臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

環境、社會與治理(Environmental、Social and Governance)績效與永續逐漸受到全球主管機關與投資人的重視，過往許多研究以企業為樣本，探討法律、法系、公司治理對於企業於環境、社會與治理的表現，然而，與過去文獻不同，本文以國家為分析單位，以制度理論分析，探討國家法規制度、法系與國家的公司治理機制與國家永續之間的關係，研究結果顯示國家法規制度和國家的公司治理機制與國家永續績效有顯著正向關係，而國家法系則不顯著影響國家永續績效。
此外本文延續 La Porta，Lopez-de-Silane 和 Shleifer(1998)的研究，再次檢視國家法規制度和法系與國家的公司治理機制之間的關係，本文實證結果國家法規制度與國家整體的公司治理機制沒有顯著的關係，與國家永續績效不同的 是，英美法系的國家對於國家的公司治理機制有正向影響。
最後，本文以永續績效較佳的國家，如瑞典、瑞士、挪威、英國與丹麥(國家永續排行前五名)為例子，於法律規範、公司治理進行說明，希冀提供台灣主管機關參考，採用他國的經驗，以適合台灣的文化、政治、法律與社會等提升台 灣的永續績效。

Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) and sustainability have already became an important issues around the world. There are many studies examine law, legal family and corporate governance impact on corporate social responsibility. However, different from other studies, this study analyzes countries and apply institutional theory to examine national law, legal family and corporate governance impact on country sustainability. According to our result, national law and corporate governance have significant positive relationship with country sustainability, while legal family have no significant relationship with country sustainability.
This study also follows La Porta，Lopez-de-Silane 和 Shleifer(1998) to examine how national law and legal family impact on corporate governance. Our result show that national law and corporate governance have no significant relationship, while common law have significant positive relationship with corporate governance.
Finally, taken Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, UK and Demark for examples for Taiwan government to learn and develop Taiwan sustainability.

第壹章、 研究動機與目的..................................................1
第貳章、 文獻探討.......................................................8
第一節、 企業社會責任....................................................8
第二節、 制度理論 ......................................................12
第三節、 公司治理 ......................................................15
第參章、 研究方法 ......................................................19
第一節、 研究假說.......................................................19
第二節、 資料來源與變數定義 .............................................26
第三節、 模型設計 ......................................................36
四、 實證結果...........................................................38
第一節、 敘述性統計分析 .................................................38
第二節、 國家法規制度與永續績效迴歸分析....................................40
第三節、 國家的公司治理機制與永續績效迴歸分析 ..............................43
第四節、 國家法規制度與國家的公司治理機制迴歸分析 ..........................45
第五節、 假說驗證結果 ....................................................47
五、 結論與建議 .........................................................48
第一節、 結論........................................................... 48
第二節、 研究限制與未來研究建議 .......................................... 54
參考文獻 ................................................................ 56

