权衡视角下企业社会责任行为研究
|
摘要
文章从权衡视角探讨了企业社会责任行为的调整机制。经验证据表明:中国上市公司社会责任投资存在极强的理性,会在外部压力、公司特征与成本之间确定最优的社会责任投资,平均的调整周期为1. 460 8,这与静态权衡预期一致;风险承受能力的差别导致朝目标值的调整速度存在差异,当企业的社会责任水平高偏于最优值时,呈现出较快的调整速度,而低偏于目标社会责任时,调整速度较慢,对应的调整半周期差异为0. 432 0,这与动态权衡预期一致。因此,研究的直接启示是不仅需要政策压力迫使企业履行社会责任,更需要引导利益相关者更好地进行回应,从而使企业更有动力去践行社会责任。
The paper investigates adjustment mechanism of corporate social responsibility from trade-off perspectives. The results shows that Chinese listed firms are rational in corporate social responsibility investment,and determine the optimal corporate social responsibility investment based on external pressure, corporate characteristics and costs, with the average adjustment half-life time being 1. 4608 years, which is consistent with static trade-off theory; due to the difference of risk attitude, adjustment process owns asymmetric characteristics.It means those above the target are significantly faster than those below, with corresponding difference of adjustment half-life time being 0. 4320, which is consistent with dynamic trade-off theory. Therefore, a direct policy implication of this study is that, we not only need policy pressure to force enterprises to fulfill social responsibility, but also need to guide the stakeholders to respond corporate social responsibility better, thus making the enterprise take more proactive steps.
The paper investigates adjustment mechanism of corporate social responsibility from trade-off perspectives. The results shows that Chinese listed firms are rational in corporate social responsibility investment,and determine the optimal corporate social responsibility investment based on external pressure, corporate characteristics and costs, with the average adjustment half-life time being 1. 4608 years, which is consistent with static trade-off theory; due to the difference of risk attitude, adjustment process owns asymmetric characteristics.It means those above the target are significantly faster than those below, with corresponding difference of adjustment half-life time being 0. 4320, which is consistent with dynamic trade-off theory. Therefore, a direct policy implication of this study is that, we not only need policy pressure to force enterprises to fulfill social responsibility, but also need to guide the stakeholders to respond corporate social responsibility better, thus making the enterprise take more proactive steps.
引文
[1]陈宏辉,张麟,向燕.企业社会责任领域的实证研究:中国大陆学者2000~2015年的探索[J].管理学报,2016(7):1051-1059.
[2]唐鹏程,杨树旺.企业社会责任投资模式研究:基于价值的判断标准[J].中国工业经济,2016(7):109-126.
[3]唐跃军,左晶晶,李汇东.制度环境变迁对公司慈善行为的影响机制研究[J].经济研究,2014(2):61-73.
[4]GARCIA-CASTRO R,FRANCOEUR C.When more is not better:Complementarities,costs and contingencies in stakeholder management[J].Strategic Management Journal,2016,37(2):406-424.
[5]贾兴平,刘益,廖勇海.利益相关者压力、企业社会责任与企业价值[J].管理学报,2016(2):267-274.
[6]杨汉明,吴丹红.企业社会责任信息披露的制度动因及路径选择——基于“制度同形”的分析框架[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2015(1):55-62.
[7]唐鹏程,杨树旺.利益相关者满足能缓解中小板上市公司融资约束吗?[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2015(4):103-108.
[8]冯丽艳,肖翔,张靖,等.企业社会责任与盈余管理治理——基于盈余管理方式和动机的综合分析[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2016(6):79-92.
[9]TRUMPP C,GUENTHER T.Too little or too much?Exploring U-shaped relationships between corporate environmental performance and corporate financial performance[J].Business Strategy and the Environment,2017,26(1):49-68.
[10]BARNETT M L,SALOMON R M.Does it pay to be really good?Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance[J].Strategic Management Journal,2012,33(11):1304-1320.
[11]WANG Q,DOU J S,JIA S H.A meta-analytic review of corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance:The moderating effect of contextual factors[J].Business&Society,2016,55(8):1083-1121.
[12]中国社科院经济学部企业社会责任研究中心.中国企业社会责任蓝皮书(2016)[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2016.
[13]HUSTED B W,JAMALI D,SAFFAR W.Near and dear?The role of location in CSR engagement[J].Strategic Management Journal,2016,37(10):2050-2070.
[14]连玉君,苏治.上市公司现金持有:静态权衡还是动态权衡[J].世界经济,2008(10):84-96.
