責任型投資與短視近利：以台灣為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：60

、訪客IP：3.133.156.201

姓名

孫妙函(Miao-han Sun) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

財務金融學系

論文名稱

責任型投資與短視近利：以台灣為例
(Socially responsible investment and managerial myopic behaviors: A case of Taiwan)

相關論文

★ 以資料包絡線分析法評估國內金融機構之經營效率	★ 我國企業員工行為守則分析--以新光金控為例
★ 理財專員的專業倫理探討	★ 證券投資信託業倫理議題的探討
★ 台資企業赴海外籌資之探討─以富士康科技個案為例	★ 大陸台商融資管道與操作模式分析-以個案企業為例
★ 本土銀行從事財富管理業務之現況與前景探討	★ 我國銀行業經營致勝的關鍵因素：公司治理、風險管理及競爭優勢的觀點
★ 新版巴賽爾協定下信用風險對中小企業授信行為之探討	★ 臺灣公司治理之探討-以銀行業為例
★ 以投資型保險作退休理財規劃	★ 連動債投資風險探討--C銀行一年期高收益型連動債個案研究
★ 信用評等機制與次級房貸危機	★ 私募股權基金之研究
★ 世代金融危機的比較:一九三○年代經濟大蕭條與二○○八年金融危機	★ 另類投資及其在資產配置中的地位

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

公司面對股東提升短期股價的壓力，制定與公司短期股價表現相連的薪酬制度，及機構投資人過度重視公司短期績效，都可能促使公司經理人短視近利，因過度追求短期盈餘而犧牲長期價值。在企業社會責任的國際趨勢下，所興起的社會責任型投資，是藉由在投資決策的過程中，將企業對環境、社會及公司治理的關懷納入重要考量的一種投資方式，強調在投資時，重視公司長期價值，不短視近利，以促進股東長期利益，從而改善公司經理人短視近利的情況。
本文欲探討台灣社會責任型投資基金是否真有別於一般共同基金把重點放在短期盈餘，而較重視公司長期價值。更具體地，本文利用CAPM、三因子模型及四因子模型，比較社會責任型投資基金與一般共同基金的績效表現是否有所差異，及其短視近利程度的高低。
實證結果顯示，台灣社會責任型投資基金在挑選成分股時，會較重視公司長期價值，而一般共同基金則較重視短期盈餘。相較而言，一般共同基金較短視近利，但就風險調整後的財務績效表現而言，兩者則無明顯差異。

摘要(英)

This paper explores whether a myopia phenomenon exhibits in Taiwan’s socially responsible investment (SRI) mutual funds. Myopia as an overweighting of a firm’s expected short-term earnings and an underweighting of expected long-term earnings. Socially responsible investment concerns about social, environmental and corporate governance (ESG) issues and it takes into account both the investors needs and investment’s impact on society. It is interests in long-term oriented investment strategies that include sustainability investing. Using socially responsible investment strategies can improve the degree of myopia phenomenon.
We would like to examine do the socially responsible investment mutual funds choose its component stocks depending on their long-term value instead of short-term earnings. On the other hand, whether non-SRI mutual funds are concern about a firm’s short-term earnings and exhibit a myopia phenomenon? In addition, we apply CAPM, three-factor model and four-factor model to examine the difference of financial performances between SRI and non-SRI mutual funds. And use a myopia proxy variable to explore the degree of myopia.
Our empirical results show that SRI mutual funds pay more attention on long-term value. Non-SRI mutual funds exhibit a myopia phenomenon. By comparison, non-SRI mutual funds are more myopic than SRI funds. Also, there is no significant difference of financial performance between these two kinds of mutual funds.

關鍵字(中)

★ 短視近利
★ 責任型投資

關鍵字(英)

★ myopia
★ socially responsible investment

論文目次

第壹章　緒論 1
第一節研究背景與動機 1
第二節研究目的 4
第貳章　文獻探討 6
第一節短視近利 6
第二節企業社會責任 9
第三節責任型投資 13
第參章　研究設計 19
第一節研究假說 19
第二節樣本說明、篩選與資料來源 21
第三節研究方法 26
第肆章　實證結果分析 34
第一節敘述統計量分析 34
第二節責任型投資與短視近利之關聯 40
第三節責任型投資與短視近利、財務績效表現之關聯 44
第伍章　研究結論與限制 49
第一節研究結論 49
第二節研究限制 51
參考文獻 53

