道德偏好、经济准则与机构投资者持股的关系研究被引量：1

Corporate Social Performance,Financial Performance and Chinese Institutional Investors Preferences

导出

摘要本文以中国上市公司为研究对象,利用面板数据模型检验了我国企业社会绩效、经济绩效与机构投资者持股比例的关系,以考察机构投资者持股的道德偏好以及经济准则对这种偏好的影响。基于2006-2010年沪深两市902家上市公司的实证检验显示:(1)企业社会绩效与机构投资者持股比例显著正相关,即机构投资者制定投资决策时表现出了一定的道德偏好;(2)企业社会绩效与不同类型机构投资者持股比例的相关性差异较大,其中只与基金持股存在显著的正相关关系;(3)经济准则对机构投资者持股的道德偏好存在显著影响,不考虑经济绩效的情况下机构投资者偏好企业社会绩效好的公司,但按经济绩效优劣分组检验表明这种道德偏好仅存在于高经济绩效的样本公司中。 The paper uses panel data model to study the relationship between corporate social perfor-mance （CSP）, financial performance （CFP） and the percentages of shares held by institutions based on Chinese listed companies, in order to study the preferences of institutional investors for CSP and influence of CFP on the preferences. Based on the empirical research of 902 listed companies＇ samples in Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchange markets over the 5 year period 2006-2010, the paper finds that：（1） Insti- tutional investors＇ ownership have a significant positive relationship with CSP. （2） Different institutional investors have the different relationship with CSP, only funds companies＇ ownership are positively related to CSP. （3） CFP has the significant influence on the preferences for CSP of institutional investors, and CSP is found to have a positive and significant impact on institutional ownership only when CFP is high, by classifying firms into two sub-groups according to CFP.

作者王玲玲王宗军毛磊

机构地区华中科技大学管理学院

出处《数理统计与管理》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第4期749-760,共12页 Journal of Applied Statistics and Management

基金国家自然科学基金资助项目(70872033)

关键词机构投资者持股偏好企业社会绩效经济绩效 institutional investors preferences corporate social performance corporate financial per-formance

分类号 F276.6 [经济管理—企业管理] O212 [理学—概率论与数理统计]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献35

1Neubaum D,Zahra S. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance:The moderating effects of investment horizon,activism and coordination[J].Journal of Management,2006,(01):108-131.doi:10.1177/0149206305277797.
2Wood D J. Measuring corporate social performance:A review[J].International Journal of Management Reviews,2010,(01):50-84.
3Muller A,Kolk A. Extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of corporate social performance:Evidence from foreign and domestic firms in mexico[J].Journal of Management Studies,2010,(01):1-26.
4Heiner R A. The origin of predictable behavior[J].American Economic Review,1983,(04):560-595.
5Petersen N,Vredenburg H. Morals or economics? Institutional investor preferences for corporate social responsibility[J].Journal of Business Ethics,2009,(01):1-14.
6Mallina C A,Michelonb G. Board reputation attributes and corporate social performance:An empirical investigation of the US Best Corporate Citizens[J].Accounting and Business Research,2011,(02):119-144.
7Graves S,Waddock S. Institutional owners and corporate social performance[J].Academy of Management Journal,1994,(04):1034-1046.
8Wahba H. Exploring the moderating effect of financial performance on the relationship between corporate environmental responsibility and institutional investors:some Egyptian evidence[J].Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,2008,(15):361-371.
9Cox P,Brammer S,Millington A. Pension funds and corporate social performance:An empirical analysis[J].Business and Society,2008,(02):213-241.
10Mahoney L,Roberts R W. Corporate social performance,financial performance and institutional ownership in Canadian firms[J].Accounting Forum,2007.233-253.