|
|
|
| Does Targeted Poverty Alleviation Affect Corporate Risk？ |
| ZHEN Hongxian, WANG Sanfa
|
| School of Accounting/ China Internal Control Research Center, Dongbei University of Finance and Economics |
|
|
|
Abstract Targeted poverty alleviation is a national strategy and an innovative form of poverty alleviation proposed according to China's special national conditions. Enterprises' participation in targeted poverty alleviation can not only give full play to the inherent advantages of industrial poverty alleviation and implement “blood-creating” poverty alleviation, but also obtain a larger platform for creating value. Therefore, the targeted poverty alleviation by corporate is an important part of winning the battle against poverty, and also becomes a new form for corporate to fulfill their social responsibility. Then, does the capital market pay attention to the targeted poverty alleviation actions of listed companies？ Does the participation of corporate in targeted poverty alleviation affect corporate risk？
The research on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate risk has formed two competing views: the risk reduction hypothesis and the risk increase hypothesis. Regarding the hypothesis of increased risk, neoclassical economics believes that corporate social responsibility has deviated from the goal of maximizing shareholder value. Under the condition of limited corporate cash flow, overtaking of social responsibilities will occupy corporate resources, which may result in companies having to reduce strategic investments such as R&D investment and long-term investment, weakening corporate competitiveness, reducing corporate value, and increasing corporate risk. According to principal-agent theory, managers tend to be opportunistic, and their active fulfillment of social responsibilities may be social activities that have nothing to do with the development of enterprises in order to improve their personal reputation and social influence. Wasting the limited resources of an enterprise on social activities unrelated to the creation of shareholder value will weaken the competitiveness of the enterprise and increase its risk. For self-interested motives, managers may use social responsibility tools to divert negative news and cover up the problems in the business performance of enterprises, so that enterprises perform social responsibility only has “tool characteristics” rather than “value-creating characteristics”. Therefore, it is ultimately an empirical question that this study aims to address.
In order to answer these questions, this paper downloaded from the CSMAR database the non-financial listed companies that participated in targeted poverty alleviation in China's A-share market in 2016-2018 as a sample to empirically study the impact of targeted poverty alleviation on corporate risk. The empirical research conclusions of this paper mainly include the following points. First, the targeted poverty alleviation action is significantly negatively correlated with the equity market risk. Second, the lower the corporate information transparency, the stronger the effect of targeted poverty alleviation on the risk reduction of the stock market, indicating that the lower the transparency of corporate information, the stronger the “information communication” role of the targeted poverty alleviation actions of enterprises; Third, in regions where the institutional environment is weaker, the targeted poverty alleviation behavior of companies has a stronger effect on reducing equity market risk. This shows that in areas where the institutional environment is relatively weak, the government allocates a greater proportion of economic resources.
The main contributions of this paper are as follows: Firstly, this paper studies the impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate risk from the perspective of targeted poverty alleviation, enriching the research scope of corporate social responsibility and corporate risk. Secondly, based on the perspective of equity market risk, this article finds that investors pay attention to the targeted poverty alleviation behavior of enterprises and can identify the strategic significance of targeted poverty alleviation by enterprises. Finally, the conclusions of this article have important policy significance. This article explores the mechanism of the enterprise's targeted poverty alleviation affecting enterprise risk from the perspectives of reputation effect, resource effect and information effect.
