2022年，新冠肺炎疫情继续在全球蔓延，对经济社会发展带来多重影响。后疫情时代，人类对于保护生态环境，以及实现经济与生态之间平衡的重要性有了更深入的认识。实现“绿色复苏”和双碳目标，并从长期主义出发，积极打造一个更高效、可持续的社会，这一理念逐渐成为全球共识。在此背景下，经济高质量发展和企业的可持续发展成为社会各方的关注点。环境（Environment）、社会（Social）和治理（Governance）逐渐成为评价企业可持续发展的主要维度。而与此同时，在中国资本市场上，也出现了上市企业因隐瞒信息与欺诈等的“黑天鹅”现象，这不但给利益相关者带来了极大的损失，同时也严重破坏了中国资本市场的平稳发展，甚至影响了中国实体经济的发展壮大。所以，企业管理者在制订企业投资发展策略时怎样应对企业未来存在的经营风险，以及投资人怎样预见上市企业的潜在经营风险，以防止在企业投资中“踩雷”，是中外学者们非常关心的问题。现有文献很少将投资环境表现、企业社会责任、企业内部管理情况等因素综合起来研究其与企业投资风险之间的关联。

ESG是从环境保护、企业社会责任以及企业治理等三个层面对上市企业所做出的综合评估，同时更是可持续发展理念在企业管理微观层次上的具体表现。所以，本文主要从ESG角度入手，通过中国的A股上市企业，研究了环境、社会责任和企业管理方面的综合特征，以及各维度对企业投资风险的影响，进一步拓展了对ESG表现的影响作用和在企业投资风险领域的研究视角，并具备了相应的理论价值和现实意义。本文选取了2017-2021年我国沪深A股的主要上市企业作为研究样本，利用彭博ESG评分系统作为对ESG表现的主要评价方法，用股票的收益波动指标来反映企业的投资风险程度，在控制研究变量的基础上，构造了多元线性回归模型，从长期、中期和短期三类角度研究了中国目前的市场经济条件下，ESG表现对企业投资风险程度的作用效应，并研究了不同产权性质、企业规模以及行业分类对二者之间的调节作用。最后，本文提出了促进企业可持续发展的建议。

本文通过研究，得出以下结论：（1）ESG综合得分与投资风险负相关，即企业ESG表现越好，企业当期面临的风险越低。ESG各维度表现与企业投资风险之间均呈负相关关系，且环境绩效和企业治理表现均在1%的显著性水平上显著。（2）企业前一期和前两期的ESG综合得分与企业当期投资风险负相关。（3）不同规模、不同产权性质、不同行业企业ESG表现与投资风险的影响关系存在显著异质性。具体而言，国有企业ESG表现降低投资风险的效应弱于非国有企业。相比小规模企业，大规模企业较高的ESG得分对企业投资风险的降低作用更明显。相比非工业行业企业，工业行业企业提升ESG表现对企业投资风险的降低作用更明显。

本文的研究结果有助于投资人对自身的投资风险做出评估，有助于投资人进行投资决策。

In 2022,the new crown pneumonia epidemic continued to spread around the world, bringing multiple impacts on economic and social development. In the post-pandemic era, the importance of human beings to protect the ecological environment and achieve a balance between economy and ecology has deepened Recognize. The concept of achieving the "green recovery" and dual carbon goals,and actively building a more efficient and sustainable society from a long-term perspective,has gradually become a global consensus.

In this context,high-quality economic development and sustainable development of enterprises have become the focus of all parties in society. Environment,Social and Governance have gradually become the main dimensions for evaluating corporate sustainability. At the same time,in China's capital market,there have also been "black swan" phenomena of listed companies due to information concealment and fraud,which not only brings great losses to stakeholders,but also seriously undermines the stable development of China's capital market,and even affects the development and growth of China's real economy. Therefore,how enterprise managers should deal with the company's future operational risks when formulating the company's investment and development strategy,and how investors should foresee the potential operational risks of listed companies to prevent "stepping on the thunder" in enterprise investment are issues that Chinese and foreign scholars are very concerned about. The existing literature rarely combines factors such as investment environment performance,corporate social responsibility,and internal management of enterprises to study the correlation between them and enterprise investment risks.

