English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 109952/140887 (78%)
Visitors : 46353027      Online Users : 1051
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 金融學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/142142


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/142142


    Title: 國際產業分類下SASB評分機制對企業財務及風險表現的研究—以台灣企業為例
    A Study on the Financial and Risk Performance of the SASB Rating System under the International Industry Classification —A Case Study of Taiwan Enterprises
    Authors: 林慧
    HUI, LIN
    Contributors: 楊曉文
    Yang, Xiao-Wen
    林慧
    LIN HUI
    Keywords: 企業社會責任
    ESG
    SASB
    重大性議題
    財務績效
    股價績效
    產業分類標準
    CSR
    ESG
    SASB
    Material issues
    Financial performance
    Stock performance
    Industry classification
    Date: 2022
    Issue Date: 2022-10-05 09:19:33 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 隨著企業、投資人對企業社會責任、ESG的重視，越來越多永續相關的資訊得以揭露，然而過去對企業社會責任、ESG與財務、風險表現相關的系列研究發現，其結果不具有一致性。結果差異大的原因可能是未區分公司的重大性議題造成的經營關聯性低。SASB的出現解決了大家對哪些ESG揭露項目是重要的疑問，由於不同產業的重大性議題各不相同，公司的產業分類顯得尤其重要。因此本文延續前人研究，以2012至2019年台灣市場具備Bloomberg ESG揭露分數與揭露細項的台灣上市櫃公司為樣本，依據SASB專有的SICS產業分類方法，將Bloomberg資料庫中的ESG項目對照到SASB準則，構建出一個SASB重大性永續信息分數。本研究將分別探討Bloomberg資料庫ESG揭露分數與SASB重大性議題分數與財務與股價績效的關係，並對不同產業分類下的結果進行比較。
    結果顯示，ESG揭露分數對提高部分公司財務、股價績效有積極影響，而SASB分數則可以進一步擴大對公司財務、股價績效指標的積極影響，並進一步提高檢定結果的信賴度。另外，對比結果發現產業分類方式的不同也會導致不同的結果, 選用SICS分類方式有效的降低人工對照過程中產生的主觀性影響，對比TEJ產業分類方式也擴大了對財務、股價績效指標的影響範圍。
    As companies and investors place greater emphasis on CSR and ESG, more and more sustainability-related information is being disclosed. However, a series of previous studies of CSR, ESG on financial and risk performance have found inconsistent results. The emergence of SASB has addressed the concern about which ESG disclosures are important, and the importance of industry classification is particularly important because the materiality issues vary by industry. Therefore, this paper continues the previous research by using the Bloomberg ESG disclosures of companies in the Taiwan market from 2012 to 2019 as a sample, and constructing a materiality score based on SICS industry classification method by comparing ESG items in the Bloomberg database to SASB criteria. This study examines the relationship between Bloomberg`s ESG disclosure score, SASB score and financial and stock performance. We also compare the results under different industry classifications.
    The results show that ESG disclosure scores have a positive impact on the financial and stock price performance of some companies, while SASB scores can further expand the positive impact on the financial and stock performance indicators and further improve the reliability of the test results. In addition, the results of the comparison show that the different industrial classification methods also lead to different results. The SICS classification method effectively reduces the subjective influence of the manual comparison process, compared with TEJ industrial classification, it also has the effect of expanding the range of financial and stock performance indicators.
    Reference: 1. Broadstock, D. C., Chan, K., Cheng, L. T., & Wang, X. (2021), The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance research letters, 38, 101716.
    2. Benlemlih, M., Shaukat, A., Qiu, Y., Trojanowski, G., (2018), Environmental and Social Disclosures and Firm Risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 152, 613–626.
    3. Bragdon, Joseph H., Jr. , & John A. T. Marlin (1972), Is pollution profitable? , Risk Management, 19, 9-18.
    4. Buchanan, B., Cao, C.X., Chen, C., (2018), Corporate Social Responsibility, Firm Value, and Influential Institutional Ownership, Journal of Corporate Finance, 52, 73–95.
    5. Capelle-Blancard, G., Crifo, P., Diaye, M. A., Oueghlissi, R., & Scholtens, B. (2019), Sovereign bond yield spreads and sustainability: An empirical analysis of OECD countries. Journal of Banking & Finance, 98, 156-169.
