School of Economics and Management, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, 430074, China.
Research Center for Rural Economy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Beijing, 100810, China.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Jun;30(29):73231-73253. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-27449-5. Epub 2023 May 15.
Before discussing how to balance and decide on environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) and traditional revenue enhancement projects, it is crucial to clarify the relationship between corporate financial performance (CFP) and ESG. However, little attention has been paid to the nexus of ESG and CFP. This paper attempts firstly to investigate the bidirectional causality of ESG and CFP, followed by the micro-foundations, and finally, the moderating effect of intrinsic factors. A GMM-PVAR method was used to examine the research hypotheses, which can effectively deal with endogenous problems that have been ignored by traditional literature. The findings of this research demonstrate that CFP promoted ESG growth, but ESG did not boost CFP. This asymmetric causality was because CFP had a supportive effect on the environment and society pillars, while the social pillar cannot promote CFP, and the environment pillar negatively affects CFP. The relationship between ESG and CFP was moderated by total quality management, environmental sensitivity, and the pay gap. Furtherly, a panel threshold model was constructed to access the threshold effects of ESG on CFP, showing an inverted U-shape. Based on these findings, the theoretical implications, managerial prescriptions, and limitations are also discussed.
在讨论如何平衡和决定环境、社会和公司治理(ESG)与传统的增收项目之前,澄清公司财务绩效(CFP)与 ESG 之间的关系至关重要。然而,很少有人关注 ESG 和 CFP 之间的关系。本文首先试图探讨 ESG 和 CFP 的双向因果关系,其次是微观基础,最后是内在因素的调节效应。使用 GMM-PVAR 方法检验了研究假设,该方法可以有效地解决传统文献中忽略的内生性问题。研究结果表明,CFP 促进了 ESG 的增长,但 ESG 并没有促进 CFP。这种非对称因果关系是因为 CFP 对环境和社会支柱有支持作用,而社会支柱不能促进 CFP,环境支柱对 CFP 产生负面影响。ESG 和 CFP 之间的关系受到全面质量管理、环境敏感度和薪酬差距的调节。此外,构建了面板门槛模型来考察 ESG 对 CFP 的门槛效应,结果呈倒 U 型。基于这些发现,还讨论了理论意义、管理建议和局限性。