A Study of the Impact Mechanism of Corporate ESG Performance on Surplus Persistence
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. ESG and Corporate Value
2.2. ESG, Institutional Investor Ownership, and Surplus Sustainability
2.3. ESG, Cost of Debt Financing, and Surplus Persistence
2.4. Literature Commentary
3. Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypotheses
4. Research Design
4.1. Sample Selection and Data Sources
4.2. Measurement Model
+ β8Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
+ δ8Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
4.3. Variable Definition
5. Empirical Results and Analysis
5.1. Descriptive Statistics
5.2. Correlation Analysis
5.3. Main Effects Regression Analysis
5.4. Mechanism Analysis
5.4.1. Cost of Debt Financing
+ β8Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
α7Growthi,t + α8Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
γ8Growthi,t + γ9Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
5.4.2. Institutional Investor Shareholding
+ β8Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
α7Growthi,t + α8Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
γ8Growthi,t + γ9Agei,t + ∑Industry + ∑Year + εi,t
5.5. Robustness Check
5.5.1. Substitution of Explanatory Variables
5.5.2. Lagged Explanatory Variables
5.6. Further Analysis
5.6.1. Analysis of Regional Heterogeneity
5.6.2. Long-Term Effects of Performance Enhancement in Environmental Dimensions on Corporate Surplus Persistence
6. Conclusions
6.1. Theoretical Implications
6.2. Practical Implications
6.3. Research Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Friede, G.; Busch, T.; Bassen, A. ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. J. Sustain. Financ. Investig. 2015, 5, 210–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, W.C.; Batten, J.A.; Mohamed-Arshad, S.B.; Nordin, S.; Adzis, A.A. Does ESG Certification Add Firm Value. Financ. Res. Lett. 2021, 39, 101593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newman, A.; Nielsen, I.; Miao, Q. The impact of employee perceptions of organizational corporate social responsibility practices on job performance and organizational citizenship behavior: Evidence from the Chinese private sector. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2015, 26, 1226–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miralles-Quirós, M.; Miralles-Quirós, L.; Goncalves, L.M.V. The Value Relevance of Environmental, Social, and Governance Performance: The Brazilian Case. Sustainability 2018, 10, 574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marsat, S.; Williams, B. Does the Market Value Social Pillar. In Proceedings of the European Financial Management Association (EFMA), Rome, Italy, 25–28 June 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Hillman, A.J.; Keim, G.D. Shareholder Value, Stakeholder Management, and Social Issues: What’s the Bottom Line? Strateg. Manag. J. 2001, 22, 125–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brammer, S.; Brooks, C.; Pavelin, S. Corporate Social Performance and Stock Returns: UK Evidence from Disaggregate Measures. Financ. Manag. 2006, 35, 97–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sassen, R.; Hinze, A.K.; Hardeck, I. Impact of ESG factors on firm risk in Europe. J. Bus. Econ. 2016, 86, 867–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sloan, R.G. Do Stock Prices Fully Reflect Information in Accruals and Cash Flow about Future Earnings. Account. Rev. 1996, 71, 289–315. [Google Scholar]
- Seo, S.C. Earnings Persistence and Earnings Management Using Accruals without Current Period Tax Implications. Korean J. Tax. Res. 2011, 28, 327–347. [Google Scholar]
- Van Ha, T.; Sibghatullah, A.; Chae, S.S.; Aldeehani, T.M. The impact of environmental and social disclosure on earnings persistence. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2020, 10, 690–696. [Google Scholar]
- Ferdy, P. Environmental Performance and Earnings Persistence: Empirical Evidence from Indonesia. J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 2021, 8, 1073–1081. [Google Scholar]
