臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

企業在社會和環境責任方面的行動正在由於全球變化而發展，除了參加舉辦慈善活動和減少對環境影響之外，企業在促進可持續發展方面的方式也極為重要。
大多數先前的研究都集中在與高CSR參與程度相關的價值創造上。然而，這一趨勢現在已開始轉向關注研究和發展企業社會責任參與對財富分配的影響。
本研究的研究動機與目的在於探討台灣企業社會責任對股利政策的影響。基於代理理論和信號理論，由TEJ台灣經濟新報蒐集上市櫃公司2013至2017年的2,942次公司年度觀察以及8個CSR評分構面評估公司的CSR分數，使用最小平方法分析，預期參與企業社會責任較積極之公司支付更高的股利。
這個結果也表明，企業社會責任企業不僅在其財富創造過程中對社會負責，且在創造財富的分配中更是如此。

Corporate actions in social and environmental responsibility are developing due to global changes. In addition to engaging in charitable activities and reducing environmental impact, the way companies are promoting sustainable development is also extremely important. Most of the previous research has focused on value creation associated with high levels of corporate social responsibility (CSR) involvement. However, this trend has now begun to focus on studying and explaining the impact of CSR participation on wealth distribution.
The motivation and purpose of this research are to investigate the impact of Taiwan's CSR on dividend policy. Based on agency theory and signaling theory, using 2,942 annual observations of listed companies from 2013 to 2017 collected by the TEJ Taiwan Economic News as well as 8 CSR Dimension scores to evaluate the company's CSR, the study employed the Least Squares Regression to analyze and showed that companies with a high level of CSR will pay higher dividends.
This result also showed that CSR companies are not only responsible for society in the process of creating wealth, but also in the distribution of wealth creation.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機及目的 1
第二節 研究問題 2
第三節研究流程 3
第二章 文獻回顧 4
第一節 台灣的企業社會責任：報導和證據 4
第二節 台灣企業的股利政策 5
第三節 企業社會責任以及股利政策 6
第三章 研究設計與資料蒐集 7
第一節 樣本選擇 7
第二節 回歸變數 7
一、CSR分數 7
二、應變數 10
三、控制變數 10
第三節 研究方法 12
一、企業社會責任和股利政策 12
二、高CSR企業與的股利發放高於低CSR企業 12
第四章 實證結果 13
第一節 敘述統計 13
第二節 主測試實證分析 16
第五章 結論與建議 22
第一節 研究結論 22
第二節 研究限制 22
第三節 後續研究建議 22
參考文獻 24
附錄 26

台灣證券交易所. (無日期). 台灣證券交易所. 擷取自 台灣證券交易所: https://cgc.twse.com.tw/frontEN/responsibility
湯奕華. (無日期). 企業社會責任報告書製作須知與注意事項說明. 財團法人台灣產業服務基金會.
董芝安. (2018). 2018第四屆台灣永續現況與趨勢分析發表會－永續驅動新商機. Taipei: NCCU College of Commerce.
蔡美娜. (2018). 近期經貿與稅收情勢. 台北: 中華民國財政部.
Babiak, Kan. and Trendafilova, S. C. (2011). CSR and environmental responsibility: Motives and pressures to adopt green. Corporate Social Responsibility Environment Management., 11-24.
BhattacharyaS. (1979). Imperfect information, dividend policy, and the “bird in the hand” fallacy. Bell J. Econ., 259-270.
Brockman, W.O., Unlu, E.,. (2009). Devidend policy, creditor rights, and the agency costs of debt. Journal of Financial Economics, 276-299.
Brown, W.O., Helland, E., Smith, J.K. (2006). Corporate philanthropic practices. Jounal of Corporate Finance, 855–877.
CarrollA.B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 497-530.
Chay,J.B., Suh, J.,. (2009). Payout policy and cash-flow uncertainty. Journal of Financial Economics, 88-107.
DeaethDuncan. (2019年3月22日). Fifth annual Taiwan Sustainability Reporting Conference held in Taipei. Taipei: Taiwan News. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3663922
ErasmusP. (2012). The Influence of Dividend Yield and Dividend Stability on Share Return: Implications for Dividend Policy Formulation. Journal of Economic and Financial Sciences, 13-32.
HamannMiningR. (2003). Companies’ role in sustainable development: The ‘why’ and ‘how’ of corporate social responsibility from a business perspective. Development Southern Africa, 237-254.
Jensen1986.M.,. (1986). Agency costs of free-cash flow, corporate finance and the market for takeovers. The American Economic Review, 323-329.
Kent, M.L.; Taylor, M. (2016). From homo economicus to homo dialogicus: Rethinking social media use in CSR communication. Public Relations Review, 60-67.
Kun Li, Nasrin R. Khalili, and Weiquan Cheng . (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility Practices in China: Trends, Context, and Impact on Company Performance. sustainability .
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., Vishny,R.W.,. (2000). Agency problems and dividend policies around the world. Journal of Financial Economics, 1-33.
Lai, C.S.; Chiu, C.J.; Yang, C.F.; Pai, D.C. (2010). The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 457-469.
LintnerJ. (1956). Distribution of Incomes of Corporations Among Dividends, Retained Earnings, and Taxes. The American Economic Review, 97-113.
Margolis, J.D., Elfenbein, H.A., Walsh, J.P. (2007). Does It Pay to Be Good? A Meta Analysis and Redirection of Research on the Relationship Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance. Working Paper. Harvard University.
Ming Jian, Kin-Wai Lee. (2014). CEO compensation and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 46-65.
MurugananthamG. (2010). Case study on corporate social responsibility of mnc’s in India. . International Trade and Academic Research Conference, 8-10. London, UK.
O’Riordan, L. and Fairbrass, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): Models and theories in stakeholder dialogue. Journal of Business Ethics, 745-758.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L., Rynes, S.L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 403-441.
Ozuomba Chidinma Nwamaka, Ezeabasili. (2017). Effect of Dividend Policies on Firm Value: Evidence from quoted firms in Nigeria. International Journal of Management Excellence, 8.
Rego, S. O., & Wilson, R. (2012). Equity risk incentives and corporate tax aggressiveness. Journal of Accounting Research, 775-810.
Robinson, M., Kleffner, A., Bertels, S. (2011). Signaling sustainability leadership: empirical evidence of the alue of DJSI membership. Journal of Business Ethics, 493-505.
Van Marrewijk, M. C. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 95-105.
Ye, K., Zhang, R. (2011). Do lenders value corporate social responsibility? Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 197-206.