随着我国资本市场的不断开放和发展，境外机构投资者在国内沪深 A 股市场上的持股数量和比例不断攀升，对拓宽企业资金来源、改善企业治理等方面发挥着重要的作用。在目前国内“碳中和”和“碳达峰”的“双碳”目标背景下，许多机构投资者加强了对沪深 A 股上市公司 ESG 的关注，尤其是更早接触和熟悉 ESG 概念的境外机构投资者，从而更好地实现其责任投资与价值投资的目的。

本文基于 2017 至 2021 年沪深 A 股上市公司的面板数据,引入包含了合格境外机构投资者（QFII）和陆股通的境外机构投资者持股信息，深入研究了境外机构投资者与企业 ESG 之间的关系。研究结果表明：境外机构投资者持股会显著促进企业 ESG绩效，并且持股比例越高，对于企业 ESG 绩效的促进作用越好，但是换作境内机构投资者持股时，该结论并不成立。进一步研究发现，不同股权性质、不同行业性质企业中的境外机构投资者持股，对企业 ESG 绩效的影响存在显著的差异。从企业股权性质角度分析，尽管境外机构投资者持股行为对于国有企业和非国有企业 ESG 绩效的促进作用均显著，但是相较于非国有企业，境外机构投资者持股行为对于国有企业的 ESG 绩效的促进作用更好，而随着持股比例的提高，它对于非国有企业 ESG 绩效的边际提升作用相较于国有企业更好。细分股权性质后发现，境外机构投资者持股比例的提高对国有企业、民营企业以及外资企业 ESG 绩效的边际提升均有显著影响，其中对于中央国有企业和外资企业 ESG 绩效的促进作用更好。从行业性质角度分析，相较于非高污染企业，境外机构投资者持股行为对高污染企业 ESG 绩效的影响程度更强，但随着持股比例的提升，它对于非高污染企业 ESG 绩效的促进作用相较于高污染企业更好。此外，本文研究发现企业绿色创新在境外机构投资者对企业 ESG 绩效影响的路径中还发挥了部分中介作用。

本研究结论有助于理清境外机构投资者对企业 ESG 绩效的影响效果，为促进资本市场进一步开放，引导企业实现绿色化转型提供了参考。

With the continuous opening and development of China's capital market, the number and proportion of shares held by foreign institutional investors in the domestic A-share market have been increasing, playing an important role in broadening the sources of corporate capital and improving corporate governance structure. In the context of the "carbon neutral" and "carbon peak" targets in China, many institutional investors have strengthened their attention to ESG of domestic A-share listed companies,especially foreign institutional investors who are familiar with the concept of ESG earlier, so as to better realize their purpose of responsibility investment and value investment.

Based on the panel data of Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2017 to 2021, this paper introduces the shareholding information of foreign institutional investors including qualified foreign institutional investors (QFII) and Lugutong, and deeply investigates the relationship between foreign institutional investors and enterprise ESG. The results show that the shareholding of foreign institutional investors will significantly promote the ESG performance of enterprises, and the higher the shareholding ratio, the better the promotion of ESG performance.But the findings do not hold when the shareholding of local institutional investors is changed. Further research found that there is a significant difference in the impact on ESG performance of firms with different equity and industry characteristics when they are held by foreign institutional investors. although the shareholding behavior of foreign institutional investors contributes significantly to the ESG performance of both SOEs and non-SOEs, the ESG performance of SOEs is better promoted by the shareholding behavior of foreign institutional investors than that of non-SOEs, and it has a better marginal enhancement effect on the ESG performance of non-SOEs compared to SOEs as the shareholding ratio increases.The specific breakdown of the nature of equity reveals that the increase in the shareholding of foreign institutional investors has a significant effect on the marginal improvement of ESG performance of SOEs, private firms and foreign firms, with a better effect on the ESG performance of central SOEs and foreign firms. Analyzed from the perspective of industry nature, the shareholding behavior of foreign institutional investors has a stronger impact on the ESG performance of highly polluting firms compared to non-highly polluting firms, but as the shareholding ratio increases, it has a better effect on the ESG performance of non-highly polluting firms compared to highly polluting firms. In addition, this study found that green innovation also played a part of intermediary role in the path of the foreign institutional investors’ influence on enterprise ESG performance.

The conclusion of this study is helpful to clarify the effect and path of the impact of foreign institutional investors on the ESG performance of enterprises, and provides a reference for promoting the further opening of the capital market and guiding enterprises to achieve green transformation.

[1]DAVIS E P., STEIL B. Institutional Investors[M].Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press, 2001
[2]MONKS, ROBERT AG, NELL MINOW. Corporate governance[M]. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[3]申尊焕. 机构投资治理与中国的实践[M].西安: 西安电子科技大学出版社, 2019.
[4]钟覃琳,陆正飞.资本市场开放能提高股价信息含量吗?——基于“沪港通”效应的实证检验[J].管理世界, 2018,(1):169-179.
[5]钟凯,孙昌玲,王永妍,王化成.资本市场对外开放与股价异质性波动——来自“沪港通”的经验证据[J].金融研究, 2018(07):174-192.
[6]刘海飞,柏巍,李冬昕,许金涛.沪港通交易制度能提升中国股票市场稳定性吗?——基于复杂网络的视角[J].管理科学学报, 2018, 21(01):97-110.
[7]连立帅,朱松,陈超.资本市场开放与股价对企业投资的引导作用:基于沪港通交易制度的经验证据[J].中国工业经济, 2019(03):100-118.
[8]GRINBLATT M, KELOHARJU M. The investment behavior and performance of various investor types: a study of Finland's unique data set[J]. Journal of financial economics, 2000, 55(1): 43-67.
[9]BAE K H , OZOGUZ A , TAN H , et al. Do foreigners facilitate information transmission in emerging markets?[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2012, 105(1):209-227.
[10]AGGARWAL R , EREL I , FERREIRA M , et al. Does Governance Travel around the World? Evidence from Institutional Investors[J]. Working Paper Series, 2009, 100(1):154-181.
[11]OLTRA V , JEAN M S. Sectoral systems of environmental innovation: An applicationto the French automotive industry[J]. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2009, 76(4):567-583.
[12]Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Eco-innovation in indu-stry – enabling green growth[EB/OL]. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/62/0,3746,de_34968570_34968855_44452670_1_1_1_1,00.html.[2023-03-15]
[13]SCHIEDERIG T , TIETZE F , HERSTATT C. Green innovation in technology and innovation management – an exploratory literature review[J]. R & D Management, 2012, 42(2):180-192.
[14]HORBACH J, KLAUS R. Environmental innovation and employment dynamics in different technology fields – an analysis based on the German Community Innovation Survey 2009[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013, 57(20):158.
[15]董炳艳,靳乐山.中国绿色技术创新研究进展初探[J].科技管理研究, 2005(02):62-64.
[16]陈强,徐凯.中国区域可持续创新效率影响因素[J].同济大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 51(03):452-461.
[17]FREEMAN R E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach[M]. Cambridg University Press, 1984.
[18]尹海员,朱旭.机构投资者信息挖掘、羊群行为与股价崩盘风险[J].管理科学学报, 2022, 25(02):69-88.
[19]戴鹏毅,杨胜刚,张少勇,袁礼.外资机构持股能提升股票定价效率吗？——来自A股纳入明晟新兴市场指数的经验证据[J].证券市场导报, 2022(08):60-69.
[20]BERLE A A , MEANS G.The Modern Corporation And Private Property[J]. The Economic Journal, 1969, 20(6).
[21]JENSEN M C , MECKLING W H. Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure[J]. Springer Netherlands, 1979, 3(4):305-360.
[22]ARROW K J. The Economics of Agency[J]. principals & agents the structure of business,1984.
[23]戴中亮.委托代理理论述评[J].商业研究,2004(19):98-100.
[24]王慧霞,李伟红,杨淑君.基于委托代理理论的企业所有者与经理人合作决策模型[J].河北大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2010, 35(03):112-114.
[25]黄文青.境外股持股对大股东利益侵占约束[J].财经理论与实践(双月刊), 2014(189):49-54.
[26]唐国平,李龙会,吴德军.环境管制、行业属性与公司环保投资[J]. 会计研究, 2013(6):83-89
[27]严泽琳,白斯琴,陈钦.QFII持股对企业社会责任的影响研究[J].当代经济, 2016(05):119-122.
[28]霍远,陶圆,景国文.合格境外机构投资者影响了企业避税行为吗[J].金融监管研究, 2022(07):95-114.
[29]李志辉,陈海龙.QFII持股能抑制股票市场操纵吗?——基于尾市价格偏离模型的检验[J].中央财经大学学报, 2022(08):43-56.
[30]刘贝贝,李春涛.合格境外机构投资者与公司盈余管理[J].管理科学, 2022,35(02):97-110.
[31]庄明明,梁权熙.境外机构投资者能促进企业投资效率提升吗?[J].世界经济研究, 2021(02):102-117+136.
[32]张浩,陶伦琛.境外投资者持股与环境信息披露：来自上市公司的实证分析[J].世界经济研究, 2022(07):105-119+137.
[33]许光清,吴静怡.碳信息披露与资本市场开放——基于沪港通与深港通的实践检验[J/OL].气候变化研究进展:1-15[2023-03-13]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5368.P.20221202.1044.001.html
[34]李志辉,金波.股票市场开放能否抑制上市公司的内幕交易行为——来自沪港通的经验证据[J].东岳论丛, 2022,43(10):135-151+192.
[35]赵东,王爱群,闫盼盼.资本市场开放与超额在职消费——基于“陆港通”的准自然实验[J].证券市场导报, 2020(10):60-71.
[36]马亚明,马金娅,胡春阳.资本市场开放可以提高上市公司治理质量吗——基于沪港通的渐进双重差分模型检验[J].广东财经大学学报, 2021, 36(04):81-95.
[37]HUANG R D , SHIU C Y. Local Effects of Foreign Ownership in an Emerging Financial Market: Evidence from Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors in Taiwan[J]. Financial Management, 2009, 38(3):567-602.
[38]MIAO L, CHEN T, ISABEL K Y. Price informativeness and institutional ownership: evidence from Japan[J]. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 2014, 42:627-651.
[39]童元松, 王光伟.境外机构投资者持股、公司业绩与股市质量[J]．会计与经济研究, 2015( 6) : 101－110．
[40]孙显超,赵晓磊,潘志远.QFII与国内主要机构投资者谁在履行资产定价职能?[J].商业研究, 2019(01):32-38.
[41]COVRIG V , LAU S T , NG L. Do domestic and foreign fund managers have similar preferences for stock characteristics? A cross-country analysis[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2006, 37(3):407-429.
[42]徐寿福.现金股利政策影响了QFII的投资偏好么?[J]. 上海金融, 2014(1):71-77, 118.
[43]赵永亮,朱英杰.企业异质性、贸易理论与经验研究:综述[J].经济学家, 2011(09):95-102.
[44]余洋,周方召,潘婉颖.上市公司ESG责任履行与明晟指数的纳入偏好[J].生产力研究, 2021(11):116-123.
[45]辛宇,左乃健.企业社会责任履行的影响因素——基于股权性质的视角[J].当代会计评论, 2012, 5(02):102-121.
[46]吴战篪,党昭澜.资本市场开放能提高企业社会责任水平吗[J].财会月刊, 2021(08):123-132.
[47]李子萍,范丽进.企业社会绩效对财务绩效的影响研究——基于国有企业、民营企业和外资企业的比较分析[J].绿色财会, 2021(06):22-25.
[48]LIU X , ANBUMOZHI V. Determinant factors of corporate environmental information disclosure: an empirical study of Chinese listed companies[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2009, 17(6):593-600.
[49]李荣锦,翟星.公共压力与环境信息披露研究——基于重污染行业上市公司的经验证据[J]. 会计之友, 2018(23): 76-83.
[50]张彩云,寇冬雪,周云波.用能技术还是管理技术？——绿色技术创新发生环节和类型的抉择[J].技术经济, 2022, 41(08):47-59.
