Title

企業永續發展環境資訊透明度之實證研究

Translated Titles

An Empirical Study on Transparency of Environmental Information in Corporate Sustainable Development

Authors

楊景雯

Key Words

永續發展 ; 環境資訊 ; 企業社會責任 ; 邏輯斯迴歸分析 ; Sustainable development ; Environmental information ; Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) ; Logistic regression analysis

PublicationName

臺灣大學國家發展研究所學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2012年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

唐代彪

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究背景緣起於關注全球暖化造成極端氣候引發災情頻起之現象,使地球上的每一份子必須去反思周遭環境的劇變。經由探索環境議題對個人、社會與國家之衝擊引伸永續發展之概念。進入全球化、資訊科技時代,要求透明化的聲浪是永續發展的驅動力,亦是關注環境議題的助力。因私部門企業是全球開發中及已開發國家的重要經濟支柱,亦是造成環境生態改變的主要來源,故本研究擇定企業永續發展環境議題揭露之透明度為研究主題。 由於電子業在臺灣經濟發展過程扮演重要角色,故以隨機抽樣方式選取國內100家電子工業上市公司作為研究對象,以其年報揭露方式之永續發展環境資訊為觀察標的。就樣本之變數作描述性統計、差異性檢定及相關性分析,並以政府、社會、企業三方觀點建構之邏輯斯迴歸模型,預測永續發展觀念下之提升環境資訊透明度之準確率,及三方個別觀點對於提升永續發展環境資訊透明度之影響力。 實證結果顯示: 一、政府機構持股比例、獨立董事與監察人人數、從業員工平均服務年資、毛利率之自變數,對於企業永續發展環境資訊透明度之提升具正向影響力。二、政府(政府機構持股比例、全體董監持股設質比例、經濟部投審會核准赴中國大陸投資金額、獨立董事與監察人人數)、社會(有無依全球永續性報告架構國際規範編製企業社會責任報告書、從業員工人數、平均年齡、平均服務年資)、企業(毛利率、每股盈餘、負債占資產比率、研究發展費用)三方觀點建構之邏輯斯迴歸模型,整體配適度達顯著水準,對於企業提升永續發展環境資訊之透明度之預測準確率為80%。 本研究發現如下: 一、政府部門對於其投資之企業能發揮提升環境資訊揭露之影響力。二、企業之獨立董事監察人之制衡力量能有助於提升環境資訊透明度。三、持久的僱傭關係隱含永續發展之精神,與企業環境資訊之揭露能發揮相乘效應。四、企業破除成本價格競逐之迷思,有利於提升環境資訊透明度。 綜上,本研究貢獻希冀作為政府、社會、企業之切入與發展方向。 研究建議如下: 一、政府應促使四大基金投資之企業與民營化之國營企業積極回應及提升環境資訊透明度。二、政府應強化獨立董事監察人督促企業揭露環境資訊之職能。三、企業應力行與員工間互相溝通環境議題,俾使企業其成長效益回饋於社會。四、企業應深耕品牌、服務創新,以永續經營理念因應氣候變遷,開創環境與經濟雙贏之競爭優勢。