- Rountree, B. Do investors value smooth performance? J. Financ. Econ. 2008, 90, 237–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chelawat, H.; Trivedi, I.V. The business value of ESG performance: The Indian context. Asian J. Bus. Ethics 2016, 5, 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Liu, X. Research on the influence of environmental regulation pressure on the sustainability of enterprise surplus. Stat. Decis.-Mak. 2022, 38, 179–183. [Google Scholar]
- Yuan, R.; Xian, D. Corporate social responsibility and surplus continuity—The intermediary effect based on financial performance. Bus. Account. 2021, 21, 83–87. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Qu, X. Related party transactions, external supervision and earnings sustainability—Based on the empirical evidence of A-share listed companies. Secur. Mark. Her. 2015, 9, 49–55. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, M.; Li, H.; Liu, X. Surplus sustainability, corporate governance and risk of stock price crash—Empirical evidence from China’s securities market. Mod. Financ. Econ. J. Tianjin Univ. Financ. Econ. 2017, 37, 27–39. [Google Scholar]
- Lei, Q.; Zhong, Y.; Zhang, Q. Corporate governance, market competition and surplus sustainability. East China Econ. Manag. 2020, 34, 116–128. [Google Scholar]
- Flammer, C.; Bansal, P. Does a long term orientation create value? Evidence from a regression discontinuity. Strateg. Manag. J. 2017, 38, 1827–1847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, E.P.; Van Luu, B. International variations in ESG disclosure—Do cross-listed companies care more? Int. Rev. Financ. Anal. 2021, 75, 101731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serafeim, M.G.; Yoon, A. Stock price reaction to ESG news: The role of ESG ratings and disagreement. Rev. Account. Stud. 2022, 28, 1500–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.; Lian, Y.; Dong, J. Study on the mechanism of the influence of ESG performance on enterprise value. Secur. Mark. Her. 2022, 5, 23–34. [Google Scholar]
- Hwang, J.; Kim, H.; Jung, D. The Effect of ESG Activities on Financial Performance during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Evidence from Korea. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, X.; Hu, D. Enterprise ESG Performance and Innovation—Evidence from A-share listed companies. Econ. Res. 2023, 58, 91–106. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, S.J.; Tian, Y.; Dang, L.L. ESG responsibility fulfillment, competitive strategy and financial performance of industrial enterprises. Account. Res. 2022, 3, 77–92. [Google Scholar]
- Brandon, R.G.; Krueger, P.; Schmidt, P.S. ESG rating disagreement and stock returns. Financ. Anal. J. 2021, 77, 104–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buchanan, B.; Cao, C.X.; Chen, C. Corporate social responsibility, firm value, and influence institutional ownership. J. Corp. Financ. 2018, 52, 73–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.H.; Zheng, S.L. Has the implementation of ESG inhibited corporate growth? Econ. Probl. 2022, 12, 81–89. [Google Scholar]
- Yu, S.; Wang, K.; Gao, H. How does the ESG performance of the listed companies affect the commercial credit? Investig. Res. 2023, 42, 60–78. [Google Scholar]
- Bénabou, R.; Tirole, J. Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica 2010, 77, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, L.; Tang, Q. The real effects of ESG reporting and GRI standards on carbon mitigation: International evidence. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 32, 2985–3000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, B.; Li, B. The impact of ESG responsibility performance on the business difficulties of enterprises: “timely help” or “worse”? Soft Sci. China 2024, 6, 121–130. [Google Scholar]
