社会责任履行对企业价值的影响

经济全球化使得世界各国联系更为紧密,全球环境污染、气候变化、企业信用危机等的挑战,共同推动企业社会责任运动的蓬勃发展。企业作为最重要的社会生产组织,积极履行社会责任是遵循人口、资源与环境可持续发展理念的重要表现,也是企业追求价值增值的实际需要。在对国内外文献评述的基础上,基于利益相关者理论,阐述了企业履行社会责任对企业价值的影响路径,并利用A股上市公司2009-2011年292组数据,检验企业社会责任履行与企业价值的相关关系。研究结论表明企业社会责任与企业价值之间存在显著正相关关系,这为企业自觉履行社会责任提供了一定的理论指导。     

碳排放信息披露质量与公司价值的相关性分析

全球变暖已成为当今世界必须要面对的重大环境问题之一，世界组织、各国政府及企业都在努力降低温室效应。本文以沪市91家社会责任股上市公司为样本探究碳排放信息披露质量与公司价值的相关性。研究结果发现：碳排放信息披露质量与公司价值和公司绩效呈显著的正相关关系。     

企业价值与股利政策关系的实证研究

本文系基于2007年上市公司企业价值和股利政策之间关系进行的实证研究。对企业价值与是否支付股利、与每股现金股利和现金股利支付率关系作分析;并对大规模公司和小规模公司的发放股利、现金股利支付情况作分析。公司规模在大规模公司的回归中没有通过假设检验,说明在大规模企业里,规模效应已经达成,上市公司提升企业价值的侧重点已不放在扩大企业规模上。     

学习能力、公司特征与环境信息披露

本文以沪市重污染行业上市公司为例,分析目前我国重污染行业环境信息披露水平与学习能力、企业特征之间的关系。研究结果表明,学习能力、公司规模、公司风险、所有权性质是影响重污染公司环境信息披露的重要因素,而企业价值、盈利能力等对环境信息披露没有显著影响。最后,我们对这一研究结果的政策含义进行了阐述,以期改进我国上市公司环境信息披露监管制度。     

环境信息披露、市场化进程与企业价值——来自中国化学制品行业上市公司的经验证据

本文在环境保护部相关文件的基础上构建了企业环境信息披露指数,同时结合樊纲、王小鲁、朱恒鹏编制的2009年中国各地区市场化指数数据,以沪深两市2009年至2011年化学制品行业上市公司为研究对象,考察了环境信息披露与企业价值的关系,并进一步分析了上市公司注册地市场化指数对企业环境信息披露与企业价值之间关系的影响。研究发现:我国上市公司环境信息披露意识逐年增加,环境信息披露质量逐年提高;企业环境信息披露对企业价值具有正面影响;上市公司所处地区市场化进程越快,环境信息披露对企业价值的正面影响效果越强。     

企业社会责任报告传递信息效度研究

通过分析国内上市公司2012年发布的社会责任报告与公司社会绩效的相关性来揭示社会责任报告反映信息的有效性,从而考察上市公司社会责任报告的质量水平。实证结果表明：上市公司社会责任报告与社会绩效之间存在显著关系,但社会绩效变量对社会责任报告水平解释能力较弱,表明上市公司社会责任报告存在一定的虚构内容。政府部门应加强监管,使企业社会责任行为落到实处。为认识我国上市公司履行社会责任提供了新的视角和经验证据,对于促进上市公司提高社会责任信息披露水平、积极履行社会责任具有现实意义。     

基于面板数据的内控质量、产权属性与公司价值研究

本文以2000-2013年沪深两市A股上市公司为研究样本,利用面板向量自回归模型和固定效应模型对上市公司的内控质量与公司价值之间的关系进行了分析。区别于现有研究,我们利用了面板格兰杰因果关系检验、回归分析和对比研究的方法,对两者的关系进行了深层次挖掘。研究表明:内控质量与公司价值之间存在着单向因果关系,内控质量能够Granger引起公司价值的变化。进一步的多元回归分析发现,内控质量越高的公司,其公司价值越大;而且,相对于非国有上市公司,国有上市公司的内控质量和公司价值之间的协同性更加显著。并且,随着时间进程的不断推移,上市公司内控质量与公司价值的关系更为密切,说明上市公司的内控质量在不断提高。     