|
|
Received: 17 December 2019
Published: 02 February 2021
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
戴亦一、潘越和冯舒,2014,《中国企业的慈善捐赠是一种“政治献金”吗？——来自市委书记更替的证据》,《经济研究》第2期,第74～86页。
|
| [2] |
杜世风、石恒贵和张依群,2019,《中国上市公司精准扶贫行为的影响因素研究——基于社会责任的视角》,《财政研究》第2期,第104～115页。
|
| [3] |
冯丽艳、肖翔和程小可,2016,《社会责任对企业风险的影响效应——基于我国经济环境的分析》,《南开管理评论》第6期,第141～154页。
|
| [4] |
宫留记,2016,《政府主导下市场化扶贫机制的构建与创新模式研究——基于精准扶贫视角》,《中国软科学》第5期,第154～162页。
|
| [5] |
管考磊和张蕊,2019,《企业声誉与盈余管理:有效契约观还是寻租观》,《会计研究》第1期,第59～64页。
|
| [6] |
林钟高和吴利娟,2004,《公司治理与会计信息质量的相关性研究》,《会计研究》第8期,第65～71页。
|
| [7] |
林晚发、李国平、王海妹和刘蕾,2013,《分析师预测与企业债券信用利差——基于2008-2012年中国企业债券数据》,《会计研究》第8期,第69～75+97页。
|
| [8] |
李维安、王鹏程和徐业坤,2015,《慈善捐赠、政治关联与债务融资——民营企业与政府的资源交换行为》,《南开管理评论》第1期,第4～14页。
|
| [9] |
罗宏、黄敏、周大伟和刘宝华,2014,《政府补助、超额薪酬与薪酬辩护》,《会计研究》第1期,第42～48页。
|
| [10] |
罗党论、廖俊平和王珏,2016,《地方官员变更与企业风险——基于中国上市公司的经验证据》,《经济研究》第5期,第130～142页。
|
| [11] |
鲁晓东和连玉君,2012,《中国工业企业全要素生产率估计:1999-2007》,《经济学(季刊)》第2期,第541～558页。
|
| [12] |
权小锋、吴世农和尹洪英,2015,《企业社会责任与股价崩盘风险:“价值利器”或“自利工具”？ 》,《经济研究》第11期,第49～64页。
|
| [13] |
宋献中、胡珺和李四海,2017,《社会责任信息披露与股价崩盘风险——基于信息效应与声誉保险效应的路径分析》,《金融研究》第4期,第165～179页。
|
| [14] |
唐跃军、左晶晶和李汇东,2014,《制度环境变迁对公司慈善行为的影响机制研究》,《经济研究》第2期,第61～73页。
|
| [15] |
田利辉和王可第,2017,《社会责任信息披露的“掩饰效应”和上市公司崩盘风险——来自中国股票市场的DID-PSM分析》,《管理世界》第11期,第146～157页。
|
| [16] |
王亚平、刘慧龙和吴联生,2009,《信息透明度、机构投资者与股价同步性》,《金融研究》第12期,第162～174页。
|
| [17] |
叶康涛、张然和徐浩萍,2010,《声誉、制度环境与债务融资——基于中国民营上市公司的证据》,《金融研究》第8期,第171～183页。
|
| [18] |
张敏和黄继承,2009,《政治关联、多元化与企业风险——来自我国证券市场的经验证据》,《管理世界》第7期,第156～164页。
|
| [19] |
张敏、马黎珺和张雯,2013,《企业慈善捐赠的政企纽带效应——基于我国上市公司的经验证据》,《管理世界》第7期,第163～171页。
|
| [20] |
张玉明和邢超,2019,《企业参与产业精准扶贫投入绩效转化效果及机制分析——来自中国A股市场的经验证据》,《商业研究》第5期,第109～120页。
|
| [21] |
张国建、佟孟华、李慧和陈飞,2019,《扶贫改革试验区的经济增长效应及政策有效性评估》,《中国工业经济》第8期,第136～154页。
|
| [22] |
朱英姿和许丹,2013,《官员晋升压力、金融市场化与房价增长》,《金融研究》第1期,第65～78页。
|
| [23] |
Barnea, A. and A. Rubin. 2010. “Corporate Social Responsibility as a Conflict Between Shareholders” Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1):71～86.
|
| [24] |
Babenko, I., O. Boguth and Y. Tserlukevich. 2016. “Idiosyncratic Cash Flows and Systematic Risk” The Journal of Finance, 71(1):425～456.
|
| [25] |
Bernile, G., V. Bhagwat and S. E. Yonker. 2018. “Board Diversity, Firm Risk, and Corporate Policies” Journal of Financial Economics, 127(3):588～612.
|
| [26] |
Cespa, G. and G. Cestone. 2007. “Corporate Social Responsibility and Managerial Entrenchment” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 16(3):741～771.
|
| [27] |
Choi, J. and H. Wang. 2009. “Stakeholder Relations and the Persistence of Corporate Financial Performance” Strategic Management Journal, 30(8):895～907.
|
| [28] |
Core, J. E., L. Hail and R. Verdi. 2015. “Mandatory Disclosure Quality, Inside Ownership, and Cost of Capital” European Accounting Review, 24(1):1～29.
|
| [29] |
Dechow, P. M., R. G. Sloan and A. P. Sweeney. 1996. “Causes and Consequences of Earnings Manipulation” Contemporary Accounting Research, 13(1):1～36.
|
| [30] |
Dechow, P. M. and I. D. Dichev. 2002. “The Quality of Accruals and Earnings: the Role of Accrual Estimation Errors” Accounting Review, 77(4):35～59.
|
| [31] |
Friedman, M. A.. 1970. “Friedman Doctrine: The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profit” The New York Times Magazine, 32-33(33):173～178.
|
| [32] |
Vilanova, M., J. M. Lonzano and D. Arenas. 2009. “Exploring the Nature of the Relationship between CSR and Competitiveness” Journal of Business Ethics, 87(Suppl 1):57～69.
|
|
|
|