參考文獻

一、英文文獻
1. Abarbanell, J. & Bernard, V. (2000). Is the U.S. stock market myopic? Journal of Accounting Research 38 (Autumn), 221–42.
2. Banz, R. W. (1981). The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of financial Economics, 9, 3-18.
3. Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2006). Beyond dichotomy: the curvilinear relationship between social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11), 1101-1122.
4. Barton, D. (2011). Capitalism for the long term. Harvard Business Review, 89(3), 84-91.
5. Bauer, R., Koedijk, K., & Otten, R. (2005). International evidence on ethical mutual fund performance and investment style. Journal of Banking & Finance, 29(7), 1751-1767.
6. Bushee, B. J. (2001). Do institutional investors prefer near-term earnings over long-run value? Contemporary Accounting Research, 18(2), 207-246.
7. Carhart, M. M. (1997). On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of financial, 52 ,57-82.
8. Consolandi, Jaiswal-Dale, Poggiani & Vercelli. (2009). Global standards and ethical stock indices：The case of the DJSSI. Journal of Business Ethics, 87,185-197.
9. Copeland, T., Dolgoff, A. & Moel, A. (2004). The role of expectations in explaining the cross-section of stock returns. Review of Accounting Studies, 9, 149-188.
10. Diltz, JD. (1995). The private cost of socially responsible investing. Applied Financial Economics 5, 69–77.
11. Edmans. (2011). Does the Stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 101, 621-640.
12. Guerard, JB. (1997). Is there a cost to being socially responsible in investing? Journal of Investing, 6(2), 11-18.
13. Hamilton, S. & Statman, M. (1993). Doing well while doing good? The investment performance of socially responsible mutual funds. Financial Analysts Journal, 49(6), 62–66.
14. Hong, H. & Kacperczyk, M. (2009). The price of sin: The effects of social norms on markets. Journal of Financial Economics ,93,15–36.
15. Jacobs, M. (1991). Short-term America: The causes and cures of our business myopia.　 Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
16. Juravle, C. & Lewis, A. (2008). Identifying impediments to SRI in Europe: a review of the practitioner and academic literature. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(3), 285-310.
17. Krehmeyer, D., Orsagh, M. & Schacht, K.N. (2006). Breaking the short-term cycle: discussion and recommendations on how corporate leaders, asset managers, investors and analysts can refocus on long-term value. CFA Centre Publications. Available at: http://www.cfapubs.org/toc/ccb/2006/2006/1
18. Laverty, K. (1996). Economic “short-termism”: The debate, the unresolved issues, and the implications for management practice and research. Academy of Management Review, 21 (6), 825–60.
19. Lindblom, C. (1994). The Implications of Organizational Legitimacy for Corporate Social Performance and Disclosure. Paper Presented at the Critical Perspective on Accounting Conference, New York.
20. Lev, B. (2011). How to win investors over. Harvard Business Review, 97(11), 1-10.
21. Liu, J. & Thomas, J. (2000). Stocks returns and accounting earnings. Journal of Accounting Research, 38, 71-101.
22. Louche, C & Lydenberg, S. (2010). Responsible Investing. Finance Ethic.393-434.
23. Luck, C, & Pilotte, N. (1993). Domini Social Index performance. Journal of Investing, 2, 60-62.
24. Lydenberg, S. & Sinclair, G. (2009). Mainstream or Daydream? The future for responsible investing. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 33, 47-67.
25. McKinsey & Company. (2006). Weighing the pros and cons of earnings guidance: a McKinsey survey. McKinsey Quarterly, March.
26. McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (2011). Corporate social responsibility：A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 50(1), 6-27.
27. Porter, M. (1992). Capital choices: Changing the way America invests in industry. Boston: Council on Competitiveness/Harvard Business School.
28. Reinganum, M. R. (1981). A new empirical perspective on the CAPM. Journal of Financial, 16, 439-462.
29. Robinson, M., Kleffner, A., & Bertels, S. (2011). Signaling sustainability leadership：Empirical evidence of the value of DJSI membership. Journal of Business Ethics,101, 493-505.
30. Statman, M. (2000). Socially responsible mutual funds. Financial Analysts Journal,56(3), 30–39.
31. Teper, J. (1992). Evaluating the cost of socially responsible investing. In The Social Investment Almanac. Henry Holt: New York, 340–349.
32. Zadek, S., Merme, M. and Samans, R. (2005). Mainstreaming responsible investment. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
二、中文文獻
1.邱慈觀（2011），中華企業倫理教育協進會教研心得分享會第六次。
2.邱慈觀（2011），中華企業倫理教育協進會教研心得分享會第七次。
3.邱慈觀（2011），中華企業倫理教育協進會教研心得分享會第八次。
4.邱佳眉（2012），社會責任投資與短視近利，國立台北大學金融與合作經濟學系碩士論文。
三、參考網站
1.GRI官方網站http://www.globalreporting.org/Home
2.ISO官方網站http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html
3.台灣企業永續發展協會 http://www.bcsd.org.tw/index.htm
4.台灣企業社會責任協會 http://www.csrtaiwan.org/index.php
5.聯合國全球盟約網站http://www.unglobalcompact.org/

指導教授

邱慈觀

審核日期

2013-7-4

推文