Study on the Effect of ESG Performance on the Financial Performance of Listed Enterprises in China = ESG 성과가 중국 상장기업의 재무성과에 미치는 영향

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In recent years, the concept of sustainable development has gradually gained popularity and Chinese companies' performance in environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) has received widespread attention from all sectors of society. ESG is a stakeholder-based approach that emphasizes that companies should not develop their economy at the expense of the environment, but should take the initiative to assume social responsibility and protect the interests of their stakeholders. However, some Chinese companies are still reluctant to fulfill their ESG-related responsibilities because they believe it will increase their costs and thus affect their financial performance.
In order to clarify the effect of ESG performance on corporate financial performance and to provide some reference for investors, company management, and other stakeholders of Chinese companies. In this paper, the financial performance data of Chinese A-share listed companies in the CSMAR database is used as the dependent variable and the Bloomberg ESG score data is used to measure ESG performance. Specifically, corporate ESG scores are used as the independent variable, and the corresponding corporate financial performance is the dependent variable. A regression model is used to investigate not only the impact of ESG performance on corporate financial performance but also the moderating effects of the nature of ownership, institutional investors' shareholding, government subsidies, and audit quality on the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance.
The results of the study show that ESG performance all have a positive impact on corporate financial performance. The nature of ownership moderates the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance. The positive correlation between ESG performance and corporate financial performance is stronger in non-state enterprises. Institutional investors' shareholding positively moderates the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance. Government subsidies negatively moderate the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance. Audit quality does not positively moderate the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance. Therefore, Chinese listed companies should raise their ESG awareness and take note of the moderating effects of the nature of ownership, institutional investors' shareholding, government subsidies and audit quality on the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance. And actively engage in ESG responsibility, which will have a positive impact not only on the companies themselves but also on the development of the Chinese economy.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ.Introduction 1
• 1.1 Research Background 1
• 1.2 Research Purposes 5
• 1.3 Research Significance 7
• 1.4 Research Content 9
• 1.5 Innovation 13
• Ⅱ.Theoretical Background and Literature Review 14
• 2.1 Related Concepts 14
• 2.1.1 ESG 14
• 2.1.2 Corporate financial performance 18
• 2.1.3 The firm's nature of ownership 19
• 2.1.4 Institutional investors' shareholding 21
• 2.1.5 Government subsidies 23
• 2.1.6 Audit quality 25
• 2.2 Basic Theory 26
• 2.2.1Sustainable Development Theory 26
• 2.2.2 Information Asymmetry Theory 28
• 2.2.3 Principal Agent Theory 30
• 2.2.4 Stakeholder Theory 31
• 2.2.5 Externalities Theory 33
• 2.2.6 Social Reputation Theory 34
• 2.3 Literature Review 36
• 2.3.1 ESG performance is positively related to corporate financial performance 36
• 2.3.2 ESG performance is negatively related to corporate financial performance 38
• 2.3.3 ESG performance is non-linearly related to corporate financial performance 40
• Ⅲ.Research Hypothesis 42
• 3.1Corporate financial performance influenced by ESG performance 42
• 3.2 The moderating effect of the firm's nature of ownership 44
• 3.3 The moderating effect of institutional investors' shareholding 46
• 3.4 The moderating effect of government subsidies 48
• 3.5 The moderating effect of audit quality 49
• Ⅳ.Research Design 51
• 4.1 Data sources 51
• 4.2 Variables design 52
• 4.2.1 Independent variable 52
• 4.2.2 Dependent variables 53
• 4.2.3 Moderating variables 54
• 4.2.4 Control variables 55
• 4.3 Model construction 58
• Ⅴ.Research Results 59
• 5.1 Descriptive statistics 59
• 5.2 Relevance analysis 61
• 5.3 Results of the empirical analysis 65
• 5.3.1 Regression results of ESG performance and corporate financial performance 65
• 5.3.2 Regression results of the moderating effect of the firm's nature of ownership 71
• 5.3.3 Regression results of the moderating effect of institutional investors' shareholding 72
• 5.3.4 Regression results of the moderating effect of government subsidies 73
• 5.3.5 Regression results of the moderating effect of audit quality 74
• Ⅵ.Robustness Tests 75
• Ⅶ.Research Findings and Implications 94
• 7.1 Research findings 94
• 7.2 Research insights 97
• 7.3 Limitations of the thesis 102
• References 103

참고문헌 (Reference)