- Demers, E.; Hendrikse, J.; Joos, P.; Lev, B. ESG Didn’t Immunize Stocks during the COVID-19 Crisis, But Investments in Intangible Assets Did. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2021, 48, 433–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Coenell, B. ESG preferences, risk and return. Eur. Financ. Manag. 2021, 27, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lou, Q. ESG information disclosure: Legal reflection and institutional construction. Secur. Mark. Her. 2023, 3, 24–34. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, F.; Qin, L. The interaction effect between ESG and green innovation and its impact on firm value from the perspective of information disclosure. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, G.; Liu, L.; Luo, S. Sustainable development, ESG performance and company market value: Mediating effect of financial performance. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 31, 3371–3387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, X.; Zhu, Y.; Han, J. ESG performance, institutional investor preferences, and Corporate Value. Stat. Inf. Forum 2022, 37, 117–128. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, L.; Lu, S. ESG performance, institutional investor shareholding and corporate financing constraints. J. Lanzhou Univ. Financ. Econ. 2024, 40, 62–75. [Google Scholar]
- Ye, Y.; Wang, X. How does corporate ESG performance affect equity earnings volatility?—Empirical research based on A-share listed companies. Account. Res. 2024, 91, 64–78. [Google Scholar]
- Krueger, P.; Sautner, Z.; Starks, L.T. The Importance of Climate Risks for Institutional Investors. Rev. Financ. Stud. 2020, 33, 1067–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bushee, B. The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. Account. Rev. 1998, 73, 305–333. [Google Scholar]
- Chung, R.; Firth, M.; Kim, J.B. Institutional Monitoring and Opportunistic Earnings Management. J. Corp. Financ. 2002, 8, 29–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Du, R.; Gao, R. Empirical study on the shareholding ratio of institutional investors and the earnings management of listed companies. Manag. Rev. 2011, 23, 39–45+70. [Google Scholar]
- Koh, P.S. Institutional Investor Type, Earnings Management and Benchmark Beaters. J. Account. Public Policy 2007, 26, 267–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, J.; Gao, G.J. Can institutional investors increase the surplus of listed companies?—Based on the empirical evidence of China’s A-share listed companies. Soft Sci. China 2012, 2, 128–138. [Google Scholar]
- Mei, Y.; Zhang, Q. Impact of ESG performance on corporate debt financing costs. Financ. Econ. 2023, 2, 51–63. [Google Scholar]
- Lian, Y.; He, X.; Zhang, L. Corporate ESG performance and Debt Financing Costs. Financ. Theory Ser. 2023, 1, 48–58. [Google Scholar]
- Qiu, M.; Yin, H. Enterprise ESG performance and financing cost under the background of ecological civilization construction. Quantitative, economic. Tech. Econ. Res. 2019, 36, 108–123. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, R.; Zhao, X.; Jin, H. The impact of corporate ESG performance on their financing costs. Sci. Decis.-Mak. 2022, 11, 24–40. [Google Scholar]
- Friedman, M. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. N. Y. Times Mag. 2007, 13, 173–178. [Google Scholar]
- Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Pitman Publishing Inc.: Marshfield, MA, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Cao, J.; Titman, S.; Zhan, X.; Zhang, W. ESG Preference, Institutional Trading, and Stock Return Patterns. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 2022, 58, 1843–1877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhaliwal, D.S.; Li, O.Z.; Tsang, A. Voluntary non-financial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The case of corporate social responsibility reporting. Account. Rev. 2011, 86, 59–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lins, K.V.; Servaes, H.; Tamayo, A. Social Capital, Trust, and Firm Performance: The Value of Corporate Social Responsibility during the Financial Crisis. J. Financ. 2017, 72, 1785–1824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pástor, Ľ.; Stambaugh, R.F.; Taylor, L.A. Sustainable investing in equilibrium. J. Financ. Econ. 2020, 142, 550–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dimitras, A.I.; Kyriakou, M.I.; Iatridis, G. Financial crisis, GDP variation and earnings management in Europe. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2015, 34, 338–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aymaliev, I.M. Corporate Motivations for Donating to the Police in Bulgaria. East Eur. Politics Soc. Cult. 2017, 31, 762–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, H.; Fang, H.; Xu, A. Eat, Drink, Firms and Government: An Investigation of Corruption from Entertainment and Travel Costs of Chinese Firms. J. Law Econ. 2011, 54, 55–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashbaugh-Skaife, H.; Collins, D.W.; LaFond, R. The effects of corporate governance on firms’ credit ratings. J. Account. Econ. 2006, 42, 203–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hart, S.L. A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 986–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haniffa, R.; Hudaib, M. Corporate governance structure and performance of Malaysian listed companies. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2006, 33, 1034–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orsato, R. Competitive Environmental Strategies: When Does It Pay To Be Green? Calif. Manag. Rev. 2006, 48, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hazudin, S.F.; Mohamad, S.A.; Azer, I.; Daud, R.; Paino, H. Iso 14001 and Financial Performance: Is the Accreditation Financially Worth It for Malaysian Firms. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2015, 31, 56–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wagner, M. The Effect Of Corporate Environmental Strategy Choice And Environmental Performance on Competitiveness And Economic Performance:: An Empirical Study of Eu Manufacturing. Eur. Manag. J. 2004, 22, 557–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, H.; Zhang, G. Internal control quality, continuity of earnings and company value. Account. Res. 2013, 5, 73–80+96. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, J.; Chu, D.; Lian, Y.; Zheng, J. Can ESG performance improve the efficiency of corporate investment? Secur. Mark. Her. 2021, 11, 24–34+72. [Google Scholar]
- Atif, M.; Ali, S. Environmental, social and governance disclosure and default risk. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 3937–3959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qureshi, M.A.; Kirkerud, S.; Theresa, K.; Ahsan, T. The impact of sustainability (environmental, social, and governance) disclosure and board diversity on firm value: The moderating role of industry sensitivity. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2020, 29, 1199–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eliwa, Y.; Aboud, A.; Saleh, A. ESG practices and the cost of debt: Evidence from EU countries. Crit. Perspect. Account. 2021, 79, 102097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, H.; Liu, Q.; Wu, S. Company environmental protection information disclosure and financing constraints. World Econ. 2017, 40, 124–147. [Google Scholar]
- Ren, Z.; Gu, S.; Yang, Y.; Li, J. Empirical study on the relationship between ESG performance and corporate financial performance. Oper. Manag. 2021, 11, 26–32. [Google Scholar]
- Yuan, X.; Li, Z.; Xu, J.; Shang, L. ESG disclosure and corporate financial irregularities—Evidence from Chinese listed firms. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 332, 129992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Zhang, L. ESG performance, digital transformation, and enterprise value enhancement. J. Zhongnan Univ. Econ. Law 2023, 3, 136–149. [Google Scholar]
- Liang, K.; Li, H. Research on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate performance—Based on the regulatory role of corporate governance. Oper. Manag. 2024, 4, 45–53. [Google Scholar]
- Li, G.; Liu, L. Debt financing costs and private credit discrimination. Financ. Res. 2009, 12, 137–150. [Google Scholar]
- Luong, H.; Moshirian, F.; Nguyen, L.; Tian, X.; Zhang, B. How do Foreign Institutional Investors Enhance Firm Innovation? J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 2017, 52, 1449–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hutchinson, M.; Seamer, M.; Chapple, L.E. Institutional Investors, Risk/Performance and Corporate Governance. Int. J. Account. 2015, 50, 32–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dou, H.; Lu, Z. The agency problem of major shareholders and the surplus continuity of listed companies. Account. Res. 2017, 5, 32–39+96. [Google Scholar]