English Abstract

The background of this research originates from the extreme weather phenomena throughout the world, leading to frequent disasters and making all people on earth to react and think about the drastic changes of their living environment. Through the exploration of environmental issues, the concept of sustainable development has been extended. The world has entered the era of globalization, and information technology has changed rapidly. The voice of requesting transparency is the driving force of sustainable development, and it is also an unavoidable issue and support of caring for environmental issue. Since private enterprises are the major economic pillars of developed and developing countries around the world, they are also the major sources of environmental and ecological changes. Therefore, the uncovered transparency of environmental issues on corporate sustainable development is selected as the topic of this research. As the electronics industry plays an important role in Taiwan's economic development process, random sampling of 100 listed electronics companies are selected as the object of this study. The sustainable development and environmental information disclosed by Annual Report are taken as the subject of observation. Descriptive statistics, test on differences and correlation analysis are conducted on the variables of the sample. The logistic regression model constructed by the tripartite views of government, society and enterprises is to be used to predict the probability of enhancing transparency of environmental information under the concept of sustainable development. In addition, the influence of individual perspective from government, society and enterprise on transparency enhancement of sustainable development and environmental information will be analyzed. Empirical results show that: (1) Shareholding ratio of government agency, number of independent board directors and supervisors, employee’s average years of service and independent variable of gross profit margin have positive effects on enhancing transparency of corporate sustainable development and environmental information. (2) The logistic regression model and overall goodness of fit constructed by the views of government (shareholding ratio of government agency, shareholding ratio and pledged ratio of all board directors and supervisors, amount of investment to mainland China approved by Investment Commission, Ministry of Economic Affairs and number of independent board directors and supervisors), society (whether Corporate Social Responsibility Report, number of employees, average age and average years of service are prepared in accordance with Global Reporting Initiative framework international norms) and enterprises (gross profit margin, earnings per share, debt to total assets ratio, R&Dcost) have achieved significant level. The predicted accuracy of transparency for corporate sustainable development and environmental information is 80%. The findings are described as follows: (1) The government is capable of enhancing its influence over disclosure of environmental information to its invested businesses; (2) The balance of power held by the independent board directors and supervisors of enterprises are able to help improve the transparency of environmental information; (3) Long-lasting employment relations imply the spirit of sustainable development, and disclosure of corporate environmental information can play a multiplying effect; (4) Enterprises get rid of the myth of competitive price, which is helpful to improve the transparency of environmental information. In summary, this research wishes to provide development guidance for government, society and enterprises. Recommendations are given as follows: (1) Government should encourage the four fund investment companies and privatized state-owned enterprises to positively response and enhance the transparency of environmental information; (2) Government should strengthen the functions of the independent board directors and supervisors to urge enterprises to expose environmental information; (3) Enterprises should communicate with employees and stress on environmental issues so that growth effectiveness of enterprises can be contributed to the community; (4) Enterprises should have in-depth development on brand, innovative service, the concept of sustainable development in response to climate change and creation of environmental and economic win-win competitive advantages.