    6. Consolandi, C., Eccles, R. G., Gabbi, G., (2020), How Material is a Material Issue? Stock returns and the Financial Relevance and Financial Intensity of ESG materiality, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 1-24.
    7. Dash-Jr, G.H., Kajiji, N., (2014), Combinatorial Nonlinear Goal Programming for ESG Portfolio Optimization and Dynamic Hedge Management, Mathematical and Statistical Methods for Actuarial Sciences and Finance, 77-80.
    8. Dyck, A., Lins, K. V., Roth, L., Wagner, H.F., (2019), Do Institutional Investors Drive Corporate Social Responsibility? International evidence, Journal of Financial Economics, 131, 693-714.
    9. Eccles, R., Serafeim, G., (2013), The Performance Frontier: Innovating for a Sustainable Strategy, Harvard Business Review, 91, 50–60.
    10. Friedman, M. (2007), The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In Corporate ethics and corporate governance (pp. 173-178). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
    11. Grewal, J., Hauptmann, C., & Serafeim, G. (2021), Material sustainability information and stock price informativeness. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(3), 513-544.
    12. Hartzmark, S., Sussman, A. B., (2019), Do Investors Value Sustainability? A Natural Experiment Examining Ranking and Fund Flows, The Journal of Finance, 64, 2789-2837.
    13. Henriksson, R., Livnat, J., Pfeifer, P., & Stumpp, M. (2019), Integrating ESG in portfolio construction. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 45(4), 67-81.
    14. Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001), Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what`s the bottom line?. Strategic management journal, 22(2), 125-139.
    15. Hoepner, A.G., Oikonomou, I., Sautner, Z., Starks, L.T., Zhou, X., (2019), ESG Shareholder Engagement and Downside Risk. working paper.
    16. Hong, H., Kacperczyk, M., (2009), The Price of Sin: The Effects of Social Norms on Markets, Journal of Financial Economics, 93, 15-36.
    17. Ilhan, E., Sautner, Z., Vilkov, G., (2019), Carbon Tail Risk, Working paper.
    18. Jo, H., & Na, H. (2012). Does CSR reduce firm risk? Evidence from controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics,110(4), 441–457.
    19. Khan, M., George, S., Aaron, Yoon., (2016), Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence on Materiality, Accounting Review, 91, 1697-1724.
    20. Kim, Y., Li, H., Li, S., (2014), Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Price Crash Risk, Journal of Banking & Finance, 43, 1-13.
    21. Madison, N., & Schiehll, E. (2021), The effect of financial materiality on ESG performance assessment. Sustainability, 13(7), 3652.
    22. Masulis, R.W., Reza, S.W., (2015), Agency Problems of Corporate Philanthropy. Review of Financial Studies, 28, 592–636.
    23. McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., Schneeweis, T., (1988), Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance, Academy of Management Journal, 31, 854–872.
    24. Pedersen, L. H., Fitzgibbons, S., Pomorski, L. (2021), Responsible Investing: The ESG-Efficient Frontier, Journal of Financial Economics, 142, 572-597.
    25. Preston, L. E., & O`bannon, D. P. (1997), The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
    26. Servaes, H., Tamayo, A., (2013), The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Value: The Role of Customer Awareness. Management Science, 59, 1045–1061.
    27. Waddock, S.A., Graves, S.B., (1997), The Corporate Social Performance-Financial Performance Link, Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.
    28. Yang,S. S.,Huang,J.W.,Chen,H.Y.,(2022),The Financial and Stock Performance: A Study of Material ESG SASB Factors. Can Disclosure or Materiality ESG information affect the assessment of the ESG Performance on Return and Risk?, Working paper.
    29. 沈中華, & 張元. (2008), 企業的社會責任為可以改善財務績效嗎?-以英國 FTSE 社會責任指數為例. 經濟論文, 36(3), 339-385.
    30. 施凱珍. (2021), 採 SASB 準則下 ESG 重大性議題與財務績效之探討.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    金融學系
    109352033
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109352033
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202201516
    Appears in Collections:[金融學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    203301.pdf1653KbAdobe PDF291View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback