| 2,278 | 8 | 385 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
作为绿色发展和低碳转型的实施主体，制造业企业绿色责任承担是制造业高质量发展的基础，也是践行新发展理念的重要抓手。本文从产业链的新视角阐释绿色责任的理论内涵，基于“上游–生产–下游”三个维度构建制造业企业绿色责任的识别框架，选择结构方程模型验证性因素分析作为测算方法，并以2008—2022年制造业上市公司为样本，通过内容分析法提取社会责任报告内关键词蕴含的有效信息，对制造业企业绿色责任加以测算和比较分析。研究发现，我国制造业企业绿色责任指数总体呈现稳步上升态势，生产环节和下游绿色责任指数较高，上游绿色责任承担不足；从空间异质性角度看，表现为企业绿色责任由东部沿海向中西部地区逐步减弱的特征，以长江经济带“生态优先”为代表的偏向性环境规制政策是绿色责任空间异质性的驱动因素。本文丰富了构建企业绿色责任评价指标体系的理论与方法，为推动制造业绿色升级提供重要借鉴。
Abstract：As the implementer subject of green development and low-carbon transformation, the green responsibility of manufacturing enterprises is the basis of high-quality development of manufacturing industry, and also an important starting point to practice the new development philosophy. This paper explains the theoretical connotation of green responsibility from a new perspective of the industrial chain,builds an identification framework for green responsibility of manufacturing enterprises based on the dimensions of “upstream-production-downstream”, selects confirmatory factor analysis of structural equation model as the measurement method, and takes the listed manufacturing companies from 2008 to 2022 as samples. The effective information contained in the key words of the social responsibility report is extracted by the content analysis method, and the green responsibility of manufacturing enterprises is calculated and compared. The results showed that the overall green responsibility index of Chinese manufacturing enterprises shows a steady increase, the production link and downstream green responsibility index is high, but the upstream green responsibility is insufficient; In terms of spatial differentiation, it is shown that it gradually decreases from the eastern coastal areas to the central and western regions, and the biased environmental regulation policy represented by the “ecological priority” of the Yangtze River Economic Belt is the driving factor of spatial heterogeneity of green responsibility. This paper enriches the theory and methodology of constructing the evaluation index system of enterprise green responsibility, which provides an important reference for promoting the green upgrading of manufacturing industry.
[1]陈劲,阳镇,朱子钦.“十四五”时期“卡脖子”技术的破解:识别框架、战略转向与突破路径[J].改革, 2020(12):5–15.
[2]杜雯翠,牛海鹏,张平淡.企业产权多元化对环境污染的门槛效应检验[J].财贸经济, 2017(12):145–158.
[3]冯俊诚.所有制、迁移成本与环境管制——来自重庆微观企业的经验证据[J].财贸经济, 2017(4):21–36.
[4]姜广省,卢建词,李维安.绿色投资者发挥作用吗?——来自企业参与绿色治理的经验研究[J].金融研究, 2021(5):117–134.
[5]贺立龙,朱方明,陈中伟.企业环境责任界定与测评:环境资源配置的视角[J].管理世界, 2014(3):180–181.
[6]黄溶冰,谢晓君,周卉芬.企业漂绿的“同构”行为[J].中国人口·资源与环境, 2020(11):139–150.
[7]李青原,肖泽华.异质性环境规制工具与企业绿色创新激励——来自上市企业绿色专利的证据[J].经济研究, 2020(9):192–208.
[8]李维安,张耀伟,郑敏娜,等.中国上市公司绿色治理及其评价研究[J].管理世界, 2019(5):126–133.
[9]李小荣,徐腾冲.环境–社会责任–公司治理研究进展[J].经济学动态, 2022(8):133–146.
[10]李哲,王文翰.“多言寡行”的环境责任表现能否影响银行信贷获取——基于“言”和“行”双维度的文本分析[J].金融研究, 2021(12):116–132.
[11]梁上坤,赵美涛,张丽.固定资产加速折旧政策与企业环境社会责任表现[J].统计研究, 2024, 41(6):99–109.
[12]刘畅,张景华.环境责任、企业性质与企业税负[J].财贸研究, 2020(9):64–75.
[13]刘啟仁,陈恬.出口行为如何影响企业环境绩效[J].中国工业经济, 2020(1):99–117.