英文文獻
2015 G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. Retrieved from:
http://www.oecd.org/daf/ca/Corporate-Governance-Principles-ENG.pdf
Arora, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (2011). Corporate governance and corporate social
responsibility (CSR): The moderating roles of attainment discrepancy and
organization slack. Corporate governance: an international review, 19(2), 136-152.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise
in the Sociology of Knowledmann. Anchor books.
Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and
institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic
Review, 10(1), 3-28.
Cadbury, S. A. (2000). The corporate governance agenda. Corporate Governance: An
International Review, 8(1), 7-15.
Campbell, J. L. (2006). Institutional analysis and the paradox of corporate social
responsibility. American Behavioral Scientist, 49 (7), 925-938.
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways?
An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of management
Review, 32(3), 946-967.
Campbell, J. L.: 2007, ‘Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways?
An Institutional Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of
Management Review 32(3), 946–967.
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate
performance. Academy of management review, 4(4), 497-505.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral
management of organizational stakeholders. Business horizons, (34), 39-48.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility evolution of a definitional
construct. Business & society, 38(3), 268-295.
Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social
responsibilities. Academy of Management journal, 16(2), 312-322.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality
and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American Sociological
Review, 48(2), 147-160.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of
management review, 14(1), 57-74.
Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge
University Press.
Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate
financial performance debate twenty-five years of incomparable research.
Business & Society, 36(1), 5-31.
Jamali, D., & Mirshak, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility (CSR): Theory and
practice in a developing country context. Journal of business ethics, 72(3), 243-262.
Jamali, D., Safieddine, A. M., & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate governance and
corporate social responsibility synergies and interrelationships. Corporate
Governance: An International Review, 16(5), 443-459.
Jensen, M. C., & Smith, C. W. (2000). Stockholder, manager, and creditor interests:
applications of agency theory. Theory of the Firm,1(1).
Jo, H., Song, M. H., & Tsang, A. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder
governance around the world. Global Finance Journal.
Jones, T. M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined.California
Management Review, 22(3), 59-67.
Khan, H. U. Z. (2010). The effect of corporate governance elements on corporate social
responsibility (CSR) reporting: Empirical evidence from private commercial
banks of Bangladesh. International Journal of Law and Management, 52(2), 82-109.
Klapper, L. F., & Love, I. (2004). Corporate governance, investor protection, and
performance in emerging markets. Journal of corporate Finance, 10(5), 703-728.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silane, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1998). Law and
finance (No. w5661). National Bureau of Economic Research.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (2000). Investor
protection and corporate governance. Journal of financial economics, 58(1), 3-27.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). Legal
determinants of external finance. Journal of finance, 1131-1150.
MacMillan, K., Money, K., Downing, S., & Hillenbrand, C. (2004). Giving your
organization SPIRIT: an overview and call to action for directors on issues of
corporate governance, corporate reputation and corporate responsibility. Journal
of General Management, 30(2), 15-42.
Marquis, C., M. A. Glynn & G. F. Davis: 2007, ‘Community Isomorphism and
Corporate Social Action’, Academy of Management Review 32(3), 925–940.
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: a conceptual framework
for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of
management Review, 33(2), 404-424.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the
firm perspective. Academy of management review, 26(1), 117-127.
Muthuri, J. N., & Gilbert, V. (2011). An institutional analysis of corporate social
responsibility in Kenya. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(3), 467-483.
Page, J. P. (2005). Corporate governance and value creation.
Saravanamuthu, K. (2004). What is measured counts: harmonized corporate reporting
and sustainable economic development. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,
15(3), 295-302.
Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative science
quarterly, 493-511.
Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests (3th ed.). Sage
Publications.
Watts, P., & Holme, R. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Meeting changing
expectations. World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
Watts, P., & Holme, R. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Meeting changing
expectations. World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
Young, S., & Thyil, V. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance:
Role of context in international settings. Journal of business ethics, 122(1), 1-24.
Zucker, L. G. (1977). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American
sociological review, 726-743.
中文文獻
張崇銘 (2011)。從公司治理、財務績效探討企業社會責任–以中國上市企業為例。
臺北大學合作經濟學系學位論文，1-63。
黃啟瑞、劉彩卿、詹場、陳俊志、陳欽賢、柯文乾、林瑩滋(2015)。企業社會責
任發展趨勢探討-兼論上市櫃公司之推動及發展策略。證券櫃檯買賣中心 104
年度研究計畫(編號：11-10507001)，未出版。
葉銀華 (2015)。公司治理：全球觀點、台灣體驗。台北市：滄海。
蔡佳吟 (2008)。企業社會責任與財務績效關聯性之再檢視–考量市場效率性與投
資人預期以科技業為主。臺北大學合作經濟學系學位論文，1-77。
閻書孝 (2016 年 1 月 29 日)。長式查核報告受到投資人歡迎。社團法人中華公司
治理協會。取自 http://www.cga.org.tw/f_2_01_news.aspx?news_aid=1683
藍光遙、許素綾 (2014)。出席「審計監理機關國際論壇」 (IFIAR)2014 年檢查工
作小組會議。行政院金融監督管理委員會證券期貨局審計監理機關國際論壇
報告書，未出版。

網站
ROBECOSAM (2016)，http://www.robecosam.com/ 搜尋日期 2016 年 5 月 30 日。
World Bank (2016)，http://www.worldbank.org/ 搜尋日期 2016 年 5 月 30 日。
OECD (2016)，http://www.oecd.org/ 搜尋日期 2016 年 5 月 30 日。