- Simonsohn, U. Two lines: A valid alternative to the invalid testing of U-shaped relationships with quadratic regressions. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 2018, 1, 538–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Type of Variable | Variable Name | Variable Symbol | Variable Metric |
---|---|---|---|
Explained variable | Corporate surplus sustainability | ES | Calculated by Equation (3) |
Explanatory variable | Enterprise ESG performance | ENV SOC GOV ESG | China card ESG rating score/100 |
Controlled variable | Asset–liability ratio | Lev | The ratio of ending total liabilities to total assets |
Fixed asset intensity | Ppe | The ratio of net fixed assets to total assets at the end of the period | |
Independent director ratio | Indb | The number of independent directors accounts for the number of all directors | |
Equity concentration | Top1 | The largest shareholder holds the proportion of the total number of shares | |
Intangible asset density | Intang | The ratio of the net intangible assets to the total assets at the end of the period | |
Enterprise growth ability | Growth | increase rate of business revenue | |
enterprise age | Age | And ln (fiscal year − establishment year + 1) | |
Trade | Industry | Virtual variables representing the industry | |
a particular year | Year | Virtual variables representing the year |
Variable | Sample Capacity | Average | Standard Error | Least Value | Median | Crest Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ES | 24,929 | 0.064 | 0.042 | −0.002 | 0.035 | 0.054 |
ESG | 24,929 | 0.732 | 0.049 | 0.572 | 0.703 | 0.734 |
E | 24,929 | 0.610 | 0.072 | 0.457 | 0.563 | 0.608 |
S | 24,929 | 0.749 | 0.094 | 0.463 | 0.696 | 0.756 |
G | 24,929 | 0.788 | 0.065 | 0.530 | 0.760 | 0.800 |
INVH | 24,929 | 0.460 | 0.243 | 0.005 | 0.278 | 0.477 |
Liability | 24,929 | 0.020 | 0.014 | 0.000 | 0.008 | 0.019 |
Lev | 24,929 | 0.454 | 0.192 | 0.051 | 0.306 | 0.451 |
Ppe | 24,929 | 0.221 | 0.161 | 0.002 | 0.094 | 0.189 |
I ndb | 24,929 | 0.382 | 0.073 | 0.250 | 0.333 | 0.364 |
Top1 | 24,929 | 0.338 | 0.148 | 0.0860 | 0.316 | 0.747 |
Intang | 24,929 | 0.048 | 0.053 | 0.000 | 0.018 | 0.034 |
Growth | 24,929 | 0.159 | 0.365 | −0.552 | −0.025 | 0.103 |
Age | 24,929 | 2.960 | 0.303 | 1.792 | 2.773 | 2.996 |
ES1 | ESG | INVH | Liability | Lev | Ppe | Indb | Top1 | Intang | Growth | Age | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ES1 | 1 | ||||||||||
ESG | 0.084 *** | 1 | |||||||||
INVH | 0.001 | 0.114 *** | 1 | ||||||||
Liability | −0.237 *** | −0.142 *** | 0.017 *** | 1 | |||||||
Lev | −0.267 *** | −0.035 *** | 0.206 *** | 0.350 *** | 1 | ||||||
Ppe | −0.081 *** | −0.064 *** | 0.147 *** | 0.321 *** | 0.046 *** | 1 | |||||
Indb | 0.042 *** | 0.075 *** | −0.103 *** | −0.033 *** | −0.057 *** | −0.050 *** | 1 | ||||
Top1 | −0.019 *** | 0.085 *** | 0.545 *** | −0.045 *** | 0.091 *** | 0.110 *** | −0.003 | 1 | |||
Intang | 0.001 | −0.036 *** | 0.059 *** | 0.133 *** | −0.023 *** | 0.061 *** | −0.028 *** | 0.028 *** | 1 | ||
Growth | 0.103 *** | 0.002 | 0.055 *** | 0.003 | 0.029 *** | −0.040 *** | −0.00200 | 0.012 * | 0.002 | 1 | |
Age | −0.076 *** | 0 | 0.006 | −0.056 *** | 0.085 *** | −0.036 *** | −0.057 *** | −0.102 *** | −0.020 *** | −0.078 *** | 1 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ES | ||||
ESG | 0.069 *** | |||
(0.005) | ||||
E | −0.006 * | |||
(0.004) | ||||
S | 0.039 *** | |||
(0.003) | ||||
G | 0.039 *** | |||
(0.004) | ||||
Lev | −0.036 *** | −0.037 *** | −0.038 *** | −0.034 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Ppe | −0.027 *** | −0.027 *** | −0.026 *** | −0.028 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.006 * | 0.010 *** | 0.009 *** | 0.006 * |
(0.003) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.003) | |
Top1 | 0.012 *** | 0.015 *** | 0.015 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.007 | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.008 * |
(0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | |
Growth | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.005 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.004 *** | −0.005 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.029 *** | 0.080 *** | 0.051 *** | 0.045 *** |
(0.005) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.005) | |
N | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 |
R2 | 0.218 | 0.212 | 0.218 | 0.215 |
