最終財廠商的ESG對廠商利潤的影響

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：9

、訪客IP：3.128.173.223

姓名

劉佩怡(Pei-Yi Liu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

產業經濟研究所

論文名稱

最終財廠商的ESG對廠商利潤的影響

相關論文

★ 金控業投入ESG之財務績效關聯性研究

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)

在生產最終財的過程中會產生污染是很常見的，廠商須肩負「環境–社會–治理」更逐漸成為常態，因此本論文將建立一最終財廠商的連續雙占垂直相關市場模型包含上游中間財與下游，來探討當最終財廠商具備ESG企業社會責任而關心其生產活動造成的環境損害時，廠商決策對最終財廠商其自身及上游中間財廠商的產量、利潤，中間財與最終財市場價格的影響，特別是關心廠商利潤會如何受到廠商ESG責任的影響。

本論文的理論模型結果發現，在上下游均為雙占的市場中，若兩廠商關心環境的ESG程度不相同，則當一最終財廠商有更高ESG程度更關心環境時，該廠商會自發性減產，利潤則同步減少，對手廠商則會因而增產，且利潤增加，最終財總產量則會減少，價格提高。當最終財廠商因關心環境減產，會使上游中間財廠商的需求同步減少，中間財廠商則會因此減產，其利潤也同步減少；中間財的價格則會因中間財市場規模變小而降低。

從另一個角度，在相同的產業文化下，同產業的廠商關心環境損害的程度是相似的，因此我們在另一模型假設二最終財廠商關心環境損害的程度是相同的。結果發現，若下游廠商關心環境的程度很低，且單位環境損害不會太大時，兩廠商皆會因關心環境而減產並產生勾結效果，使得市場價格上升，兩廠商的利潤均會提高，且此時的利潤亦高於傳統模式；若單位環境損害變大，則利潤先升後降，可能大於或小於傳統追求利潤最大化下的利潤，取決於環境損害的大小；若單位環境損害很大，則當廠商只要更關心環境時，就會導致利潤減少且較傳統模式下來的少。

本論文探討了許多當最終財廠商開始關心環境並重視ESG時，對上下游廠商的產量及利潤有何等影響，亦探討在哪些情況下可能產生勾結效果，哪些情況下會造成利潤上升與降低，希望可以就不同的面向來補足關於ESG對廠商收益影響的探討。

摘要(英)

Environmental pollution is a common byproduct in the production of final goods. This study establishes a theoretical Cournot quantity competition model under a duopoly market structure to examine the impact of “environment– social – governance (ESG) “ —specifically when firms consider the environmental harm caused by their production, the output and profits of final goods firms and their upstream intermediate goods suppliers, as well as on the prices in both markets.
The findings reveal that in a duopoly market, when one final goods firm adopts ESG principles and begins to address environmental concerns, it voluntarily reduces its output, leading to a decline in its profits. Conversely, its competitor increases output and sees an increase in profits. As a result, the total output of final goods decreases. The reduction in output by the environmentally conscious firm also lowers its demand for intermediate goods, prompting upstream firms to reduce their production and experience a decrease in profits. The intermediate goods market price falls due to the contraction of market size.
In another model, assuming that both final goods firms share a similar level of concern for environmental harm under a common industry culture, the results vary depending on the level of concern. If the firms’ environmental concern is low and the per-unit environmental damage is minimal, both firms reduce output, resulting in a collusive effect that drives market prices higher and increases profits for both firms. Under such conditions, profits surpass those of the traditional profit-maximization model. However, as per-unit environmental damage increases, profits first rise and then fall, which may be greater or less than traditional profits, depending on the extent of the damage. When environmental damage is severe, increased environmental concern leads to profit declines below traditional levels.
This study explores the impact of ESG adoption by final goods firms on the output and profits of upstream and downstream firms and identifies conditions under which collusive effects arise, as well as when profits increase or decrease. The findings aim to provide a comprehensive perspective on how ESG considerations influence corporate profitability.