[14]罗进辉,王雨婷,刘海潮. ESG表现与家族企业长期导向[J].财贸研究, 2023, 34(2):78–96.
[15]潘健平,翁若宇,潘越.企业履行社会责任的共赢效应——基于精准扶贫的视角[J].金融研究, 2021(7):134–153.
[16]宋马林,王舒鸿.环境规制、技术进步与经济增长[J].经济研究, 2013(3):122–134.
[17]苏丹妮,盛斌.服务业外资开放如何影响企业环境绩效——来自中国的经验[J].中国工业经济, 2021(6):61–79.
[18]万攀兵,陈林.环保税能推动我国经济发展与环境保护实现双赢吗?——最低税率与实现路径[J].统计研究, 2023, 40(8):32–45.
[19]谢芳,李俊青.环境风险影响商业银行贷款定价吗?——基于环境责任评分的经验分析[J].财经研究, 2019(11):57–69.
[20]叶飞,张婕.绿色供应链管理驱动因素、绿色设计与绩效关系[J].科学学研究, 2010(8):1230–1239.
[21]曾萍,肖静.长江经济带发展战略能否提升地区绿色创新能力——基于准自然实验的证据[J].统计研究, 2023, 40(6):91–104.
[22] Berg F, Koelbel J F, Rigobon R. Aggregate Confusion:The Divergence of ESG Ratings[J]. Review of Finance, 2022, 26(6):1315–1344.
[23] Chuang S P, Huang S J. The Effect of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility on Environmental Performance and Business Competitiveness:The Mediation of Green Information Technology Capital[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, 150:991–1009.
[24] Elmagrhi M H, Ntim C G, Elamer A A, et al. A Study of Environmental Policies and Regulations, Governance Structures, and Environmental Performance:The Role of Female Directors[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2019, 28(1):206–220.
[25] Homroy S, Slechten A. Do Board Expertise and Networked Boards Affect Environmental Performance?[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2019,158:269–292.
[26] Nguyen T H H, Elmagrhi M H, Ntim C G, et al. Environmental Performance, Sustainability, Governance and Financial Performance:Evidence from Heavily Polluting Industries in China[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2021, 30(5):2313–2331.
[27] Ruf B M, Muralidhar K, Brown R M, et al. An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Change in Corporate Social Performance and Financial Performance:A Stakeholder Theory Perspective[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2001, 32:143–156.
[28] Wang R, Wijen F, Heugens P P. Government’s Green Grip:Multifaceted State Influence on Corporate Environmental Actions in China[J].Strategic Management Journal, 2018, 39(2):403–428.
[29] Wei Z, Shen H, Zhou K Z, et al. How does Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility Matter in a Dysfunctional Institutional Environment?Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2017, 140:209–223.
(1)为保证潜变量的路径系数可估计，需要做尺度约束，通常约束第一个变量系数为1。模型中各个测量指标的随机误差项及潜变量残差项用符号e标出。
(1)因篇幅所限，企业策略性行为关键词词库以附表1展示，见《统计研究》网站所列附件。下同。
(2)因篇幅所限，模型拟合优度检验以附表2展示。
(1)本文样本中，八大经济区包括东北（辽宁、吉林、黑龙江）、北部沿海（北京、天津、河北、山东）、东部沿海（上海、江苏、浙江）、南部沿海（福建、广东、海南）、黄河中游（陕西、山西、河南、内蒙古）、长江中游（湖北、湖南、江西、安徽）、西南（云南、贵州、四川、重庆、广西）、西北（甘肃、青海、宁夏、西藏、新疆）。划分依据参考https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2004-06-05/03462720344s.shtml。
(1)https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2016-01/07/content_5031289.htm。
(2)长江经济带区域覆盖上海、江苏、浙江、安徽、江西、湖北、湖南、重庆、四川、云南、贵州11个省份。
(3)因篇幅所限，产业链视角下的不同区域环境规制政策导向下的企业绿色责任指数以附图1展示。
基本信息:
DOI：10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2024.10.006
中图分类号:X322;F425;F270
引用信息:
[1]李明珊,孙晓华,罗佳宁.产业链视角下制造业企业的绿色责任——识别框架、测度方法与比较研究[J].统计研究,2024,41(10):87-97.DOI:10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2024.10.006.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金青年项目“‘双链’梗阻下区域科技创新中心的创新生态培育路径与治理机制研究”（22CGL057）
2024-10-25
2024-10-25