社会信任与企业ESG“言过其实”

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 企业ESG“言过其实”是资本市场ESG信息披露进程中的关键问题,在正式制度对其监管受限的背景下,作为重要非正式制度的社会信任能否发挥治理作用值得探讨。本文基于2010—2022年中国A股上市公司数据,考察了社会信任对于企业ESG“言过其实”的影响。研究结果显示,社会信任能够抑制企业ESG“言过其实”。机制检验表明,企业在内部融资获取动机、声誉维护动机驱使和外部利益相关者压力影响下,更倾向于接受社会信任约束,进而抑制ESG“言过其实”。基于“言”与“行”二元视角,社会信任对企业ESG“言过其实”的治理效果主要体现为提升ESG信息质量、改善ESG实际行为。进一步分析发现,在市场化程度较高的地区和非国有产权、ESG实际表现较好的企业中,社会信任对ESG“言过其实”的抑制作用将更为突出。本文的研究结论有助于深入理解社会信任的公司治理作用,同时从非正式制度角度为纾解企业ESG“言过其实”问题提供了参考思路。

关键词: 社会信任, ESG“言过其实”, 融资约束, 企业声誉, 外部利益相关者压力

Abstract: Corporate ESG overstatement represents a critical challenge in the process of ESG information disclosure within capital markets. Since formal systems inevitably contain blind spots in addressing corporate ESG overstatement, it is worth investigating whether social trust, as a key informal system, can serve as an effective governance mechanism. Based on the data from Chinese A-share listed companies from 2010 to 2022, this study examines the impact of social trust on corporate ESG overstatement. The findings show that social trust significantly inhibits corporate ESG overstatement. Mechanism analysis indicates that firms, driven by internal financing motivations, reputation maintenance incentives, and external stakeholder pressures, are more likely to adhere to the constraints of social trust, thereby mitigating ESG overstatement. From the dual perspectives of “words” and “actions”, the governance effect of social trust on corporate ESG overstatement is primarily reflected in the enhancement of ESG information quality and the improvement of actual ESG practices. Further research reveals that the inhibitory effect of social trust on ESG overstatement is more pronounced in regions with higher levels of marketization, in non-state-owned companies, and in companies with superior actual ESG performance. The findings of this study enhance the understanding of the governance role of social trust and, from the perspective of informal systems, offer valuable insights for mitigating the issue of corporate ESG overstatement.

Key words: Social Trust, ESG Overstatement, Financing Constraints, Corporate Reputation, External Stakeholder Pressure

中图分类号:

F275.5

王怡晨, 周泽将. 社会信任与企业ESG“言过其实”[J]. 财经论丛, 2025, 41(11): 76-85.

WANG Yichen, ZHOU Zejiang. Social Trust and Corporate ESG Overstatement[J]. Collected Essays on Finance and Economics, 2025, 41(11): 76-85.