關鍵字(中)

★ 環境-社會-治理
★ 中間財
★ 最終財
★ 利潤
★ 勾結效果

關鍵字(英)

★ environment– social – governance (ESG)
★ final goods
★ intermediate goods
★ profits
★ collusive effect

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝辭 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 v
1 第1章　前言 1
1.1 研究動機與目的 1
1.2 研究方法 3
1.3 論文架構 4
2 第二章　文獻回顧 5
2.1 CSR或ESG表現對企業的影響 5
2.2 實行ESG對企業財務績效的影響 6
2.3 ESG在不同市場結構下對企業財務績效的影響 8
2.4 本章小結 9
3 第三章　基本模型 10
3.1 模型設定 10
3.2 廠商決策與市場均衡 11
4 第四章　ESG下的市場均衡 15
4.1 模型設定 15
4.2 下游廠商市場均衡 16
4.3 上游廠商市場均衡 20
5 第五章　結論 30
6 參考文獻 32

參考文獻

中文文獻
丁裕家、陳勤忠、陳飛帆 (2021) 從企業成長觀點探討社會責任績效之價值創造，《管理學報》，38 (1)，81–105。
王馨培 (2023)《ESG績效對公司財務績效及經營價值之影響 — 以臺灣為例》，朝陽科技大學會計研究所碩士論文。
陳立瑩 (2022)《ESG因子與公司財務績效之探討》，國立臺北商業大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
湯偉宏（2020）《企業投入ESG效益之研究 — 以總體經濟、機構投資人探討》，國立政治大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。

英文文獻
Afum, E., Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., Sun, Z., Frimpong, B., Kusi, L. Y., and Acquah, I. S. K. (2020) Exploring the link between green manufacturing, operational competitiveness, firm reputation and sustainable performance dimensions: a mediated approach, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 31(7), 1417–1438.

Barauskaite, G. and Streimikiene, D. (2021) Corporate social responsibility and financial performance of companies: The puzzle of concepts, definitions and assessment methods, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(1), 278–287.

Cai, Z., Qian, M., and Wang, L. (2023) Comprehensive ESG score and financial performance of carbon-neutral concept enterprises-based on entropy weight-TOPSIS and Grey relational analysis, Open Journal of Business and Management, 11(1), 133–148.

Correia-da-Silva, J. and Pinho, J. (2018) Collusion in mixed oligopolies and the coordinated effects of privatization, Journal of Economics, 124, 19–55.

Farza, K., Ftiti, Z., Hlioui, Z., Louhichi, W., and Omri, A. (2021) Does it pay to go green? The environmental innovation effect on corporate financial performance, Journal of Environmental Management, 300, 113695.

Freeman, R. E. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman.

Friede, G., Busch, T., and Bassen, A. (2015) ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233.

Friedman, M. (2007) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits, in Zimmerli, W.C., Holzinger, M., and Richter, K. (Eds), Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance (pp. 173–178). Springer.

Hiroaki, K. and Masatoshi, T. (2022) Effects of firm-Level ESG performance on creditworthiness in Japanese listed companies, International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, 16(1), 465–489.

Hart, S. L. and Ahuja, G. (1996) Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between emission reduction and firm performance, Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(1), 30-37.

Jinji, N. (2013) Is corporate environmentalism good for domestic welfare? Review of International Economics, 21(5), 901-911.

Lambertini, L. and Tampieri, A. (2015) Incentives, performance and desirability of socially responsible firms in a Cournot oligopoly. Economic Modelling, 50, 40–48.

Pursiainen, V., Sun, H., and Xiang, Y. (2023) Market competition hurts firm’s ESG performance, ProMarket.

Ruan, L. and Liu, H. (2021) Environmental, social, governance activities and firm performance: Evidence from China, Sustainability, 13(2), 1–16.

Sachin, N. and Rajesh, R. (2022) An empirical study of supply chain sustainability with financial performances of Indian firms, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24, 6577–6601.

Wang, C. (2021) Monopoly with corporate social responsibility, product differentiation, and environmental R&D: Implications for economic, environmental, and social sustainability, Journal of Cleaner Production, 287 125433.

Xie, J., Nozawa, W., Yagi, M., Fujii, H. and Managi, S (2018) Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 286–300.

Younis, H., Sundarakani, B. and Vel, P. (2016) The impact of implementing green supply chain management practices on corporate performance, Competitiveness Review, 26(3), 216–245.

指導教授

邱俊榮鄭有為(Jiunn-Rong Chiou Yu-Wei Cheng)

審核日期

2025-1-13

推文