|
|
|
| Social-Value-Oriented CEOs and Corporate Green Innovation |
| QUAN Xiaofeng, QIAN Yuting
|
Business School, Soochow University;
School of Finance, Nanjing Agricultural University |
|
|
|
Abstract Green innovation has become a pivotal strategy for reconciling economic growth with environmental protection. While existing research has extensively explored the drivers of green innovation from institutional and firm-level perspectives, the role of top executives' intrinsic value orientations remains underexplored. This study addresses this gap by investigating how CEOs with a social value orientation, influence corporate green innovation. Drawing on social capital theory and stewardship theory, we posit that such CEOs foster green innovation through two primary mechanisms: alleviating external resource constraints and enhancing internal environmental consciousness.
We hypothesize that social-value-oriented CEOs bolster green innovation via a resource channel and an awareness channel. The resource channel suggests that these CEOs, often through participation in philanthropic organizations, build stronger relationships with key stakeholders such as governments, investors, and communities. This enhanced social capital facilitates access to critical resources by easing financing constraints and attracting high-skilled talents, thereby providing the necessary foundation for green innovation activities that are typically characterized by high costs and long cycles. Simultaneously, the awareness channel, rooted in stewardship theory, posits that these CEOs act as organizational stewards with a long-term vision. They are more likely to intrinsically integrate environmental sustainability into corporate strategies, foster a green culture, and exhibit greater tolerance for the risks associated with green research and development, thus creating an internal environment conducive to substantive innovation.
To test these hypotheses, we construct a unique dataset of Chinese A-share listed manufacturing companies from 2007 to 2022. Our key explanatory variable, Social-value-oriented CEO (SocialCEO), is a binary indicator that equals one if the CEO participates in at least one charitable organization, based on hand-collected data from China's official “Charity China” platform. Our primary measure of green innovation is the number of green invention patent applications, identified using the World Intellectual Property Organization's International Patent Classification Green List. We employ a fixed-effects panel regression model controlling for a comprehensive set of firm-level characteristics and CEO demographic variables. The baseline results provide robust evidence that firms led by social-value-oriented CEOs exhibit a significant increase in green invention patent applications.
The mechanism tests corroborate the proposed dual channels. We find that social-value-oriented CEOs significantly reduce corporate financing constraints and increase the proportion of high-skilled employees, validating the resource channel. Concurrently, they lead to higher environmental protection investments, more frequent green training, and a stronger corporate green culture, supporting the awareness channel.
Heterogeneity analyses reveal boundary conditions for this effect. The positive impact is more pronounced in technology-intensive industries and non-heavily polluting industries. Furthermore, the effect is stronger when CEOs possess greater power, as indicated by CEO-chairman duality, or hold higher shareholdings, suggesting that decision-making authority and incentive alignment amplify their influence. Additional analyses yield nuanced insights. The promotive effect is primarily observed in substantive green innovation , indicating a focus on real technological advancement. Crucially, the interaction between social-value-oriented CEOs and green innovation is associated with a significant increase in long-term firm value, underscoring the economic sustainability of this strategic alignment.
This study contributes to the literature in several ways. It extends research on the antecedents of green innovation by introducing and validating CEOs' social value orientation as a novel and significant driver. It enriches upper echelons theory by delineating the specific resource-based and awareness-based pathways through which personal values translate into strategic environmental outcomes. Our findings also offer practical implications for corporate governance and policy-making, suggesting the value of fostering leadership with prosocial tendencies and creating supportive institutional environments for green transformation.
|
|
Received: 14 May 2025
Published: 05 December 2025
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
代昀昊、童心楚、王砾和邢斐,2023,《法治强化能够促进企业绿色创新吗？》,《金融研究》第2期,第115～133页。
|
| [2] |
江鑫、胡文涛、许文立和李光龙,2024,《政府绿色采购如何激发企业绿色创新活力》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第1～21页。
|
| [3] |
刘锡禄、陈志军和马鹏程,2023,《信息技术背景CEO与企业数字化转型》,《中国软科学》第1期,第134～144页。
|
| [4] |
罗进辉、刘海潮和巫奕龙,2023,《高管团队稳定性与公司创新投入:有恒产者有恒心》,《南开管理评论》第6期,第159～168, 211, 169～170页。
|
| [5] |
权小锋和李闯,2022,《智能制造与成本粘性——来自中国智能制造示范项目的准自然实验》,《经济研究》第4期,第68～84页。
|
| [6] |
王馨和王营,2021,《环境信息公开的绿色创新效应研究——基于〈环境空气质量标准〉的准自然实验》,《金融研究》第10期,第134～152页。
|
| [7] |
王永钦和董雯,2020,《机器人的兴起如何影响中国劳动力市场？——来自制造业上市公司的证据》,《经济研究》第10期,第159～175页。
|
| [8] |
吴烨伟、郝若鸿和韩宇航,2023,《增值税留抵退税的环境治理效应:绿色并购的视角》,《管理科学》第5期,第18～31页。
|
| [9] |
吴育辉、张腾、秦利宾和鲍珩淼,2022,《高管信息技术背景与企业数字化转型》,《经济管理》第12期,第138～157页。
|
| [10] |
向世陵,2016,《儒家的仁爱—博爱观念与亲社会行为》,《中国哲学史》第3期,第5～12页。
|
| [11] |
谢佩君、黄珺和肖文辉,2024,《二代参与管理是否抑制了家族企业绿色创新？》,《审计与经济研究》第2期,第107～116页。
|
| [12] |
张光利、兰明慧、于连超和杨长汉,2024,《环境政策不确定性、环境执法与企业环保投资》,《财经研究》第6期,第79～92页。
|
| [13] |
Anahit Mkrtchyan, J. Sandvik, and D. Xu. 2024. “Employee Responses to CEO Activism,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 78(1): p.101701.