Topic Category 社會科學院 > 國家發展研究所
社會科學 > 政治學
Reference
  1. 行政院環境保護署(2008)。產業環境會計指引。
    連結:
  2. 李明軒、邱如美譯(1996)。Michael E. Porter著(1990)。國家競爭優勢(The Competitive Advantage of Nations)。台北市:天下文化出版社。
    連結:
  3. 周賓凰、徐耀男、王絹淑譯(2011),Molly Scott Cato,著(2009)。綠色經濟學-理論、政策與實務(Green Economics An Introduction to Theory, Policy and Practice)。台北市:智勝文化事業。
    連結:
  4. 祝道松、盧正宗、洪晨桓、楊秀萍(2008)。環境績效對環境揭露與經濟績效的影響。當代會計,第九卷第二期237-270頁。
    連結:
  5. 翁霓、蕭運炎(2008),財務報表環境資訊揭露品質影響因素之探討—以國內上市公司為例。東吳經濟商學學報,第61期1-30頁。
    連結:
  6. 陳冠宙、陳育成與陳雪如(2005)。影響上市公司網站資訊透明度因子之實證。會計與公司治理,第2卷第1期33-59頁。
    連結:
  7. 黃劭彥、吳東憲、紀怡如(2009)。企業網站環境會計資訊揭露影響因素之研究。會計與公司治理,第六卷第一期1-30 頁。
    連結:
  8. 廖麗敏(2011)。企業環境資訊揭露影響因素之研究-以台灣上市電子公司為例。國立台北大學企業管理學系博士論文。
    連結:
  9. 鄭麗文譯(2009),Nicholas Stern著(2009)。全球新政-氣候變遷下的世界經濟改造計畫(A Blueprint For A Safer Planet:how to manage climate change and creat a new era of progress and prosperity)。台北市:如果出版社。
    連結:
  10. Ansell and Gash(2007).Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice .Journal of Public Administration Research 18:543-571
    連結:
  11. Atle Midttun, (2005)."Realigning business, government and civil society: Emerging embedded relational governance beyond the (neo)liberal and welfare state models", Corporate Governance, Vol. 5 Iss: 3 pp. 159 – 174
    連結:
  12. David Held & Anthony McGrew(2002).Governing Globalization:Power, Authority and Global Governance. Cambridge, UK:Polity Press.
    連結:
  13. Deegan, C., & Gordon, B. (1996). A study of the environmental disclosure practices of Australian corporations. Accounting and Business Research, 26(3) , 187-199.
    連結:
  14. Epstein and Roy.(1998.)Managing Corporate Environmental Performance:A Multinational Perspective.European Management Journal June 1988.
    連結:
  15. Epstein and Roy.(2003).Improving Sustainability Performance:Specifying,Implementing, and Measuring Key Principles.Journal of General Management29.
    連結:
  16. Ostrom, Elinor(1990). Governing the Commons: the Evolution of institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
    連結:
  17. Patten, D. M. (1991).Exposure, legitimacy and social disclosure.Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 10:297-308.
    連結:
  18. Peter B. Evans , Dietrich Rueschemeyer , Theda Skocpol(1985). Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge University Press.
    連結:
  19. Jonathon Porritt(2006).Capitalism as if the World Mattered. London: Earthscan.p.289
    連結:
  20. Reinhard Steurer(2010). The role of governments in corporate social responsibility: characterising public policies on CSR in Europe. Policy Sciences ,43:49-72.
    連結:
  21. R. Lawson(2007).An overview of green economics.International Journal of Green Economics,1/1-2:23-36:23.
    連結:
  22. Robert Kaplan, David Norton(2004). Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Harvard Business Review Press.
    連結:
  23. Walden, D. W. and B. N. Schwarts,(1997)Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure.Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 16:125-154.
    連結:
  24. Wiseman, J. (1982). An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports . Accounting, Organizations and Society, 7(1),53-64.
    連結:
  25. Zadek,Simon (2006).“The Logic of Collaborative Governance: Corporate
    連結:
  26. 中文部分
  27. 王濟川、郭志剛(2010)。Logistic迴歸模型-方法及應用(二版)。台北市:五南圖書。
