面臨全球的能源危機以及全球暖化，人們開始重視節能減碳等議題，在運輸方面，替代能源和交通工具也改變原本的習慣以及觀念，例如在石油方面則改用生機柴油來替代原本的石油。特別是石油大漲的時候，讓許多通勤者放棄自行開車，改搭大眾運輸，且其中的轉乘則使用自行車代步，讓自行車銷售大幅提升。
企業強調永續經營，對於企業社會責任更加重視，特別是近年來發生重大的企業財務醜聞和全球的經濟衝擊，故本研究擬分析導入社會責任的台灣自行車產業，其企業規模對公司財務績效之影響，因此本研究之目的為：
1. 企業規模大小，是否影響公司財務績效?
2. 衡量企業規模大小和企業社會責任實施與否，是否影響公司財務績效?
本研究發現企業規模對於台灣上市自行車產業的財務績效有顯著性關係，此外，企業規模對財務績效的影響，會因企業社會責任實施與否，對自行車產業財務績效有顯著性差異。亦即，企業社會責任的實施可提高公司的財務績效，且對於企業規模愈大其財務績效愈顯著，顯示企業提高其資本額對財務績效有正面的助益，台灣自行車產業應持續發展企業社會責任，以建立良好企業形象，獲得消費者認同，增加銷售量，進而提升資產規模影響企業財務績效，使公司得以永續經營。

The globe warming is from bad to worse, energy saving and carbon reduction become popular. People try to change their life style, for example, people take the public transportation substitute for vehicles. Between the way from home to public transportation, people ride the bicycles, therefore, the sales volume was increasing.
The sustainable management is becoming popular, especially for the current serious financial crisis and recession. Therefore, The study of the relationships among firm size and CFP of CSR─Based on the Taiwan's listed bicycle Industry. The purpose of this research below:
1. The relationship among firm size and CFP.
2. The relationship among CSR and CFP.
The research shows CSR and CFP in accounting base measure had positive relationship, and firm size and CFP was also positive relationship. It shows the customers think highly of CSR. Therefore, the bicycle industry should keep doing CSR for sustainable operation.

摘 要 IV
誌謝 VI
目 錄 VII
一、緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 1
1.3 研究範圍與對象 2
1.4 研究流程 2
二、文獻探討 4
2.1 企業社會責任 4
2.1.1企業社會責任概念 4
2.2 企業社會責任的相關組織 7
2.2.1 OECD多國企業指導綱領（The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises） 7
2.3 企業社會責任與財務績效關係 9
三、研究方法 12
3.1 研究架構 12
3.2 研究假設 13
3.3 研究樣本 13
3.4 相關變數定義 15
根據研究假設與實證研究需要，將變數定義如下： 15
3.5 迴歸模型建立 16
四、實證分析與結果 17
4.1基本敘述統計量分析 17
4.2 相關性分析 19
4.3 迴歸分析 25
4.4 研究結果 30
五、結論與建議 33
5.1 結論 33
5.1.1 社會責任與財務績效關連性 33
5.1.2 企業規模與財務績效關連性 34
5.2 研究建議與後續研究 34
參考文獻 35