 

ESG makes a comprehensive assessment of listed companies from three levels: environmental protection,corporate social responsibility and corporate governance,and it is also a concrete expression of the concept of sustainable development at the micro level of corporate management. Therefore,this paper mainly starts from the perspective of ESG, through China's A-share listed enterprises,studies the comprehensive characteristics of environment,social responsibility and corporate management,as well as the impact of various dimensions on corporate investment risk,further expands the impact on ESG performance and the research perspective in the field of corporate investment risk,and has corresponding theoretical value and practical significance. This paper selects the major listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen A-shares in China from 2017 to 2021 as research samples,uses the Bloomberg ESG scoring system as the main evaluation method for ESG performance,uses the return fluctuation index of stocks to reflect the investment risk degree of the company,constructs a multiple linear regression model on the basis of controlling the research variables,and studies the effect of ESG performance on the investment risk degree of enterprises under the current market economy conditions in China from the perspectives of long-term,medium-term and short-term. The moderating effect of different property rights,enterprise scale and industry classification on the two was studied. Finally,this paper puts forward suggestions for promoting sustainable development of enterprises.

 

Through research,this paper concludes that :(1) ESG comprehensive score is negatively correlated with corporate investment risk,that is the better the ESG performance of enterprises,the lower the risks faced by enterprises in the current period. There was an inverse correlation between ESG performance and corporate investment risk,and environmental performance and corporate governance performance were significant at the significance level of 1%. (2) The ESG comprehensive scores of the previous period and the previous two periods of the enterprise are negatively correlated with the investment risk of the enterprise in the current period. (3) There is significant heterogeneity in the relationship between the impact of ESG performance on investment risk of enterprises of different scales,different property rights and different industries. Specifically,the ESG performance of state-owned enterprises reduces investment risk less effectively than non-state-owned enterprises. Compared with small-scale enterprises,the higher ESG score of large-scale enterprises has a more obvious effect on reducing the investment risk of enterprises. Compared with non-industrial enterprises,the improvement of ESG performance of industrial enterprises has a more obvious effect on reducing corporate investment risks.

 

The research results in this paper help investors to evaluate their own investment risks and help investors make investment decisions.

[1]Johnson, E. C., Stout, et al. Profound Change: The Evolution of ESG[J]. The Business Lawyer, 2020,75: 2567-2608.
[2]Lockhart,D. Mark Carney.Value(s)—Building a Better World for All Public Affairs[M], Hatchett Book Group,2021.
[3]Donaldson,Thomas,Thomas W Dunfee. Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics［M］. Boston: Business Press,1999.
[4]Godfrey, P. C. Corporate social responsibility in sport: An overview and key issues[J]. Journal of Sport Management,2009,23(6):698-716.
[5]何音,李健,蔡满堂等.企业社会责任与企业价值:营销竞争力与顾客意识的作用机理[J].管理工程学报,2020,34(02):84-94.
[6]仵志忠.信息不对称理论及其经济学意义[J].经济学动态,1997(01):66-69.
[7]Godfrey, P.C.The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: a risk management perspective[J]. Acad Manag Rev,2005,30 (4):777–798.
[8]Freeman,R. E.Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press[M].Cambridge University Press,1984.
[9]Park, Kwong O. How CSV and CSR affect organizational performance: A productive behavior perspective[J].International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2020,17: 2556.
[10]Ilze Zumente, Natal, ja Lace. ESG Rating—Necessity for the Investor or the Company? [J]Sustainability,2021,13,8940.
[11]Jo, Hoje, Haejung Na.Does CSR reduce firm risk? Evidence from controversial industry sector[J].Journal of Business Ethics,2012,110:441–56.
[12]Sharfman, M.P, Fernando. Environmental risk management and the cost of capital[J].Strategic Management Journal,2008,29:569–592.
[13]De Franco,Carmine. ESG controversies and their impact on performance[J].The Journal of Investing,2020,29: 33–45.
[14]Broadstock, David C, Kalok Chan,et al. The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China[J].Finance Research Letters,2021,38: 101716.
[15]Matos, Pedro Verga,Victor Barros,et al. Does ESG affect stability of dividend policies in Europe?[J] Sustainability,2020,12: 8840.
[16]Vincent George Whitelock,Environmental Social Governance (ESG) Management: A Theoretical Perspective for the Role of Disclosure in the Supply Chain[J].International Journal of Business Information Systems,2015,18(4),390-405.
[17]King,A.A.,Lenox, M.J.Does it really pay to be green? An empirical study of firm en-vironmental and financial performance[J.].2001,Ind. Ecol,5 (1),105–116.
[18]Cail,Cuij,Joh. Corporate environmental responsibility and firm risk［J］.Journal of Business Ethics,2016,139（3）:563-594.
[19]Paulc,Gdfrey,Merrillc,et al. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value:an empirical test of the risk management hypothesis［J］.Strategic Management Journal,2009,30（4）:425-445.
[20]Piotrosji J D,Wong T J,Zhang T. Political incentives to suppress negative financial information：evidence from state-controlled Chinese firms［J］.Journal of Accounting Review,2015,53（2）：401-459
[21]Clarkson, M.E. A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1995, (1) : 92-117.
[22]Jain A, Rezaee Z. Value-Relevance of Corporate Social Responsibility:Evidence from Short Selling[J]. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2016, (2) : 29-52.
[23]Sassen R, Hinze A, Hardeck I. Impact of ESG factors on firm risk in Europe[J]. Journal of Business Economics, 2016, 86(8) : 867-904.
[24]陆铭.建立和完善我国上市企业ESG信息披露制度的实践及对策[J].科学发展,2021(10):33-39.
[25]北京证监局课题组.关于上市企业环境、社会责任及企业治理（ESG）信息披露的研究[J].财务与会计,2021(11):25-28.
[26]刘璐,吁文涛.企业ESG评价和传统信用评级体系比较研究[J].新金融,2021(04):59-64.
[27]碳适应、碳减排可能成为ESG信息披露方向[J].环境经济,2021(06):5.
[28]李文,顾欣科,周冰星.国际ESG信息披露制度发展下的全球实践及中国展望[J].可持续发展经济导刊,2021(Z1):41-45.
[29]雒京华,赵博雅.ESG表现与企业短期财务绩效——基于制度环境的调节效应检验[J].武汉金融,2022(07):20-28.
[30]李晚秋. 上市公司ESG表现与企业财务绩效的相关性研究[D].西南财经大学,2022.
[31]张晨曦.探究ESG表现对上市公司财务绩效的影响——基于利益相关方信心的传导[J].投资与创业,2022,33(24):61-63.
[32]刘慧媛.双碳背景下企业ESG表现与财务绩效——基于长三角上市公司的证据[J].上海立信会计金融学院学报,2022,34(04):76-90.
[33]王燕姣.ESG表现对企业价值影响的实证研究——基于制造业上市企业[J].投资与创业,2022,33(24):170-172.
[34]仝佳.ESG表现、融资约束与企业价值分析[J].商讯,2021(29):89-91.
[35]张芬. ESG信息披露、绿色创新与企业价值[D].山东师范大学,2021.
[36]张原,梁敏娜.社会责任自愿披露、媒体关注与股价崩盘风险[J].会计之友,2021(04):53-60.
[37]李玲.旅游企业社会责任履行与系统风险应对——基于经济水平的调节作用[J].企业经济,2020,39(07):108-115.
[38]韩芳,杨柳.社会责任信息披露与财务风险[J].统计与决策,2021,37(14):165-168.
[39]孙冬,杨硕,赵雨萱,袁家海.ESG表现、财务状况与系统性风险相关性研究——以沪深A股电力上市企业为例[J].中国环境管理,2019,11(02):37-43.
[40]柳凌艳. 公司ESG参与和下行风险[D].西南财经大学,2022.
[41]谭劲松,黄仁玉,张京心.ESG表现与企业风险-基于资源获取视角的解释[J].管理科学,2022,35(05):3-18.
[42]王宝东,张琳,马忠宝.ESG评级在企业财务风险预警中的应用研究[J].投资与创业,2022,33(12):36-38.
[43]叶积昕. ESG表现对企业风险的影响[D].西南财经大学,2022.
[44]田地, 高明, 韩春燕. ESG 评级和数据产品发展启示[J]. 中国金融, 2021, 72(24) : 35-37.
[45]张慧,黄群慧.ESG责任投资研究热点与前沿的文献计量分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2022,43(12):57-75.
[46]Lueg,K,Krastev,et al.Bidirectional effects between organizational sustainability disclosure and risk[ J]. Clean. Prod,2019,22: 268–277.
[47]Chollet, P, Sandwidi, et al.CSR engagement and financial risk: a virtuous circle? International evidence[J]. Global Finance J. 2018,38:65–81.
[48]Freeman, R.E.Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach[M]. Cambridge University Press,1984.
[49]Godfrey,P.C. The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: a risk management perspective[J]. Acad Manag Rev,2005,30:777–798.
[50]Ashwin Kumar, N,Smith, C,Badis, L.,et al. ESG factors and risk-adjusted performance: a new quantitative model[ J]. Sustain Financ Investig. 2016,6:292–300.
[51]De,Clayman,M.R. The benefits of socially responsible investing: An active manager’s perspective[J]. J Investig. 2015,24:49–72.
[52]Boubaker S, Cellier A,Manita R,et al. Does corporate social responsibility reduce financial distress risk? [J].Econ. Model,2020,91,835–851.
[53]于富生,张敏,姜付秀等.企业治理影响企业财务风险吗?[J].会计研究,2008（10）:52-59+97
[54]徐茜茹.上市企业产权性质、企业层级与企业社会责任实证研究[J].中国商论,2021(17):160-167.
[55]Valiente J M A, Ayerbe C G, Figueras M S. Social responsibility practices and evaluation of corporate social performance[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2012,35: 25-38.
[56]Chen S,Bouvain P. Is corporate responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany[J]. Journal of business ethics, 2009,87(1): 299-317.
[57]Perrini F, Russo A, Tencati A. CSR strategies of SMEs and large firms. Evidence from Italy[J]. Journal of business ethics,2007,74(3): 285-300.
[58]Graafland J J, Smid H. Reputation,corporate social responsibility and market regulation[J]. 2004: 271-308.
[59]中国工商银行绿色金融课题组, 张红力, 周月秋, 等. ESG 绿色评级及绿色指数研究[J]. 金融论坛,2017,22(09) : 3-14.
[60]李百兴,王博,卿小权. 企业社会责任履行、媒体监督与财务绩效研究——基于 A 股重污染行业的经验数据[J]. 会计研究, 2018, 39(07) : 64-71.
[61]廖屹甍. 股价波动的VaR模型及其在股票投资风险管理中的应用[D].华东师范大学,2008.
[62]翟胜宝,张胜,谢露,郑洁.银行关联与企业风险——基于我国上市公司的经验证据[J].管理世界,2014(04):53-59.
[63]Hoje Jo, Haejung Na. Does CSR Reduce Firm Risk? Evidence from Controversial Industry Sectors[J]. Journal of Business Ethics,2012,110(4)
[64]Benlemlih M, Bitar M. Corporate social responsibility and investment efficiency[J]. Journal of business ethics,2018,148(3): 647-671.
[65]Saurabh Mishra ,Sachin Modi.Positive and Negative Corporate Social Responsibility,Financial Leverage,and Idiosyncratic Risk.Journal of business ethics, Springer, 2013,117(2):431-448.
[66]Luo,Bhattacharya, C.B. The Debate over Doing Good: Corporate Social Performance, Strategic Marketing Levers, and Firm-Idiosyncratic Risk. Journal of Marketing,2009, 73(6):198–213.
[67]Sang K ,Li Z F. Understanding the Impact of ESG Practices in Corporate Finance[J]. Sustainability, 2021,13(7):3746
[68]Shakil,M.H.Environmental,social and governance performance and stock price volatility: a moderating role of firm size[ J]. Publ. Aff,2020.
[69]Jia Y, Gao X, Julian S. Do firms use corporate social responsibility to insure against stock price risk? Evidence from a natural experiment[J]. Strat. Manag,2020 41 (2):290–307.
[70]朱小云.股权质押、产权性质与企业社会责任履行[J].会计之友,2020(21):85-92.
[71]王宇哲, 赵静. “用钱投票”:公众环境关注度对不同产业资产价格的影响[J]. 管理世界, 2018, 34(09) : 46-57.
[72]苏坤,张健 .企业治理对企业风险承担的影响研究[J].西安财经学院学报,2016,29（01:43-49）.
[73]段钢.ESG投资与可持续发展[J].中国商界,2021(12):114-117.
[74]娄邹超.关于ESG体系相关研究的文献综述[J].时代经贸,2021,18(11):65-70.
[75]詹鸿.ESG投资理念助力实现碳中和[J].时代金融,2021(18):53-55.
[76]屠光绍.ESG责任投资的理念与实践(上)[J].中国金融,2019(01):13-16.
[77]孔慧阁,唐伟.利益相关者视角下环境信息披露质量的影响因素[J].管理评论,2016,28(09):182-193.
[78]王清刚,徐欣宇.企业社会责任的价值创造机理及实证检验——基于利益相关者理论和生命周期理论[J].中国软科学,2016(02):179-192.
[79]彭雪蓉,魏江.利益相关者环保导向与企业生态创新——高管环保意识的调节作用[J].科学学研究,2015,33(07):1109-1120.