  28. 王佩如(2003)。年報環境揭露與合理性理論之研究─以上市公司為例。國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。
  29. 丘羽先、李欣容、許貴蓮、童一寧、黃孝如、楊舒絹、蔡菁芳、顧淑馨等八位譯(2008)。Thomas L. Friedman著(2008)。世界又熱又平又擠(Hot, Flat, and Crowded)。台北市:天下文化出版社。
  30. 朱博湧(2012)。綠金企業-從IT到ET,開創新藍海。台北市:天下遠見。
  31. 朱竹元(2009)。對資本市場推動企業社會責任的想法。永續產業發展雙月刊,第44期68-73頁。
  32. 行政院研究考核發展委員會(2011)。國營事業落實公司治理個案分析—以桃園國際機場股份有限公司及港務股份有限公司為例。
  33. 吳明隆(2008)。SPSS操作與應用—多變量分析實務。台北市:五南圖書。
  34. 吳明隆、涂金堂(2010)。SPSS與統計應用分析(二版)。台北市:五南圖書。
  35. 吳明隆(2011)。論文寫作與量化研究。台北市:五南圖書。
  36. 李芳齡譯(2009)。Marc J.Epstein著(2008)。企業永續發展指南(Making Sustainbility Work)。台北市:天下雜誌社。
  37. 李明軒、邱如美譯(1999)。Michael E. Porter著(1985)。競爭優勢(Competitive Advantage:Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance)。台北市:天下文化出版社。
  38. 李禮仲(2008)。國營事業非「酬庸」單位。國家政策研究基金會,財經(評)097-190號,2008年11月16日。
  39. 李國鳳(2004)。環境資訊揭露內容之評估-以違反環保法規之公開發行公司為例。政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。
  40. 李秀玲(2010)。鼓勵引導上市上櫃公司履行企業社會責任。證券櫃檯月刊,147期6-13頁。
  41. 周子敬、黃廷合(2007)。統計套裝軟體-精通SPSS。台北市:全華科技圖書。
  42. 林宏端(2005)。台灣環境議題特論:第21章國際環保趨勢與產業因應。台北市:五南圖書。
  43. 林震岩(2007)。多變量分析:SPSS的操作與應用。台北市:智勝文化事業。
  44. 金志遠(2000)。董事會特性與年報自願性揭露關係之研究。國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。
  45. 韋敦平(2005)。企業環境資訊揭露行為之實證研究─成本效益觀點分析。東吳大學會計學系碩士論文。
  46. 高若熙譯(2011)。Andrew S.Winston著(2009)。綠色成長企業(Green Recovery:Get Lean,Get Smart,and Emerge from Downturn on Top)。台北市:天下雜誌。
  47. 高宜凡(2010)。台灣產業必須的改變:服務創新。遠見雜誌2010年1月號第283期。
  48. 陳凱俐譯(2007)。Ahmed M.Hussen著(2004)。環境經濟學原裡(Principles of Enviromental Economics—Economics,Ecology and Public Policy)。新北市:揚智文化事業。
  49. 陳欽春(2006)。企業與社會的鑲嵌與接軌:企業社會責任的省思。中華發展基金管理會主辦「政府與企業法制關係」學術研討會。
  50. 陳春山(2008)。企業社會責任及治理。台北市:財團法人中華民國證券暨期貨市場發展基金會。
  51. 莊文忠譯(2007)。Robert L.Miller、Ciaran Acton Deirdre A.Fullerton、John Maltby著(2002)。SPSS在社會科學的應用(SPSS For Social Scientists: Covers Versions 9, 10 And 11)。台北市:五南圖書。
  52. 黃振豊、史雅男(2005)。從社會政治理論觀點論環境資訊揭露程度與環境聲譽關聯性。淡江人文社會學刊,第23期77-102頁。
  53. 莫冬立(2006)。企業非財務績效資訊揭露:為何做?如何做?。應用倫理研究通訊,第40期60-71頁。
  54. 張美惠譯(2010)。Daniel Goleman著(2009)。綠色E Q(Ecological Intelligence)。台北市:時報文化出版。
  55. 張泉湧(2011)。全球氣候變遷-危機與轉機(三版)。台北市:五南圖書。
  56. 葉保強(2007)。企業社會責任的發展與國家角色。應用倫理研究通訊,第41期35-47頁。
  57. 楊冠政(1999)。永續發展的倫理。環境教育季刊,37期82-86頁。
  58. 經濟部投資業務處(2005)。OECD 國際投資暨多國企業宣言與決議:基本條文。
  59. 劉國輝(2003)。複雜抽樣設計下邏輯斯迴歸模式之分析。國立政治大學統計研究所碩士論文。
  60. 鍾憲瑞(2008)。產業分析精論—多元觀點與策略思維。新北市:前程文化事業。
  61. 外文部分
  62. Daniel Franklin(2008).Special Reports: Just good business. Jan.17,The Economist.
  63. David Holmgren.(2004).Essence of Permaculture. Australia: Holmgren Design Services.
  64. G. Smith and S. Young(2007).‘Social economy and the environment’paper prepared for the conference Social Economy:Towards a Worldwide Perspective, Leuven,4-5 june.
  65. Raffaele Marchetti(2010).The Role of Civil Society in Global Governance Synthesis Report on the joint seminar organised by the EUISS, the European Commission / DG Research,and UNU-CRIS
  66. R. Douthwaite(1992).The Growth Illusion,Totnes:Green Books.
  67. S. Fitz-Gibbon(2004).Best of Both Worlds:Green Policies for Job Creation and Sustainability.London:Green Party.
  68. Responsibility, Accountability, and the Social Contract”, A Report of “Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative”, Working Paper No.17, The Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.