参考文献

[1] 张维迎, 柯荣住. 信任及其解释:来自中国的跨省调查分析[J]. 经济研究, 2002, (10): 59-70, 96.
[2] 弗朗西斯·福山. 信任: 社会美德与创造经济繁荣[M]. 郭华, 译. 桂林: 广西师范大学出版社, 2016.
[3] 刘凤委, 李琳, 薛云奎. 信任、交易成本与商业信用模式[J]. 经济研究, 2009, (8): 60-72.
[4] 张婷婷, 王珠珠. 诚至金开: 区域诚信文化建设与商业信用融资[J]. 会计研究, 2022, (12): 19-34.
[5] Chen S., Cai W., Jebran K. Does Social Trust Mitigate Earnings Management? Evidence from China[J]. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 2021, 57(10): 2995-3016.
[6] 申丹琳, 江轩宇. 社会信任与企业劳动投资效率[J]. 金融研究, 2022, (9): 152-168.
[7] Roszkowska-Menkes M., Aluchna M., Kamiński B. True Transparency or Mere Decoupling? The Study of Selective Disclosure in Sustainability Reporting[J]. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2024, 98: 102700.
[8] Eliwa Y., Aboud A., Saleh A. Board Gender Diversity and ESG Decoupling: Does Religiosity Matter?[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2023, 32(7): 4046-4067.
[9] Gull A. A., Hussain N., Khan S. A., et al. Governing Corporate Social Responsibility Decoupling: The Effect of the Governance Committee on Corporate Social Responsibility Decoupling[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2023, 185(2): 349-374.
[10] Zhang Y. Analyst Coverage and Corporate Social Responsibility Decoupling: Evidence from China[J]. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 2022, 29(3): 620-634.
[11] 王嘉鑫, 刘雪娜, 于鑫雨, 等. 银企ESG一致性与贷后企业策略性ESG行为[J]. 财经研究, 2024, (4): 109-123.
[12] Aboud A., Saleh A., Eliwa Y. Does Mandating ESG Reporting Reduce ESG Decoupling? Evidence from the European Union's Directive 2014/95[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2024, 33(2): 1305-1320.
[13] Knack S., Keefer P. Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1997, 112(4): 1251-1288.
[14] 张敦力, 李四海. 社会信任、政治关系与民营企业银行贷款[J]. 会计研究, 2012, (8): 17-24, 96.
[15] Garrett J., Hoitash R., Prawitt D. F. Trust and Financial Reporting Quality[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2014, 52(5): 1087-1125.
[16] Chen X., Wan P. Social Trust and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from China[J]. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 2020, 27(2): 485-500.
[17] 翟学伟, 薛天山. 社会信任: 理论及其应用[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2014. 59-64.
[18] 邱保印, 曹万彬, 黄健军. 识不足则多虑, 信不足则多言: 信任与债券契约条款[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2024, (9): 48-66.
[19] 李哲, 王文翰, 王遥. 企业环境责任表现与政府补贴获取——基于文本分析的经验证据[J]. 财经研究, 2022, (2): 78-92, 108.
[20] 刘媛媛, 徐沛钰, 刘靖瑜. 高管团队社会资本对CSR负面事件的缓解效应——基于产品市场视角[J]. 科研管理, 2019, (1): 131-138.
[21] 廖佳, 苏冬蔚. 上市公司负面声誉与分析师关注: “趋之若鹜”抑或“避之若浼”[J]. 会计研究, 2021, (8): 38-53.
[22] 段钊, 涂秋阳, 胡春, 等. 上市公司社会责任信息披露中的信任修复[J]. 经济管理, 2023, (8): 145-166.
[23] 蒋为, 干铠骏, 李锡涛. 媒体负面报道、印象管理与策略性环境治理[J]. 会计研究, 2023, (11): 150-162.
[24] 魏志华, 曾爱民, 李博. 金融生态环境与企业融资约束——基于中国上市公司的实证研究[J]. 会计研究, 2014, (5): 73-80, 95.
[25] Lai C. S., Chiu C. J., Yang C. F., et al. The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Brand Performance: The Mediating Effect of Industrial Brand Equity and Corporate Reputation[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2010, 95(3): 457-469.
[26] 管考磊, 张蕊. 企业声誉与盈余管理: 有效契约观还是寻租观[J]. 会计研究, 2019, (1): 59-64.
[27] 俞庆进, 张兵. 投资者有限关注与股票收益——以百度指数作为关注度的一项实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2012, (8): 152-165.
[28] 黄勃, 李海彤, 江萍, 等. 战略联盟、要素流动与企业全要素生产率提升[J]. 管理世界, 2022, (10): 195-212.
[29] 张梓靖, 黄福宁, 宋明勇. 机构投资者网络中心性与企业环境信息披露[J]. 证券市场导报, 2023, (7): 3-13.
[30] 王克敏, 王华杰, 李栋栋, 等. 年报文本信息复杂性与管理者自利——来自中国上市公司的证据[J]. 管理世界, 2018, (12): 120-132, 194.
[31] 雷玲, 周泽将. 经济增长目标调整与企业过度投资——“有为政府”与“有效市场”的双重视角[J]. 学术研究, 2024, (9): 102-110.
[32] Huang Y., Francoeur C., Brammer S. What Drives and Curbs Brownwashing?[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2022, 31(5): 2518-2532.