Corporate social responsibility and social capital

When corporations make an effort to be socially responsible beyond what is required by the law, this effort is often described as strategic—made mainly for the shareholders’ or managers’ benefit. A large body of literature corroborates this belief. But, could the incentives for corporate social responsibility (CSR) come from an altruistic inclination fostered by the social capital of the region in which the firm is headquartered? We investigate whether this phenomenon exists by examining the association between the social capital in the region and the firm’s CSR. We find that a firm from a high social capital region exhibits higher CSR. This result suggests that the self-interest of shareholders or mangers does not explain all of the firm’s CSR, but the altruistic inclination from the region might also play a role.     

Corporate social responsibility and CEO confidence

This study examines the relationship between firm corporate social responsibility (CSR) and CEO confidence. Research shows that CSR has a hedging feature. Research also shows that more confident CEOs underestimate firm risks, which, in turn, leads them to undertake relatively less hedging. Consistent with this, we find that CEO confidence is negatively related to the level of CSR. Closer analysis shows that this effect is stronger in the institutional aspects of CSR, such as community and workforce diversity, rather than in the technical aspects of CSR, such as corporate governance and product quality. Our results are robust to different competing explanations, including narcissism, which refers in this context to CEOs who engage in CSR to attract attention and alternative proxies for CSR and CEO confidence.     

Corporate social responsibility and trade credit

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting - Prior studies show that higher corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance lowers firms’ cost of debt and equity financing. Using a...     

Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy

This study outlines and tests two corporate social responsibility (CSR) views of dividends. The first view argues that firms are likely to pay fewer dividends because CSR activities lower the cost of equity, encouraging firms to invest or hoard cash rather than to pay dividends. The second view suggests that CSR activities are positive NPV projects that increases earnings and hence dividend payouts. The first (second) view predicts that firms with a stronger involvement in CSR activities should be associated with a lower (higher) dividend payouts. The finding supports the second view and is robust.     

Corporate social responsibility and classification shifting

This study examines the relation between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm behavior to misclassify core expenses as special items in the income statement to inflate core earnings (i.e., classification shifting). We find that firms with good CSR performance (high-CSR firms) are less likely to engage in classification shifting than firms with poor CSR performance (low-CSR firms). We also find that high-CSR firms engage in less classification shifting even when they have greater incentives to meet earnings benchmarks. Overall, our results are consistent with the notion that socially responsible firms behave ethically in financial reporting.     

Corporate social responsibility and dividend policy

Using a sample of 22,839 US firm-year observations over the 1991–2012 period, we find that high CSR firms pay more dividends than low CSR firms. The analysis of individual components of CSR provides strong support for this main finding: five of the six individual dimensions are also associated with high dividend payout. When analyzing the stability of dividend payout, our results show that socially irresponsible firms adjust dividends more rapidly than socially responsible firms do: dividend payout is more stable in high CSR firms. These findings are robust to alternative assumptions and model specifications, alternative measures of dividend, additional control, and several approaches to address endogeneity. Overall, our results are consistent with the expectation that high CSR firms may use dividend policy to manage the agency problems related to overinvestment in CSR.     

Corporate social responsibility committees and the use of corporate social responsibility assurance services

This study examines whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) committees associate with the external assurance of CSR reports. Specifically, we consider the presence and effectiveness of CSR committees. Using a sample of Australian firms over the period 2004–2016, we show the mere presence of a CSR committee is not related to the external assurance of CSR. However, CSR committee effectiveness is positively related. In addition, firms with higher CSR committee effectiveness are more likely to seek external assurance provided by the Big4 accountancy firms and acquire financial audit and CSR assurance services from the same provider. Taken together, CSR committee effectiveness plays an active role in CSR assurance services. Our results are particularly relevant to those with interests in understanding the demand and choice of external CSR assurance services, as well as the impact of corporate governance mechanisms on these services.     

Corporate social responsibility and earnings forecasting unbiasedness

We investigate the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and I/B/E/S analysts’ earnings per share (EPS) forecasts using a large sample of US firms for 1992–2011. Based on literature findings, we decompose the CSR effect into four factors: accounting opacity, corporate governance, stakeholder risk, and overinvestment. We find that all of them significantly affect both the absolute forecast error on EPS and its standard deviation controlling for forecast horizon; number of analysts and forecasts; and year, industry, and broker house effects. Consistently with our ex ante hypotheses, overinvestment, stakeholder risk, and accounting opacity have a positive effect, increasing both dependent variables, while corporate governance quality has a negative effect. A crucial aspect of our findings is that high CSR quality in terms of the four factors (i.e., accounting transparency, high corporate governance quality, stakeholder risk mitigation, and absence of overinvestment) contributes to making earnings forecasts unbiased as unbiasedness is generally met in the subsample of the Top CSR quality companies and markedly violated in the subsample of the Bottom CSR companies. We also document that overinvestment and stakeholder risk are sufficient to produce this effect.     