1. A survey of corporate governance, Shleifer, A., Vishny, R. W., 52(2), 737–783, , 1997

2. Board independence and firm performance in China, Liu, Y., Wei, Z., Yang, T., Miletkov, M. K., 30, 223–244, , 2015

3. Corporate social responsibility and access to finance, Cheng, B., Serafeim, G., Ioannou, I., 35, 1–23, , 2014

4. The business value of esg performance: the indian context, Chelawat, H., Trivedi, I. V., 5(1-2), 1-16, , 2016

5. Voluntary environmental disclosures by large uk companies, Brammer, S., Pavelin, S., (7-8),1168-1188. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1468-5 957.2006.00598. x, , 2010

6. A study on the mechanism of ESG performance on corporate value, Lian Yonghui, Wang Linlin, Dong Jie, 05), 23-34, , 2022

7. Corporate donations in china: a strategic- political perspective, X Song, S Li, W Long, 4), 25, , 2015

8. ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure, Glaum, M., Fatemi, A., Kaiser, S., 38, 45–64, , 2018

9. A critique of the eco-imperialist logic of carbon politics and its transcendence, Huan Qingzhi, 3), 18, , 2016

10. Does esg performance have an impact on financial performance? evidence from germany, Velte, P., 8(2), , 2017

11. Sensitive industries produce better esg performance: evidence from emerging markets, Garcia, A. S., Orsato, R. J., Mendes-Da-Silva, W., 150(MAY1), 135-147, , 2017

12. Corporate disclosure practices, institutional investors, and stock return volatility, Noe, C. F., Bushee, B. J., 38, 171–202, , 2000

13. Motivation analysis and realistic choices of modern accounting information management, Liang Zhiqiang, 2), 4, , 2018

14. Prospect theory and the risk-return association: An empirical examination in 85 industries, Fiegenbaum, A., 14(2), pp.187-203, DOI: 10.1016/0167-2681(90)90074-N, , 1990

15. A pilot study on the construction of quality control standards for social auditing in China, Zhang Longping, 4), 6, , 1995

16. Evaluating water supply services in japan with ram: a range-adjusted measure of inefficiency, Aida, K., Sueyoshi, T., Pastor, J. T., Cooper, W. W., 26(2), 207-232. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0305-0483(97)00072-8, , 1998

17. The impact of environmental, social, and governance disclosure on firm value: the role of ceo power, Gong, M., Li, Y., Koh, L., Zhang, X., 60-75. https://doi. org/10.1016/j. bar.2017.09.007, , 2017

18. Does the mixed ownership reform work? influence of board chair on performance of state-owned enterprises, Ws, D., Zg, A., Jtb, C., Jian, G. A., Fan, S. A., 122, 51-59, , 2021

19. Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development, Panayotou, T., 4(1), , 1993

20. Corporate economic, environmental, and social sustainability performance transformation through esg disclosure, Alsayegh, M. F., Homayoun, S., Rahman, R. A., 12, , 2020

21. Environmental, social, and governance (esg) profiles, stock returns, and financial policy: australian evidence, Durand, R. B., Limkriangkrai, M., Koh, S. K., 17(3), 461-471, , 2017

22. The relationship between ownership structure and firm performance: an empirical analysis of listed companies in Kenya, Ongore, V. O., 5 (6), 2120 – 2128. https://doi. org/10.5897/AJBM10.074, , 2001

23. How to explain corporate investment heterogeneity in China ’ s new normal: structural models with state-owned property rights, Zhang, X., Shi, J., 50, 1 – 16. https://doi. org/10.1016/j. chieco.2017.10.005, , 2018

24. How to design more sustainable financial systems: the roles of environmental, social, and governance factors in the decision-making process, Filipiak, B. Z., Bk, I., Cheba, K., Ziolo, M., 11, , 2019

25. Corporate governance and risk reporting in south africa: a study of corporate risk disclosures in the pre- and post-2007/2008 global financial crisis periods, Thomas, D. A., Lindop, S., Ntim, C. G., 30(4), 363-383, , 2013

26. The relationship between CSR and financial performance and the moderating effect of ownership structure: Evidence from Chinese heavily polluting listed enterprises, Rui Ang, Zhen Shao, Chen Liu, Changhui Yang, Qingru Zheng, Volume 30,2022,Pages 117-129, , 2022

27. The effect of corporate environmental strategy choice and environmental performance on competitiveness and economic performance:: an empirical study of eu manufacturing, Wagner, M., 22(5), 557-572, , 2004

28. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) scores and financial performance of multilatinas:Moderating effects of geographic international diversification and financial slack, Duque-Grisales, E., Aguilera-Caracuel, J., 168, 315e334, , 2019