[51]SCHUMPETER J, BACKHAUS U. The theory of economic development[M]. Springer US, 2003.
[52]MARIA C. CUERVA, ÁNGELA TRIGUERO-CANO, D CÓRCOLES. Drivers of green and non-green innovation: empirical evidence in Low-Tech SMEs[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014, 68, 104-113.
[53]JABBOUR C, SANTOS F, FONSECA S A, et al. Green teams: Understanding their roles in the environmental management of companies located in Brazil[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013, 46:58-66.
[54]SHEN W. Can Corporate Digitalization Promote Green Innovation? The Moderating Roles of Internal Control and Institutional Ownership[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(24),13983.
[55]徐建中,贯君,林艳.制度压力、高管环保意识与企业绿色创新实践——基于新制度主义理论和高阶理论视角[J].管理评论,2017,29(09):72-83.
[56]李泽众.绿色信贷政策变迁与企业环境治理行为选择——《绿色信贷指引》出台前后的实证比较[J].上海经济研究,2023(02):104-114.
[57]李平,方健.环境规制、数字经济与企业绿色创新[J].统计与决策,2023,39(05):158-163.
[58]孟常青,卢丽娟.媒体关注能促进企业绿色创新的同群效应吗？——来自我国上市公司的经验证据[J].经营与管理, 2023(03):76-84.
[59]李万利,陈亮,袁凯彬.互联网能否增强传统媒体的外部治理功能？——基于媒体环境报道与企业绿色创新视角[J/OL].南开管理评论:1-26[2023-03-13].http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/12.1288.f.20230216.1525.010.html.
[60]周率,尹志超,高若瑜.资本市场开放、企业创新与产品市场竞争力：基于QFII制度视角[J].改革, 2022(12):119-135.
[61]熊朗羽,田皓宇.资本市场开放对企业创新的影响——基于陆港通的多期DID经验证据[J].沈阳师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 40(05):462-466.
[62]SHA Y, ZHANG P, WANG Y, et al. Capital market opening and green innovation——Evidence from Shanghai-Hong Kong stock connect and the Shenzhen-Hong Kong stock connect[J]. Energy Economics, 2022, 111,106048.
[63]温湖炜,钟启明.环境保护税改革能否撬动企业绿色技术创新：来自中国排污费征收标准变迁的启示[J].贵州财经大学学报, 2020(3):91-100.
[64]张杨勋.绿色创新对工业企业空气污染治理绩效的影响——以SO_2为例[J].科技管理研究, 2022, 42(24):192-197.
[65]赵宸宇.数字化转型对企业社会责任的影响研究[J].当代经济科学, 2022, 44(02):109-116.
[66]贾春香,张燕.基于PVAR模型的绿色技术创新对企业绩效的影响[J].生态经济, 2023, 39(03):63-69.
[67]肖仁桥,王冉,钱丽.数字化水平对企业碳绩效的非线性影响——绿色技术创新的中介作用[J].科技进步与对策, 2023, 40(05):96-106.
[68]高敬忠,周晓苏,王英允.机构投资者持股对信息披露的治理作用研究——以管理层盈余预告为例[J].南开管理评论, 2011, 14(05):129-140.
[69]AUDRA L, BOONE, et al. The effect of institutional ownership on firm transparency and information production - ScienceDirect[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2015, 117(3):508-533.
[70]TIROLE J. The theory of corporate finance[M]. Princeton university press, 2010.
[71]SHLEIFER A,VISHNY R W. Equilibrium short horizons of investors and firms[J]. The American Economic Review, 1990, 80.2: 148-153.
[72]邹伟进,裴宏伟,王进.基于委托代理模型的企业环境行为研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境, 2014,24(S1):51-54.
[73]郭涛. 股东积极主义的研究综述[J]. 财会研究, 2021, (4): 28-36.
[74]童明荣,王宗军,王山慧.机构投资者持股对上市公司绩效影响实证研究——以浙江省制造业为例[J]. 财会通讯, 2018, (29): 24-26, 129.
[75]尹晓娜,李静萍.ESG表现与股票收益率——基于医药卫生行业的实证研究[J].统计学报, 2023, 4(01):73-82.
[76]周方召, 潘婉颖, 付辉.上市公司ESG责任表现与机构投资者持股偏好——来自中国A股上市公司的经验证据[J]. 科学决策, 2020, (11): 15-41.
[77]唐跃军,宋渊洋.价值选择VS.价值创造——来自中国市场机构投资者的证据[J].经济学(季刊),2010, 9(02):609-632.
[78]蒋佳榛.机构抱团对股票价格影响的实证研究[D].浙江大学, 2022.
[79]李蕾,韩立岩.价值投资还是价值创造?——基于境内外机构投资者比较的经验研究[J].经济学(季刊), 2014, 13(01):351-372.
[80]任广乾,周雪娅,李昕怡,刘莉.产权性质、公司治理与企业环境行为[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 23(02):44-55.
[81]李志斌,章铁生.内部控制、产权性质与社会责任信息披露——来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J]. 会计研究, 2017, (10): 86-92, 97.
[82]徐茜茹.上市公司产权性质、企业层级与企业社会责任实证研究[J].中国商论, 2021(17):160-167.
[83]高云龙.徐乐江《中国民营企业社会责任报告（2021）》[M].北京.中华工商联合出版社,2022.
[84]邓小军,侯枫婷.公司治理质量、企业生命周期与审计费用——基于产权性质的视角[J]. 西安石油大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 30(5):32-39, 100.
[85]耿丽.管理者异质性、产权性质与企业金融化[D].山西财经大学, 2020.
[86]孙毅.滕耀凯.试析绿色信贷政策与污染企业金融化的关系[J].西南石油大学学报(社会科学版),2022, 24(02):26-34.
[87]中国金融学会绿色金融专业委员会课题组.碳中和愿景下机构投资者面临的机遇与挑战[J].金融市场研究, 2022(01):41-51.
[88]张红凤,李睿.低碳试点政策与高污染工业企业绩效[J].经济评论, 2022(02):137-153.
[89]王建民,王传旭,杨力.我国碳减排利益相关者界定与分类[J].安徽理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2014, 16(05):17-24.
[90]王波,吴彦茹,张伟,张敬钦.“双碳”目标背景下绿色技术创新路径与政策范式转型[J].科学管理研究, 2022, 40(02):2-6.
[91]韦施威,杜金岷,吴文洋.机构投资者如何影响企业创新——兼论机构投资者与企业异质性[J].科技进步与对策, 2022, 39(01):30-38.
[92]金缦.机构投资者的ESG偏好对绿色创新价值的影响[J].金融理论与实践, 2022(01):65-75.
[93]王珮,杨淑程,黄珊.环境保护税对企业环境、社会和治理表现的影响研究——基于绿色技术创新的中介效应[J].税务研究, 2021(11):50-56.
[94]郑登攀,周青,杨伟.技术创新能力与“一带一路”出口贸易:市场拓展能力和企业年龄的影响[J]. 管理评论, 2022, 34(2):154-165.
[95]张晶,陆承俊,纳夏.高管激励、独立董事与企业创新质量[J]. 云南社会科学, 2022, (3):74-83.
[96]王生年,宋媛媛,徐亚飞.资产误定价影响了企业投资效率吗?[J]. 金融论坛, 2018, 23(2):50-64.
[97]FAMA E F , FRENCH K R.Industry costs of equity[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 1997, 43(2):153-193.
[98]徐勇,陈曦.合格境外机构投资者持股对中小创上市公司绩效的影响[J].华南理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 23(04):18-28.
[99]袁水林.企业物流成本对企业效益影响的多元线性回归分析[J].统计与决策, 2019, 35(04):186-188.
[100]温忠麟, 叶宝娟.中介效应分析:方法和模型发展[J].心理科学进展, 2014, 22(005):731-745
[101]BEATSON S A, JIAN C. Foreign investment, corporate governance and performance in the Chinese listed a share companies[J]. Journal of Chinese Economic & Business Studies, 2018(1):1-35.