adj. R2 | 0.217 | 0.210 | 0.216 | 0.214 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ES | Liability | ES | ES | Liability | ES | ES | Liability | ES | |
ESG | 0.069 *** | −0.027 *** | 0.055 *** | ||||||
(0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | |||||||
S | 0.039 *** | −0.008 *** | 0.035 *** | ||||||
(0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | |||||||
G | 0.039 *** | −0.025 *** | 0.025 *** | ||||||
(0.004) | (0.001) | (0.004) | |||||||
Liability | −0.539 *** | −0.548 *** | −0.546 *** | ||||||
(0.020) | (0.020) | (0.021) | |||||||
Lev | −0.036 *** | 0.026 *** | −0.022 *** | −0.038 *** | 0.027 *** | −0.023 *** | −0.034 *** | 0.024 *** | −0.020 *** |
(0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | |
Ppe | −0.027 *** | 0.020 *** | −0.016 *** | −0.026 *** | 0.020 *** | −0.015 *** | −0.028 *** | 0.021 *** | −0.016 *** |
(0.002) | (0.001) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.001) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.001) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.006 * | 0.003 *** | 0.008 ** | 0.009 *** | 0.002 ** | 0.010 *** | 0.006 * | 0.004 *** | 0.008 ** |
(0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | |
Top1 | 0.012 *** | 0.795 *** | −0.003 | 0.015 *** | 0.808 *** | −0.002 | 0.012 *** | 0.787 *** | −0.003 |
(0.002) | (0.008) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.008) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.008) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.007 | 0.026 *** | 0.021 *** | 0.006 | 0.026 *** | 0.020 *** | 0.008 * | 0.025 *** | 0.022 *** |
(0.004) | (0.002) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.002) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.002) | (0.004) | |
Growth | 0.012 *** | 0.000 | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.000 | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.000 | 0.012 *** |
(0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.005 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.004 *** | −0.001 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.001 ** | −0.005 *** |
(0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.029 *** | 0.033 *** | 0.047 *** | 0.051 *** | 0.020 *** | 0.062 *** | 0.045 *** | 0.035 *** | 0.064 *** |
(0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.004) | (0.001) | (0.004) | (0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | |
N | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 |
R2 | 0.218 | 0.309 | 0.240 | 0.218 | 0.303 | 0.241 | 0.215 | 0.313 | 0.238 |
adj. R2 | 0.217 | 0.308 | 0.239 | 0.216 | 0.302 | 0.240 | 0.214 | 0.311 | 0.236 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ES | INVH | ES | ES | INVH | ES | ES | INVH | ES | |
ESG | 0.069 *** | 0.454 *** | 0.061 *** | ||||||
(0.005) | (0.025) | (0.005) | |||||||
S | 0.039 *** | 0.073 *** | 0.038 *** | ||||||
(0.003) | (0.014) | (0.003) | |||||||
G | 0.039 *** | 0.379 *** | 0.032 *** | ||||||
(0.004) | (0.020) | (0.004) | |||||||
INVH | 0.019 *** | 0.020 *** | 0.020 *** | ||||||
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |||||||
Lev | −0.036 *** | 0.146 *** | −0.038 *** | −0.038 *** | 0.137 *** | −0.041 *** | −0.034 *** | 0.168 *** | −0.037 *** |
(0.001) | (0.007) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.007) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.007) | (0.001) | |
Ppe | −0.027 *** | 0.071 *** | −0.029 *** | −0.026 *** | 0.073 *** | −0.028 *** | −0.028 *** | 0.067 *** | −0.029 *** |
(0.002) | (0.009) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.009) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.009) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.006 * | −0.250 *** | 0.011 *** | 0.009 *** | −0.229 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.006 * | −0.265 *** | 0.011 *** |
(0.003) | (0.017) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.017) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.017) | (0.003) | |
Top1 | 0.012 *** | 0.795 *** | −0.003 | 0.015 *** | 0.808 *** | −0.002 | 0.012 *** | 0.787 *** | −0.003 |
(0.002) | (0.008) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.008) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.008) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.007 | 0.087 *** | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.085 *** | 0.004 | 0.008 * | 0.094 *** | 0.006 |