[15]靳小翠.企业文化会影响企业社会责任吗?——来自中国沪市上市公司的经验证据[J].会计研究,2017(2):56-62.
[16]王士红.所有权性质、高管背景特征与企业社会责任披露——基于中国上市公司的数据[J].会计研究,2016(11):53-60,96.
[17]贾兴平,刘益.外部环境、内部资源与企业社会责任[J].南开管理评论,2014(6):13-18,52.
[18]杨树旺,孟楠.经济发展水平、公司治理与企业社会责任信息披露——来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J].湖北社会科学,2016(1):80-84.
[19]JAIN T,JAMALI D.Looking inside the black box:The effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility[J].Corporate Governance:An International Review,2016,24(3):253-273.
(1)当然,也有部分研究采用慈善捐赠或环境责任水平作为企业社会责任的代理指标,但由于其没有涵盖到企业的各利益相关者,本文在此不将其单列。
(2)之所以选取2008-2016年的样本数据,是因为2008年通常被视作中国企业社会责任的元年。
(3)因为A股与B、H股面临的市场监管环境不一样,进而对企业的社会责任行为产生影响,因而本文仅选取A股上市公司以剔除市场监管环境带来的影响。
[2]唐鹏程,杨树旺.企业社会责任投资模式研究:基于价值的判断标准[J].中国工业经济,2016(7):109-126.
[3]唐跃军,左晶晶,李汇东.制度环境变迁对公司慈善行为的影响机制研究[J].经济研究,2014(2):61-73.
[4]GARCIA-CASTRO R,FRANCOEUR C.When more is not better:Complementarities,costs and contingencies in stakeholder management[J].Strategic Management Journal,2016,37(2):406-424.
[5]贾兴平,刘益,廖勇海.利益相关者压力、企业社会责任与企业价值[J].管理学报,2016(2):267-274.
[6]杨汉明,吴丹红.企业社会责任信息披露的制度动因及路径选择——基于“制度同形”的分析框架[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2015(1):55-62.
[7]唐鹏程,杨树旺.利益相关者满足能缓解中小板上市公司融资约束吗?[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2015(4):103-108.
[8]冯丽艳,肖翔,张靖,等.企业社会责任与盈余管理治理——基于盈余管理方式和动机的综合分析[J].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2016(6):79-92.
[9]TRUMPP C,GUENTHER T.Too little or too much?Exploring U-shaped relationships between corporate environmental performance and corporate financial performance[J].Business Strategy and the Environment,2017,26(1):49-68.
[10]BARNETT M L,SALOMON R M.Does it pay to be really good?Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance[J].Strategic Management Journal,2012,33(11):1304-1320.
[11]WANG Q,DOU J S,JIA S H.A meta-analytic review of corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance:The moderating effect of contextual factors[J].Business&Society,2016,55(8):1083-1121.
[12]中国社科院经济学部企业社会责任研究中心.中国企业社会责任蓝皮书(2016)[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2016.
[13]HUSTED B W,JAMALI D,SAFFAR W.Near and dear?The role of location in CSR engagement[J].Strategic Management Journal,2016,37(10):2050-2070.
[14]连玉君,苏治.上市公司现金持有:静态权衡还是动态权衡[J].世界经济,2008(10):84-96.
[15]靳小翠.企业文化会影响企业社会责任吗?——来自中国沪市上市公司的经验证据[J].会计研究,2017(2):56-62.
[16]王士红.所有权性质、高管背景特征与企业社会责任披露——基于中国上市公司的数据[J].会计研究,2016(11):53-60,96.
[17]贾兴平,刘益.外部环境、内部资源与企业社会责任[J].南开管理评论,2014(6):13-18,52.
[18]杨树旺,孟楠.经济发展水平、公司治理与企业社会责任信息披露——来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J].湖北社会科学,2016(1):80-84.
[19]JAIN T,JAMALI D.Looking inside the black box:The effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility[J].Corporate Governance:An International Review,2016,24(3):253-273.
(1)当然,也有部分研究采用慈善捐赠或环境责任水平作为企业社会责任的代理指标,但由于其没有涵盖到企业的各利益相关者,本文在此不将其单列。
(2)之所以选取2008-2016年的样本数据,是因为2008年通常被视作中国企业社会责任的元年。
(3)因为A股与B、H股面临的市场监管环境不一样,进而对企业的社会责任行为产生影响,因而本文仅选取A股上市公司以剔除市场监管环境带来的影响。