跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.14.90) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/01/22 13:57
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:陳冠良
研究生(外文):Chen, Guan-Liang
論文名稱:公司治理監督機制、企業社會責任與企業價值關聯性探討
論文名稱(外文):Corporate Governance, Monitoring Mechanisms, Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Value
指導教授:黃金發黃金發引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hwang, Jin-Fa
口試委員:林江亮李慕萱
口試委員(外文):Lin, Jiang-LiangLi, Mu-Xuan
口試日期:2013-06-18
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:中國文化大學
系所名稱:會計學系
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:會計學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:中文
論文頁數:49
中文關鍵詞:過度投資假說解決衝突假說企業社會責任
外文關鍵詞:over-investment hypothesisconflict-resolution hypothesiscorporate social responsibility
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:6
  • 點閱點閱:594
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:42
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究探討企業履行社會責任下,公司治理監督機制與企業參與社會責任所產生的影響,以及公司治理監督機制和企業履行社會責任能否影響企業市場價值。研究理論基礎可分為兩種實證假說,過度投資假說與解決衝突假說。過度投資假說認為高階經理人會利用履行企業社會責任來提高名聲以獲取私人利益,卻可能侵蝕股東以及利害關係人權益,危害企業市場價值;而解決衝突假說認為企業履行社會責任能減緩潛在代理利益衝突,並在減緩代理衝突後提高企業市場價值。研究結果顯示公司治理監督機制與企業履行社會責任具有顯著相關性,而公司治理監督機制與企業履行社會責任也會影響企業市場價值。符合過去的研究文獻及經濟意涵,研究結果顯示公司治理監督機制能夠監督企業履行社會責任並透過企業社會責任來解決與利害關係人之間的所產生的代理利益衝突,然後影響企業市場價值。
The goal of this paper is to investigate the association between corporate gov-ernance (CG) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement and examine whether the firms engaging in corporate social responsibility can maximize the market value. As a main core of this paper, we test two competing hypotheses, the over-investment hypothesis based on agency theory and the conflict-resolution hy-pothesis based on stakeholder theory. The over-investment explanation posits that top managements use the CSR engagement to enhance their private benefits of so-cial-citizen reputation that could hurt the market value of firm, whereas the conflict resolution explanation postulates that using CSR activities to reduce potential con-flicts between top management and various stakeholders and could eventually max-imize the interests of the shareholders and the market value of firm. The study finds that CSR is positively associated with the internal and external corporate governance and monitoring mechanisms, including board size, and institutional ownership. We also find CSR engagement is associated with industry adjusted Tobin’s Q. The coef-ficient on institutional investors and board size are positively significant, suggesting that institutional investors and board size can be a monitoring role to make a firm’s information environment transparent and reduce the agency cost and resolve the con-flicts between top management and various stakeholders. We also find the insider ownership can interfere the CSR decision-making. Consistent with the prior literature and economic intuition, the finding suggests that governance characteristics can monitor the CSR engagement; CSR engagement could reduce potential conflicts be-tween top management and various stakeholders.
中文摘要 ..................... iii
英文摘要 ..................... iv
誌謝辭  ..................... vi
內容目錄 ..................... vii
表目錄  ..................... viii
圖目錄  ..................... ix
第一章  緒論................... 1
  第一節  研究動機與目的............ 1
  第二節  研究流程............... 3
第二章  文獻探討................. 5
  第一節  企業履行社會責任的目的........ 5
  第二節  代理理論與利害關係人理論....... 7
  第三節  公司治理監督機制........... 8
第三章  研究方法................. 13
  第一節  研究假說............... 13
  第二節  研究變數操作型定義.......... 14
  第三節  資料來源與樣本選取.......... 16
  第四節  計量分析方法............. 17
第四章  實證結果................. 20
  第一節  敘述統計量.............. 20
第二節 相關係數分析............. 22
  第三節  Logistics迴歸分析........... 24
  第四節  最小平方法迴歸分析(OLS) ....... 26
第五章  結論與建議................ 28
第一節  研究結論............... 28
第二節  研究限制與建議............ 29
參考文獻 ..................... 30
表目錄
表 4-1 敘述統計量.................. 21
表 4-2 相關係數分析................. 23
表 4-3 Logistics迴歸分析................ 25
表 4-4 最小平方法迴歸分析(OLS)............ 27
圖目錄
圖 1-1 研究流程圖.................. 4

Aggrawal, B., & Nanda, S. (2004). Access, common agency, and board size. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia, Virginia.

Agrawal, C., & Knoeber, G. (1996). Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 377-397.

Allen, F. (2001). A theory of dividends based on tax clientele. Journal of Finance, 55(5), 2499-2536.

Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social re-sponsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(8), 71-86.

Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2003). Enjoying the quiet life? Corporate governance and managerial preferences. Journal of Political Economy, 111(9), 1043-1075.

Bhagat, S., & Black, B. (2001). The non-correlation between board independence and long term performance. Journal of Corporation Law, 27(2), 231-274.

Bhojrarj, S., & Sengupta, P. (2003). Effect of corporate governance on bond ratings and yields: The role of institutional investors and outside directors. The Journal of Business, 76(6), 455-475.

Brown, W. (2006). Corporate philanthropic practices. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(7), 855-877.