企业业绩与企业社会责任关系研究

本文选择我国2007-2009年沪深国有上市公司发布社会责任报告的公司为研究对象,针对企业财务业绩与社会责任的关系问题进行实证研究。通过重新构建企业社会责任指标,采用新的计量方法,在对前人研究的基础上,对社会责任指标进行分解,用经济责任、职工权益、环境责任、产品质量、社会公益和企业文化六个方面来度量企业社会责任,并采用打分的方法进行赋值,从上市公司已经公开发布的上市公司社会责任报告中选取数据,通过逐一研读上市公司社会责任报告,手工收集数据,得出企业履行社会责任的分数作为企业履行社会责任替代变量,检验企业履行社会责任对企业业绩的影响。     

企业社会责任对上市公司运行效率的影响 ——基于融资约束中介效应的检验

近年来,实体经济经营环境趋紧,我国政府着眼于实体经济,不断推出有利于实体经济发展的政策.选取2010—2020年沪深两市A股上市公司为对象,讨论社会责任履行与上市公司运行效率之间的关系.研究结果表明:积极承担社会责任且社会责任水平高的企业拥有更高的运行效率.采用中介效应模型探究社会责任影响运行效率的传导机制,研究发现融资约束有助于解释企业社会责任对运行效率的正向影响.进一步研究显示,企业社会责任促进运行效率的作用在非国有企业和东部地区表现得更明显.研究结论为政策制定者规范企业社会责任报告披露方式、企业管理者提高公司治理效率提供借鉴意义.     

上市公司社会责任与企业价值的相关性研究——以采矿业为例

本文选择A股市场上的采矿类上市公司为研究对象,检验社会责任与企业价值的相关性。研究表明,采矿业社会责任与企业价值之间具有线性关系,且正相关。     

Roundtable on Corporate Disclosure

In an article published in this journal two years ago titled "Just Say No to Wall Street," Harvard's Michael Jensen and The Monitor Group's CEO Joseph Fuller urged companies to put an end to what they called the "earnings guidance game." Instead of earnings forecasts, Jensen and Fuller recommended that companies provide investors with information about their strategic goals and value drivers, and about the risks associated with carrying out those goals and management's plans to manage those risks.
In this roundtable, a group of corporate executives, equity analysts, and academics explore the possibility that companies can increase their values by resisting the temptation to "manage" earnings, committing to expanded disclosure, and engaging investors in a more strategic dialogue. By establishing such a dialogue, companies may be able to break out of the current "bad equilibrium" in which markets distrust managers and managers distrust markets.     

Brazil's Experiment with Corporate Governance

The adoption of special listing segments by the São Paulo Stock Exchange in the year 2000 was an important step forward for the Brazilian equity market. Bovespa's introduction of the Novo Mercado and its Special Corporate Governance Levels 1 and 2 provided concrete, standardized certification of corporate commitments to higher governance standards that could be readily observed and verified by all market participants. What evidence do we have that this experiment in corporate governance has been a success? One indication is the performance of the Brazilian stock market itself, along with its ability to attract foreign investors. From 2002 to mid‐2008, the market capitalization of Bovespa companies increased by over 700%, while average daily volume grew almost tenfold. And as of June 2008, international investors represented 37% of total value, up from 26% in 2002. What's more, the growth in the three differentiated governance segments has been even more remarkable. Starting with 15 companies in 2001, the special governance segments had a total of 161 listings by early 2009. And by the end of 2008, the companies listed in the three differentiated segments accounted for more than 60% of Bovespa's total market capitalization and 73% of all trades. Perhaps even more telling, over 70% of the Brazilian IPOs issued between 2001 and 2008 were placed in the special governance segments. In this article, the authors summarize the findings of their study of the reaction of stock prices to the announcement by 31 Brazilian companies of their intent to list on one of the special governance exchanges. Their analysis showed that the companies choosing to list in these segments experienced an increase in both the value and the liquidity of their shares. In light of this evidence, such corporate decisions can be seen as functioning as publicly verifiable signals of commitment to greater transparency and investor protection. And the fact that the listing requirements of the special segments are stricter than those of Brazilian securities legislation means that stock exchanges—and the companies that choose to list on them— effectively have the option to initiate or lead investor protection reforms, as opposed to just complying with them. Thus, in countries where governance legislation is weak and the progress of reform is slow, stock markets can play a key role in helping companies differentiate themselves through exchange‐defined governance codes.     