Corporate social responsibility performance and information asymmetry

Using Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) performance scores from KLD STAT, we investigate whether CSR performance affects information asymmetry. We find that both positive and negative CSR performance reduce information asymmetry. Moreover, we find that the influence of negative CSR performance is much stronger than that of positive CSR performance in reducing information asymmetry. We also investigate the effect of informed investors on the CSR performance-asymmetry relation. We find that the negative association between CSR performance and bid-ask spread decreases for firms with a high level of institutional investors compared to those with a low level of institutional investors. This finding suggests that informed investors may exploit their CSR information advantage. Overall, our results suggest that CSR performance plays a positive role for investors by reducing information asymmetry and that regulatory action may be appropriate to mitigate the adverse selection problem faced by less-informed investors.     

Corporate social responsibility and bank liquidity creation

Under the stakeholder theory hypothesis, reputable corporate social responsibility (CSR) banks are expected to attract more loans and deposits, which in turn strengthens their ability to create liquidity. Our findings support this view. Further analyses reveal that the positive effect of CSR on liquidity creation differs depending on bank size, bank capital, and type of financial crisis. In addition, deposit growth, loan growth, lending rate, and funding rate are potential channels through which CSR influences bank liquidity creation. The findings are not driven by an endogeneity issue.     

Corporate social responsibility and provision of trade credit

In this article, we identify and examine three different views of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the relationship between CSR and firms’ provision of trade credit. The trust view of CSR argues that CSR and trade credit provision are related positively, because CSR, as a trust-enhancing device, complements the incomplete contract nature of trade credit. The CSR literature shows that CSR firms tend to have higher cash holdings. With this in mind, the precautionary motive view of CSR suggests that cash holdings serve as a hedge against trade credit risk, while, on the other hand, the substitution view of CSR predicts that cash hoarding discourages the provision of trade credit. Using a dataset of 20,591 firm-year observations from 1991 to 2015, we find strong evidence that supports both the trust and substitution views of CSR but not the precautionary view of CSR.     

Corporate social responsibility overinvestment in mergers and acquisitions

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been advocated by scholars and practitioners whereas overinvestment in CSR can destroy value. This paper investigates how CSR overinvestment influences firm value in the context of mergers and acquisitions (M&As). Specifically, we examine the shareholder wealth and financial performance of firms who bid on targets with CSR overinvestment. The results suggest that firms purchasing CSR-overinvesting targets experience significant declining market reactions to the M&A announcements and deteriorating financial performance following the M&A transactions. We further show significant improvement in CSR ratings and CEO pay among acquirers purchasing CSR-overinvesting targets. Moreover, the adverse effects of CSR-overinvesting targets on M&A outcomes are more pronounced for the acquiring firms with weak corporate governance or with retiring CEOs. Our findings suggest that a firm makes a value-destroying M&A with a CSR-overinvesting target probably for the benefit of improved CSR and CEO gains. This study provides evidence for the agency view of CSR investment in the context of M&As.     

Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder governance around the world

In this paper, we examine the impact of stakeholder governance on corporate social responsibility (CSR) around the world to determine whether CSR is employed as a mechanism to mitigate conflicts of interest between managers and diverse stakeholders, or used as managerial perquisites. To examine this relation properly, we not only employ a large and extensive sample of international firms, but also control for endogeneity by using dynamic panel generalized method of moments (GMM), propensity score matching, and difference-in-difference approach. Our results suggest that stakeholder governance positively influences firms’ CSR engagement with a greater magnitude than board governance after controlling for endogeneity and other confounding factors of traditional corporate governance mechanisms, firm characteristics and national factors. Stakeholders’ influence in CSR engagement is more prevalent when investor protections and board governance are relatively weak.     

Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder governance around the world

This paper examines the impact of stakeholder governance on corporate social responsibility (CSR) to determine whether CSR is employed as a mechanism to mitigate conflicts of interest between managers and diverse stakeholders, or used as managerial perquisites. To examine this relation properly, we not only employ an extensive sample of international firms, but also mitigate endogeneity by using various econometric methods. We find that stakeholder governance positively influences firms' CSR engagement with a greater magnitude than board governance after controlling for confounding factors. Stakeholders' influence in CSR engagement is more pronounced when investor protections and board governance are relatively weak.     