Black, B. (1992). Agents watching agents: The promise of institutional investor voice. UCLA Law Review, 39(7), 811-893.

Brickley, J. (1988). Ownership structure and voting on antitakeover amendments. Journal of Financial Economics, 20(6), 267-291.

Campbell, H. (1996). Understanding risk and return. Journal of Political Economy, 104(9), 298-345.

Carroll, A. (1979). A three dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(3), 497-505.

Chung, K., & Jo, H. (1996). The impact of security analysts monitoring and marketing functions on the market value of firms. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(4), 493-512.

Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press, Harvard.

Coles, D., & Naveen, L. (2008). Boards: Does one size fit all. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(11), 329-356.

Dechow, P. (2000). The relation between analysts forecasts of long-term earnings growth and stock price performance following equity offerings. Contem-porary Accounting Research, 17(6), 1-32.

Demsetz, H. (1983). The structure of ownership and the theory of the firm. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(5), 375-390

Demsetz, H., & Lehn, K. (1985). The structure of corporate ownership: Causes and consequences. Journal of Political Economy, 93(2), 1155-1177.

Diamond, D. (1991). Monitoring and reputation: The choice between bank loans and directly placed debt. Journal of Political Economy, 99(8), 689-721.

Fama, E., & Jensen, M. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(7), 301-325.

Fisman, R., & Hill, L. (2005). Corporate social respon-sibility: Doing well by doing good? Wharton School review, 26(3), University of Pennsylvania.

Fisman, R. (2006). A model of corporate philanthropy. Unpublished manuscript, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.

Friedman, M. (1970). Money and income: Comment on tobin. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(8), 318-327.

Gilson, S. (1990). Bankruptcy, boards, banks, and block holders. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(5), 355-387.

Goel, A., &Thakor, A. (2008). Overconfidence, CEO selection, and corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 24(6), 318-339

Goss, A., & Roberts, G. (2007). Corporate social re-sponsibility and the cost of debt financing. Un-published manuscript, York University.

Goyal, A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility as a signaling device for FDI. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 13(7), 145-163.

Greene, W. (1993). Econometric analysis (5th ed.).New York: Wiley.

Guiso, L. (2004). The role of social capital in financial development. American Economic Review, 94(8), 526-556.

Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (2008). A theory of board control and size. Review of Financial Studies, 21(4), 336-355.

Hartzell, J., & Starks, L. (2003). Institutional investors and executive compensation. Journal of Finance, 58(9), 2351-2374.

Hermalin, B. (2005). Trends in corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 60(7), 2351-2384.

Hermalin, B., & Weisbach, M. (1991). The effects of board composition and direct incentives on firm value. Financial Management, 20(5), 101-112.

Hill, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and socially responsible investing: A global perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(4), 165-174.

Hong, H., & Kacperczyk, M. (2009). The price of sin: The effects of social norms on markets. Journal of Financial Economics, 93(3), 15-36.

Jensen, M. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76(7), 323-329.

Jensen, M. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48(9), 831-880.

Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and capital structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(2), 305-360.
Jo, H., & Kim, Y. (2007). Disclosure frequency and earnings management. Journal of Financial Economics, 84(7), 561-590.

Jo, H., & Kim, Y. (2008). Ethics and disclosure: A study of the financial performance of firms in the seasoned equity offerings market. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(8), 855-878.

Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1997). Does social capital have an economic payoff ? A cross-country investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(6), 295-321.

Knyazeva, D. (2007). Corporate governance, analyst following, and firm behavior. Unpublished manuscript, New York University.

La Porta, R. (1997). Legal determinants of external finance. Journal of Finance, 52(6), 1131-1150.

La Porta, R. (1997). Trust in large organizations. American Economic Review, 87(3), 333-338.

La Porta, R. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(7), 471-517.

Lin, H., & McNichols, M. (1998). Underwriting rela-tionships and analysts’ forecasts and investment recommendations. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 25(4), 101-127.

Linck, J. (2008). The determinants of board structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(2), 308-328.

Malmendier, U., & Tate, G. (2005). CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. Journal of Finance, 60(9), 226-358.

Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(7), 268-305.

McConnell, J., & Servaes, H. (1990). Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(8), 595-612.

McConnell, J., & Servaes, H. (1995). Equity ownership and the two faces of debt. Journal of Financial Economics, 39(6), 131-157.

Mehran, H. (1995). Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance. Journal of Fi-nancial Economics, 38(3), 163-184.

Miller, M. (2005). Is american corporate governance fatally flawed?. D. Chew and S. Gillan (eds.), Corporate Governance at the Crossroads: A Book of Readings. Boston:McGraw-Hill.

Morck, R. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis. Journal of Fi-nancial Economics, 20(9), 293-316.

Navarro, P. (1988). Why do corporations give to charity?. Journal of Business, 61(4), 65-93.

Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic tra-ditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Schwart, R. (1968). Corporate philanthropic contributions. Journal of Finance, 23(9), 479-497.

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1986). Large shareholders and corporate control. Journal of Political Economy, 94(9), 461-488.

Yu, F. (2008). Analyst coverage and earnings management. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(2), 245-271

Zweibel, J. (1996). Dynamic capital structure under managerial entrenchment. American Economic Review, 86(6), 1197-1215.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top