1. 中華徵信所，擷取於：http://www.credit.com.tw/Special/ (民國99年)。
2. 台灣企業社會責任網站，擷取於：http://csr.idic.gov.tw/main.asp (民國99年)
3. 台灣經濟新報資料庫(Taiwan Economic Journal ；TEJ)，擷取於：http://www.tej.com.tw/ (民國99年)。
4. 林宜諄，企業社會責任入門手冊，天下遠見出版股份有限公司，26 頁，民國(2007)。
5. 林建煌，管理學，智勝出版社，台北(2002)。
6. 吳萬益，企業研究方法，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，台北(2008
7. 沈中華，張元，企業的社會責任行為可以改善財務績效嗎?－以英國FTSE社會責任指數為例，中央研究院經濟研究所，Vol. 36:3(3)，pp. 339-385，台北(2008)。
8. 邱皓政，量化研究與統計分析，五南圖書出版公司， 台北(2009)。
9. 林宜諄，企業社會責任入門手冊，天下遠見出版股份有限公司，26 頁，台北(2008)。
10. 黃正忠，企業社會責任－滿足變遷中的期望，財團法人中華民國企業永續發展協會，6 頁，(2001)。
11. 楊蘭宣，企業落實社會責任衡量體系之建構與實證－以台灣半導體產業為例，輔仁大學管理學院碩士論文，台北(2008)。
12. 鄭立華、齊德彰。台灣標竿企業社會責任與公益作為之研究-以F金融企業集團為例。中華技術學院學報第27期：p158-173，(2003)。
13. Adam A.M. and T. Shavit, “How Can a Ratings-based Method for Assessing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Provide an Incentive to Firms Excluded from Socially Responsible Investment Indices to Incentive in CSR?” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 82 No.4, 99.899-905, 2007.
14. Aigner, D. J., "Corporate Social Responsibility and the Bottom Line," Working Paper, Paul Merage School of Business, University of California, 2006.
15. Becchetti, L., R. Ciciretti, and I. Hasan, "Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder’s Value: An Event Study Analysis," Working Paper, FederalR eserve Bank of Atlanta, 2007.
16. Buchholz, R. A. “Business environment and public policy: Implications for management”, Prentice Hall, 1995.
17. Bowen, H. R.,” Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, New York: Harper and Brothers”, 1953.
18. Bragdon, H. H. and J. T. Marlin, "Is Pollution Profitable?" Risk Management, 19(4), 9-18, 1972.
19. Carroll, Archie B., ”Corporate Social Responsibility”, Business & Society, September, pp.268-295, 1999.
20. Clarkson, M.B.E. 1995. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65-91.
21. Davis, K., “Can Corporations Ignore Social Responsibilities?” California Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 70-76, 1960.
22. Davis, K., “The case for and against business assumption of social responsibility,” Academy of Management Journal, 16, pp.312-322, 1973.
23. Dam, L. “Corporate Social Responsibility in a General Equilibrium Stock Market Model: Solving the Financial Performance Puzzle,” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Groningen, 2006.
24. Drucker E., “Molecular Epidemiology Meets the Fourrh World (Commentary)”, the Lancet, 1993.
25. Eells, R. and Walton R., “Conceptual Foundations of Business”, Homewood, III.: Richard D. Irwin, 1961.
26. Frederick, W. C., “From CSR1 to CSR2”, Business & Society, Vol. 33(2), pp.150-164, 1978.
27. Friedman, M.,”The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,” The New York Times Magazine,13, 32-33.1984,1970.
28. Griffin, J. J. and Mahon, J. F., "The Corporate Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate: Twenty-Five Years of Incomparable Research," Business and Society, 36(1), p.5-31,1997.
29. Guenster, N., J. Derwall, R. Bauer, and K. Koedijk,”The Economic Value of Corporate Eco-Efficiency,” Working Paper, Academy of Management Conference, 2005.
30. Hawkins Del I., Best Roger J. Coney, Kenneth A., Consumer Behavior, 396-402, 1998.
31. Hay, R., & Gray, E. “Social Responsibilities of Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate.” Business & Society, 36(1), 5-31, 1997.
32. Leisinger, K., “Corporate Philanthropy: The top of the pyramid” Business and Society Review, Vol. 112:3, pp. 315-342, 2007.
33. Nadja Guenster et al.,” The Economic Value of Corporate Eco-Efficiency,” Academy of Management, 2005.
34. Nelling, E. and E. Webb, “Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: The Virtuous Circle Revisited,” Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, forthcoming, 2008.
35. Preston, L. E. and D. P. O’Bannon, “The Corporate Social-Financial PerformanceRelationship：A Typology and Analysis,” Business and Society, 36, 419-429,1997.Ruf, B., Muralidhar, K., Brown, R. M., Janney, J. J. and Paul, K., "An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Change in Corporate Socail Performance and Financial Performance: A Stakeholder Theory Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, 32(2),p.l43-156,2001.
36. Richter, F-J., & Mar, P. C. M. 。企業全面品德管理：看見亞洲新利基（羅耀宗等譯）。台北：天下。(2004）。
37. Robbins, S. and Decenzo, D., “Fundamentals of Management”, 3rd ed., Pretice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ., 2001.
38. Ruf, B.M., Krishnamurty, M, Robert, M. B. and Kaargn, P., "An Empircal Investigation of the Relationship between Change in Corporate Social Performance: A Stakeholder Theory Perspective", Working Paper, 1998.
39. Sethi, S.P.,”Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytical Framework”, California Management Review , 17(3),58-64,1975.
40. Venkatraman, N., Ramanujam, V.,“Measurement of Business Performance on Strategy Research：A comparison of Approach”, Academy of Mnagement Review, 11(4), P801-814, 1986.
41. Vogel, David, “Is There a Market for Virtue? A Critical Appraisal of Corporate Social Respinsibility”, Manuscript presented at the Third Transatlantic Business Ethic Conference, ESADE, Barceloba, 2004.
42. Waddock, Sandra A., & Samuel B. Graves,“The Corporate Social Performance-FinancialPerformance Link”, Strategic Management Journal, Forthcoming,1997.
43. Wahurst, A. and Nomoha, L. (eds.), “Environment Policy in Mining: Corporate strategy and planning for closure”, Lorden, Levis, 2000.
44. Werther, W. and D. Chandler, "Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility as GlobalBrand Insurance,” Business Horizons, 48,317-324,2005.
45. Wood, D., "Corporate Social Performance Revisited," Academy of Management Review,16,691-718,1991.
46. Wood, D. and Jones, E.J.,”Stakeholer Mismatching: A Theoretical Problem in Empirical Research on Corporate Performance,” The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(3), 229-267, 1995.