materiality on ESG Performance Assessment. Sustainability, 13(7), 3652.
Neubaum, D. O., & Zahra, S. A. (2006). Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon, activism, and coordination. Journal of Management, 32(1), 108-131.
Nofsinger, J. R., Sulaeman, J., & Varma, A. (2019). Institutional investors and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Finance, 58, 700-725.
Owen, D. (2005). CSR after Enron: A role for the academic accounting profession?. European Accounting Review, 14(2), 395-404.
Preston, L. E., & O`bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
Rodriguez, A., Cotran, H., & Stewart, L. S. (2017). Evaluating the effectiveness of sustainability disclosure: Findings from a recent SASB study. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 29(2), 100-108.
Siegel, D. S., & Vitaliano, D. F. (2007). An empirical analysis of the strategic use of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16(3), 773-792.
the-time-has-come.pdf
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of management journal, 40(3), 658-672.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2021), The reality of materiality: insights from real-world applications of ESG materiality assessments, http://www.wbcsd.org/work-program/business-role/previous-work/corporate-social-responsibility .as p x
陳振遠、王健聰、洪世偉(2017)，公司治理對於企業社會責任、公司價值之影響 中山管理評論，25(1)，135-176
黃正忠、林泉興、謝孟哲（2017）。企業如何整合運用GRI準測及TCFD指引報導氣候變遷議題。證券服務，(660)，56-62。		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202200791en_US