金字塔控制、关联交易与公司价值——基于我国民营上市公司的实证研究

本文以我国证券市场2002～2004年329家民营上市公司为样本，考察了金字塔控制、关联交易与公司价值之间的关系。发现民营上市公司的金字塔控制不利干公司价值：民营上市公司的最终控制人主要通过关联方担保、关联方资金占用和上市公司与关联方的商品购销活动来侵占小股东的利益，其政策含义是应该鼓励自然人直接持股上市公司，加强对关联交易的监管。更为重要的是必须改营公司外部治理环境、尤其是法律对投资者权益的保护，从而从根本上杜绝民营上市公司及其最终控制人对小股东的侵害行为，改善公司治理，提高公司价值。     

Capital Deployment Roundtable: A Discussion of Corporate Investment and Payout Policy

U.S. companies are now reportedly earning record‐high operating returns on capital while at the same time continuing to set new records both for corporate cash holdings and distributions to investors in the form of dividends and stock repurchases. But are most of these companies really maximizing value? And what role, if any, do these large distributions play in creating value? These are the two main questions that are addressed by a small group that includes two senior corporate executives and two representatives of well‐known activist investors. A number of panelists suggest that many companies, in misguided efforts to maximize returns on capital, have been using hurdle rates that are too high and so sacrificing value‐adding investment opportunities. As evidence for this claim, they cite evidence that, in recent years, the companies that have achieved the highest stock market returns appear to have made conscious decisions to reduce their returns on capital to pursue higher growth. Another increasingly common charge against U.S. companies is their tendency to pay out excessive capital to investors, especially in the form of stock repurchases at prices that turn out to be too high. But this last practice, however widespread, may not be as troubling as it has been made out to be. Although it involves a wealth transfer from existing to selling shareholders, overall investor value is lost only if such buybacks lead to corporate underinvestment. But, as a number of panelists (including the activist investors) point out, such payouts of capital have generally functioned as a demonstration of corporate managers' commitment to investing and operating with the optimal, or value‐maximizing, level of capital—neither too much nor too little.     

How Corporate Diversity and Size Influence Spinoffs and Other Breakups

In recent months, the list of large diversified companies that have decided they would be worth more as several smaller, focused companies has grown sharply. In many of these cases, it has been outside pressure from activist investors that has motivated these actions by management—and with some pretty favorable results. But what is driving these strategic actions and what is most important in determining whether breakups create value? To answer this fundamental questions, it is critical to decide whether large, diversified companies have a value recognition problem or a value creation problem. In this article, the authors present and try to integrate the findings of two separate but related research studies on business diversity and size with the aim of identifying their implications for corporate strategy and helping company executives create more value for their investors. The specific reasons for underperformance by large diverse companies vary greatly, but there are a number of potential problems discussed in this article, including organizational “distance,” capital allocation, human capital allocation, cross subsidies, and ineffective governance. Instead of waiting for activist investors to demand a breakup, executives of large diverse companies should be proactive in addressing the potential weaknesses of their organizations. Private equity firms understand how to make diversification work and many of today's executives could learn some valuable lessons from these firms. Large diverse businesses should embrace “Internal Capitalism,” a corporate culture and set of practices that emphasizes the importance of strategic decision‐making that is linked through continuous performance assessment to the corporate goals of boosting efficiency and sustainable growth.     