(0.004) | (0.024) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.024) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.024) | (0.004) | |
Growth | 0.012 *** | 0.031 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.031 *** | 0.011 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.031 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.001) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.005 *** | 0.075 *** | −0.006 *** | −0.004 *** | 0.075 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.005 *** | 0.071 *** | −0.006 *** |
(0.001) | (0.005) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.005) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.005) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.029 *** | −0.264 *** | 0.034 *** | 0.051 *** | 0.000 | 0.051 *** | 0.045 *** | −0.256 *** | 0.050 *** |
(0.005) | (0.026) | (0.005) | (0.004) | (0.022) | (0.004) | (0.005) | (0.025) | (0.005) | |
N | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 |
R2 | 0.218 | 0.384 | 0.225 | 0.218 | 0.377 | 0.226 | 0.215 | 0.385 | 0.223 |
adj. R2 | 0.217 | 0.383 | 0.224 | 0.216 | 0.376 | 0.225 | 0.214 | 0.384 | 0.221 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ES2 | ||||
ESG | 0.046 *** | |||
(0.003) | ||||
E | −0.004 * | |||
(0.002) | ||||
S | 0.026 *** | |||
(0.002) | ||||
G | 0.026 *** | |||
(0.003) | ||||
Lev | −0.024 *** | −0.024 *** | −0.025 *** | −0.022 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Ppe | −0.018 *** | −0.018 *** | −0.018 *** | −0.018 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Indb | 0.004 * | 0.006 *** | 0.006 *** | 0.004 * |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Top1 | 0.008 *** | 0.010 *** | 0.010 *** | 0.008 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Intang | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.005 * |
(0.003) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.003) | |
Growth | 0.008 *** | 0.008 *** | 0.008 *** | 0.008 *** |
(0.000) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.000) | |
Age | −0.003 *** | −0.003 *** | −0.003 *** | −0.003 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.023 *** | 0.057 *** | 0.037 *** | 0.034 *** |
(0.003) | (0.003) | (0.003) | (0.003) | |
N | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 | 24,929 |
R2 | 0.218 | 0.212 | 0.218 | 0.215 |
adj. R2 | 0.217 | 0.210 | 0.216 | 0.214 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ES | ||||
L.ESG | 0.050 *** | |||
(0.005) | ||||
L.E | −0.010 ** | |||
(0.004) | ||||
L.S | 0.034 *** | |||
(0.003) | ||||
L.G | 0.027 *** | |||
(0.004) | ||||
Lev | −0.035 *** | −0.035 *** | −0.037 *** | −0.034 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Ppe | −0.026 *** | −0.025 *** | −0.025 *** | −0.026 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.007 ** | 0.010 *** | 0.009 ** | 0.007 ** |
(0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | |
Top1 | 0.012 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.008 * | 0.009 * | 0.007 | 0.009 * |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | |
Growth | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.005 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.004 *** | −0.005 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.038 *** | 0.077 *** | 0.049 *** | 0.050 *** |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.004) | (0.005) | |
N | 20,789 | 20,789 | 20,789 | 20,789 |
R2 | 0.216 | 0.212 | 0.217 | 0.214 |
adj. R2 | 0.214 | 0.211 | 0.216 | 0.212 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ES | ||||
L2.ESG | 0.034 *** | |||
(0.005) | ||||
L2.E | −0.012 *** | |||
(0.004) | ||||
L2.S | 0.030 *** | |||
(0.003) | ||||
L2.G | 0.020 *** | |||
(0.004) | ||||
Lev | −0.033 *** | −0.033 *** | −0.034 *** | −0.033 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Ppe | −0.024 *** | −0.023 *** | −0.023 *** | −0.024 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.007 * | 0.009 ** | 0.008 ** | 0.007 * |
(0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | |
Top1 | 0.013 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.008 | 0.009* | 0.007 | 0.009 * |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | |
Growth | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.005 *** | −0.005 *** | −0.004 *** | −0.005 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.050 *** | 0.080 *** | 0.054 *** | 0.057 *** |
(0.006) | (0.005) | (0.005) | (0.006) | |
N | 17,741 | 17,741 | 17,741 | 17,741 |
R2 | 0.214 | 0.212 | 0.216 | 0.213 |
adj. R2 | 0.212 | 0.211 | 0.214 | 0.211 |
ES | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | |
Western Region | Eastern Region | Western Region | Eastern Region | Western Region | Eastern Region | Western Region | Eastern Region | |
ESG | 0.026 * | 0.077 *** | ||||||
(0.014) | (0.006) | |||||||
E | −0.015 | −0.003 | ||||||
(0.010) | (0.004) | |||||||
S | 0.028 *** | 0.041 *** | ||||||
(0.008) | (0.003) | |||||||
G | 0.005 | 0.046 *** | ||||||
(0.011) | (0.005) | |||||||
Coefficient of variation between groups | 9.36 *** | 1.31 | 1.81 | 9.87 *** | ||||
Lev | −0.033 *** | −0.031 *** | −0.032 *** | −0.032 *** | −0.033 *** | −0.033 *** | −0.033 *** | −0.029 *** |
(0.004) | (0.002) | (0.004) | (0.002) | (0.004) | (0.002) | (0.004) | (0.002) | |
Ppe | −0.036 *** | −0.031 *** | −0.035 *** | −0.031 *** | −0.035 *** | −0.030 *** | −0.036 *** | −0.031 *** |
(0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.021 ** | 0.004 | 0.023 ** | 0.007 * | 0.022 ** | 0.007 * | 0.023 ** | 0.003 |
(0.010) | (0.004) | (0.010) | (0.004) | (0.010) | (0.004) | (0.010) | (0.004) | |
Top1 | −0.000 | 0.012 *** | −0.000 | 0.015 *** | 0.000 | 0.015 *** | −0.000 | 0.011 *** |
(0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.002) | (0.005) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.023* | 0.003 | 0.023* | 0.005 | 0.023* | 0.002 | 0.023* | 0.005 |
(0.013) | (0.006) | (0.013) | (0.006) | (0.013) | (0.006) | (0.013) | (0.006) | |
Growth | 0.013 *** | 0.011 *** | 0.013 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.013 *** | 0.011 *** | 0.013 *** | 0.011 *** |
(0.002) | (0.001) | (0.002) | (0.001) | (0.002) | (0.001) | (0.002) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.002 | −0.006 *** | −0.002 | −0.006 *** | −0.001 | −0.006 *** | −0.002 | −0.007 *** |
(0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
C | 0.038 ** | 0.027 *** | 0.065 *** | 0.082 *** | 0.036 *** | 0.053 *** | 0.052 *** | 0.044 *** |
(0.015) | (0.006) | (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.012) | (0.005) | (0.014) | (0.006) | |
N | 2868 | 17,296 | 2868 | 17,296 | 2868 | 17,296 | 2868 | 17,296 |
R2 | 0.280 | 0.216 | 0.279 | 0.208 | 0.282 | 0.214 | 0.279 | 0.212 |
adj. R2 | 0.270 | 0.214 | 0.269 | 0.206 | 0.272 | 0.213 | 0.269 | 0.210 |
(1) | (2) | |
---|---|---|
ES | ||
E_w | −0.289 *** | |
(0.046) | ||
E_w2 | 0.229 *** | |
(0.037) | ||
E_w low | −0.039 *** | |
(0.007) | ||
E_w high | 0.034 *** | |
(0.009) | ||
high | 0.000 | |
(0.001) | ||
Lev | −0.037 *** | −0.037 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | |
Ppe | −0.027 *** | −0.027 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | |
Indb | 0.010 *** | 0.010 *** |
(0.003) | (0.003) | |
Top1 | 0.014 *** | 0.014 *** |
(0.002) | (0.002) | |
Intang | 0.007 | 0.007 |
(0.004) | (0.004) | |
Growth | 0.012 *** | 0.012 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | |
Age | −0.005 *** | −0.005 *** |
(0.001) | (0.001) | |
industry effect | YES | YES |
vintage effect | YES | YES |
C | 0.168 *** | 0.075 *** |
(0.015) | (0.004) | |
N | 24,929 | 24,929 |
R2 | 0.213 | 0.213 |
adj. R2 | 0.212 | 0.212 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Xu, A.; Su, Y.; Wang, Y. A Study of the Impact Mechanism of Corporate ESG Performance on Surplus Persistence. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7324. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177324
Xu A, Su Y, Wang Y. A Study of the Impact Mechanism of Corporate ESG Performance on Surplus Persistence. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7324. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177324
Chicago/Turabian StyleXu, Ailing, Yuanyuan Su, and Yingxin Wang. 2024. "A Study of the Impact Mechanism of Corporate ESG Performance on Surplus Persistence" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7324. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177324