|
| [14] |
Bacq, S. and G.T. Lumpkin. 2021. “Social Entrepreneurship and COVID‐19,” Journal of Management Studies, 58(1): pp.285～288.
|
| [15] |
Bendell, B.L. 2017. “I Don't Want to Be Green: Prosocial Motivation Effects on Firm Environmental Innovation Rejection Decisions,” Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2): pp.277～288.
|
| [16] |
Cengiz, D., A. Dube, A. Lindner, and B. Zipperer. 2019. “The Effect of Minimum Wages on Low-Wage Jobs*,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3): pp.1405～1454.
|
| [17] |
Chan, K.C. and X. Feng. 2019. “Corporate Philanthropy in a Politically Uncertain Environment: Does It Bring Tangible Benefits to a Firm？ Evidence from China,” The European Journal of Finance, 25(3): pp.256～278.
|
| [18] |
Cremer, D.D. and P.A.M.V. Lange. 2001. “Why Prosocials Exhibit Greater Cooperation than Proselfs: The Roles of Social Responsibility and Reciprocity,” European Journal of Personality, 15(S1): pp.S5～S18.
|
| [19] |
Davis, J.H., F.D. Schoorman, and L. Donaldson. 1997. “Toward a Stewardship Theory of Management,” Academy of Management Review, 22(1): pp.20～47.
|
| [20] |
Feng, M., W. Ge, Z. Ling, and W.T. Loh. 2023. “Prosocial CEOs, Corporate Policies, and Firm Value,” Review of Accounting Studies,29(2):pp.1854~1903.
|
| [21] |
Flannery, B.L. and D.R. May. 2000. “Environmental Ethical Decision Making in the U.S. Metal-Finishing Industry,” Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): pp.642～662.
|
| [22] |
Hottenrott, H. and B. Peters. 2012. “Innovative Capability and Financing Constraints for Innovation: More Money, More Innovation？,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(4): pp.1126～1142.
|
| [23] |
Javed, M., F. Wang, M. Usman, A. Ali Gull, and Q. Uz Zaman. 2023. “Female CEOs and Green Innovation,” Journal of Business Research, 157: p.113515.
|
| [24] |
Jiao, A., H. Ren, and W. Zhang. 2023. “Prosocial CEOs and Social Advocacy: Evidence from Firm Political Donations,” SSRN Electronic Journal.
|
| [25] |
Jin, H. M., Su, Z. Q., Wang, L., & Xiao, Z. (2022). “Do Academic Independent Directors Matter？ Evidence from Stock Price Crash Risk,” Journal of Business Research, 144:pp.1129~1148.
|
| [26] |
Lange, P.A.M.V. 2000. “Beyond Self-Interest: A Set of Propositions Relevant to Interpersonal Orientations,” European Review of Social Psychology,11(1):pp.297~331.
|
| [27] |
Lee, B. 2025. “Social Entrepreneurs, Fear of Failure and Growth Aspirations: The Moderating Role of Social Value Orientation,” International Small Business Journal,p.02662426251361436.
|
| [28] |
Liu, C., L. Xu, H. Yang, and W. Zhang. 2023. “Prosocial CEOs and the Cost of Debt: Evidence from Syndicated Loan Contracts,” Journal of Corporate Finance, 78:p.102316.
|
| [29] |
Mkrtchyan, A., Sandvik, J., & Xu, D. (2024). “Employee Responses to CEO Activism”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 78(1), 101701.
|
| [30] |
Orsato, R.J. 2006. “Competitive Environmental Strategies: When Does It Pay to Be Green？,” California Management Review, 48(2): pp.127～143.
|
| [31] |
Qin, B., and Yang, L. (2022). “CSR Contracting and Performance-induced CEO Turnover,” Journal of Corporate Finance, 73, 102173.
|
| [32] |
Quan, X., Y. Ke, Y. Qian, and Y. Zhang. 2023. “CEO Foreign Experience and Green Innovation: Evidence from China,” Journal of Business Ethics, 182(2): pp.535～557.
|
| [33] |
Tang, L., Y. Guo, J. Zha, and W. Zheng. 2024. “Acquiescence or Redemption: CEO’s Early-Life Experience of Environmental Pollution and Corporate Green Innovation,” Journal of Business Research, 173:p.114479.
|
| [34] |
Tong, L., N. Liu, M. Zhang, and L. Wang. 2018. “Employee Protection and Corporate Innovation: Empirical Evidence from China,” Journal of Business Ethics, 153(2): pp.569～589.
|
| [35] |
Xu, N., M. Li, R. Xie, and K.C. Chan. 2024. “Double Standards？ The Adverse Impact of Chairperson Hometown Ties on Corporate Green Innovation,” Journal of Corporate Finance, 88: p.102640.
|
|
|
|