Leadership Structure and Corporate Governance in Switzerland*

The question of whether the CEO should also serve as chairman of the board continues to be a controversial issue in corporate governance. While “agency cost” arguments would lead one to advocate separation of the top decision‐making and control functions, there are efficiency and coordination arguments for vesting the powers of the CEO and chair in the same person. And helping to keep the controversy alive, the empirical evidence on U.S. companies is inconclusive, with no clear loss of value associated with having combined CEO/chairmen. The authors use their recent research on Swiss companies, for which separation of the CEO and chair has long been the rule, to shed light on whether one leadership structure clearly dominates. But like most previous studies of U.S. companies, the authors report no evidence of a systematic difference in valuation between companies with combined and those with dual leadership. The authors also investigated whether companies with CEO‐chairmen use other governance mechanisms to counteract potential agency problems associated with giving the CEO effective control. Consistent with this hypothesis, the authors report that CEO/chairmen tend to have larger percentage ownership than CEOs who are not chairmen, but at the same time they find that the value of the firm appears to rise with increases in CEO equity holdings up to a certain point—around 40–50%— and then declines with further increases above that point. The suggestion here is that the potential for agency costs associated with combining the two leadership functions appears to be managed by providing larger—though not too large—equity incentives for CEO/chairmen. Finally, the authors investigated whether firm value is significantly related to firm‐level corporate governance as measured by a broad survey‐based index for a representative sample of Swiss firms. The results show a positive and significant relationship between the governance index and firm value—one that proves robust after controlling for a series of other governance mechanisms related to ownership structure and board characteristics as well as the possible “endogeneity” of these mechanisms.     

Postmodern Corporate Finance

One of the core tenets of modern finance theory is that corporations create value by producing operating rates of return on capital that are greater than the cost of capital. “Postmodern” corporate finance, while reaffirming the importance of earning an adequate return on capital, also attempts to restore at least part of the traditional corporate emphasis on top-line growth that prevailed before the intense focus on returns by modern shareholder value advocates. One important reason for the heightened emphasis on growth in addition to returns is that most rate-of-return measures used by companies and investors are based on conservative accounting practices that make old assets look more profitable than new ones, thereby discouraging investments in growth. This article introduces a new return measure called “Gross Business Return” that, when evaluated against a Required Return framework that reflects the level of current stock prices, has a stronger correlation with how companies are valued by the stock market. Moreover, in reviewing historical returns over time for both the market and specific industries, the author's research suggests that the market appears to demand considerably lower current returns than those implied by traditional weighted average cost of capital (WACC) approaches. And to the extent corporate executives rely on WACC, they could be passing up valuable growth opportunities. To help evaluate tradeoffs between growth and return, the author introduces a cash-based measure of corporate economic profit called Residual Cash Earnings. Unlike most traditional return and economic profit measures, Residual Cash Earnings, when expressed as a percentage of sales, provides a way for corporate managers to identify growth opportunities that, while producing current returns lower than WACC, are likely to add value over a multi-year time horizon. These new measures and analytical tools are suitable for strategic planning, budgeting, resource allocation, performance measurement, and rewards. Consistent application of these principles across these management processes provides a framework for constantly rebalancing the emphasis on growth and return to adapt to changes in the economy, industry, and competitive landscape.     

政府控制层级对公司价值的影响研究——基于A股上市公司的实证研究

中国特有的经济＂双轨制＂决定着上市公司受不同最终控制人的影响,由此造成不同控制性质的公司价值存在差异性。以2007-2011年中国所有A股上市公司作为研究样本,根据实际控制人性质将上市公司细分为非政府控制、县级政府控制、市级政府控制、省级政府控制以及中央政府控制这五种类型,实证分析了不同层级政府控制和非政府控制人对公司价值的影响。实证结果表明,相对于非政府控制上市公司,政府控制的上市公司价值更低,其中市级县级等低层级政府控制的上市公司价值更低。同时也发现政府控制的上市公司比例有显著性下降,说明中国经济主体转向非政府控制经济已初见成效。     

Underwriter Compensation and Corporate Monitoring

Studies suggest that underwriting syndicates provide marketing services and certify the fairness of offer prices. We argue that syndicate lead banks also monitor manager effort, increasing the value of capital-raising companies. A given level of monitoring is associated with a given level of intrinsic value, so there is a “schedule” of certifiable offer prices, depending on the level of monitoring. Monitoring, marketing, and certification are, therefore, all legitimate syndicate functions. New evidence supporting the conclusion that syndicates provide corporate monitoring is presented.     

公司社会责任履行对财务业绩的影响--基于发布企业社会责任报告下的研究

文章以2011～2012年披露企业社会责任报告的486家上市公司为样本,运用OLS回归方法,实证检验上市公司在发布企业社会责任报告的情况下,公司社会责任对财务业绩的影响。研究结果表明：上市公司多次发布企业社会责任报告能够促进公司财务业绩;公司履行社会责任能够直接促进公司财务业绩的提高;上市公司履行社会责任可以通过发布企业社会责任报告提高公司财务业绩。