Corporate social responsibility culture and international M&As

We examine the role of corporate culture in M&As by utilizing a unique corporate social responsibility (CSR) dataset, providing in-depth information on multiple dimensions of organizational culture in 22 developed markets. In accordance with the prediction of the culture clash theory, a wider divergence between the CSR corporate cultures of the acquiring and target firms is associated with lower acquirer announcement and long-run returns as well as synergistic gains for the combined firm. Cultural misalignment also increases the time required to finalise a deal, reduces the likelihood of deal completion and the percentage of stock payment. Our results are robust to alternative explanations (e.g., similarities in national culture, acquirer CSR performance, institutional configurations), different regression specifications, and additional cultural misalignment measures. Our findings highlight the importance of the need for a deeper understanding of the role of CSR for the target selection process, integration planning, and financing choice of M&As to corporations and their investors.     

Corporate social responsibility as a common risk factor

This article challenges factor models widely used to explain stock returns. For European firms involved in corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions, we find a risk premium associated with extra-financial ratings priced by the market (that is, environmental, social, and governance [ESG] ratings). This premium is calculated as the excess return of low-rated firms compared to high-rated firms. To describe rated firms' returns, we propose a parsimonious two-factor model that includes both the market factor and this premium. Unlike the CAPM, three-, or five-factor models, our model is validated by the Gibbons, Ross and Shanken (1989) test. Our results lead to many managerial implications related to portfolio management, asset pricing, and corporate financial and investing decisions.     

Corporate social responsibility versus corporate shareholder responsibility: A family firm perspective

Recent literature suggests that some socially responsible corporate actions benefit shareholders while others do not. We study differences in policy toward corporate social responsibility (CSR) between family and non-family firms, using environmental performance as the proxy for CSR. We show that family firms are more responsible to shareholders than non-family firms in making environmental investments. When shareholder interests and societal interests coincide, i.e., when it comes to alleviating environmental concerns that have potential to harm society and elevate the firm's risk exposure, family firms do at least as well as non-family firms in protecting shareholder interests. However, when shareholder and societal interests diverge, i.e., when it comes to making environmental investments that might benefit society but do not benefit shareholders, family firms protect shareholder interests by undertaking a significantly lower level of such investments than non-family firms. Our findings suggest that lack of diversification by controlling families creates strong incentives for them to act in the financial interest of all shareholders, which more than overcomes any noneconomic benefits families may derive from engaging in social causes that do not benefit non-controlling shareholders.     

Smoke and mirrors: Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance

The bourgeoning corporate social responsibility literature has paid little attention to organised tax avoidance by companies even though it has real consequences for the life chances of millions of people. Companies legitimise their social credentials by making promises of responsible and ethical conduct, but organisational culture and practices have not necessarily been aligned with publicly espoused claims. This paper draws attention to the gaps between corporate talk, decisions and action, or what may be characterised as organised hypocrisy. Its persistence can become a liability and threaten the welfare of the company, its employees and its executives. The paper provides examples to show how companies, including major accountancy firms, make promises of responsible conduct, but indulge in tax avoidance and evasion. It also shows that the exposure of contradictions between talk and action has yielded negative outcomes.     

Corporate social responsibility and degrees of operating and financial leverage

We examine the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firms’ degrees of operating (DOL) and financial leverage (DFL). Combining the enlightened value maximizing and capital structure theories, we hypothesize that CSR as firms’ strategic choice to internalize the cost from implicit contracts between the firms and their non-investing stakeholders affects firms’ operating and financial leverage. We find empirical evidence that CSR and CSR strengths are positively (negatively) related to firms’ DOL (DFL). CSR concerns are positively related firms’ DOL and DFL. We also document that CSR is positively related to firms’ operating cost and we find evidence that CSR acts as a substitute for corporate debt tax shield when firms’ financial leverage is low.     

Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis

This study examines the association between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate tax aggressiveness. Based on a sample of 408 publicly listed Australian corporations for the 2008/2009 financial year, our regression results show that the higher the level of CSR disclosure of a corporation, the lower is the level of corporate tax aggressiveness. We find a negative and statistically significant association between CSR disclosure and tax aggressiveness which holds across a number of different regression model specifications, thus more socially responsible corporations are likely to be less tax aggressive in nature. Finally, the regression results from our additional analysis indicate that the social investment commitment and corporate and CSR strategy (including the ethics and business conduct) of a corporation are important elements of CSR activities that have a negative impact on tax aggressiveness.