1998-60411998-605X
Business Perspectives
  • Login

Editorial office contact form

Please complete all required fields!

Please specify your request here

Should not be empty
Should not be empty
Should not be empty
Should not be empty
Captcha Refresh Invalid data

Your request has been successfully sent.

Your Cart

Price Total
€0.00

(₴0)

Proceed to Checkout
Your cart is empty
Cart 0 Items
Submit Manuscript
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publishing policies
  • Editorial Policies
  • Books
FOLLOW US
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Environmental Economics
  • Issue #2
  • Environmental, social, and governance performance: The role of Chinese employee stock ownership plans

Environmental, social, and governance performance: The role of Chinese employee stock ownership plans

  • Received April 2, 2024;
    Accepted October 7, 2024;
    Published October 17, 2024
  • Author(s)
    Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5119-0486
    Yasi Liu
    ORCID ,
    Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3363-2307
    Shaun McDowell
    ORCID ,
    Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5914-6974
    Chunxiao Xue
    ORCID ,
    Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2964-0733
    Jianing Zhang
    ORCID
  • DOI
    http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.15(2).2024.10
  • Article Info
    Volume 15 2024, Issue #2, pp. 132-148
  • TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ
  • 354 Views
  • 51 Downloads

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

The challenges of global warming, resource depletion, and environmental protection require immediate action from corporations, governments, and communities globally. Implementing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) measures represents a key strategy for corporations in addressing sustainability concerns. This study investigates how the ESG performance of publicly listed companies in China is influenced by employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs). Utilizing a dataset covering 4,464 publicly listed Chinese corporations from 2009 to 2022, this analysis employs fixed-effects regressions to reveal the beneficial impact of ESOPs on corporate ESG ratings. A firm’s transition from non-ESOP to ESOP status raises ESG ratings by 1.213, representing 22% of the ESG score’s standard deviation. The findings indicate that greater involvement of the top management team in an ESOP weakens the positive impact of the ESOP on corporate ESG performance. The positive impact of ESOPs on ESG performance is insignificant in the agriculture sector but more pronounced in the manufacturing and service sectors, where the transition to ESOP status results in ESG score increases of 1.122 and 1.500, respectively. The issue of endogeneity is addressed by utilizing a lagged ESOP independent variable and applying two-stage least squares regression with the average ESOP serving as the instrumental variable. The findings confirm that causality runs from ESOP to ESG rather than ESG influencing ESOP.

Acknowledgment
This study was supported by the Department of Education of Zhejiang Province – General Program (Y202249981, Y202353438), the Wenzhou Association for Science and Technology – Service and Technology Innovation Program (jczc0254), the Wenzhou-Kean University Student Partnering with Faculty Research Program (WKUSPF202404, WKUSPF202411), the Wenzhou-Kean University International Collaborative Research Program (ICRP2023002, ICRP2023004), and the Wenzhou-Kean University Internal Research Support Program (IRSPG202205, IRSPG202206).

view full abstract hide full abstract
  • PAPER PROFILE
  • AUTHORS CONTRIBUTIONS
  • FIGURES
  • TABLES
  • REFERENCES
  • Keywords
    China, employee stock ownership plan, environmental sustainability, ESG, top management team, two-stage least squares
  • JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)
    Q56, Q51, Q58, M14
  • References
    43
  • Tables
    7
  • Figures
    0
    • Table 1. Descriptive statistics
    • Table 2. Pairwise correlations
    • Table 3. Baseline regressions
    • Table 4. Moderating effect of TMT subscription ratio
    • Table 5. Different industries
    • Table 6. Lagged independent variable
    • Table 7. Two-stage least squares regressions
    • Alexiev, A. S., Jansen, J. J., Van den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2010). Top management team advice seeking and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of TMT heterogeneity. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1343-1364.
    • Al-Hiyari, A. (2024). Does top executive gender diversity matter for the value relevance of ESG controversies? Empirical evidence from European tech firms. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change.
    • Barrick, M. R., Thurgood, G. R., Smith, T. A., & Courtright, S. H. (2015). Collective organizational engagement: Linking motivational antecedents, strategic implementation, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 111-135.
    • Blair, M. M., Kruse, D. L., & Blasi, J. (2000). Employee ownership: An unstable form or a stabilizing force? (Working Paper No. 142146). Georgetown University Law Center.
    • Bova, F., Kolev, K., Thomas, J. K., & Zhang, X. F. (2015). Non-executive employee ownership and corporate risk. Accounting Review, 90(1), 115-145.
    • Chaganti, R., & Damanpour, F. (1991). Institutional ownership, capital structure, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12(7), 479-491.
    • Chen, T., Dong, H., & Lin, C. (2020). Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 135(2), 483-504.
    • Cogin, J. A., Sanders, K., & Williamson, I. O. (2018). Work-life support practices and customer satisfaction: The role of TMT composition and country culture. Human Resource Management, 57(1), 279-291.
    • Cramton, P., Mehran, H., & Tracy, J. S. (2008). ESOP fables: The impact of employee stock ownership plans on labor disputes (FRB of New York Staff Report No. 347).
    • Ermakova, A., Finogenova, Y., & Subbota, K. (2023). Assessment of industry specifics impact on the ESG rating among Russian companies. Revista Gestão & Tecnologia, 23, 53-71.
    • Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law & Economics, 26(2), 301-325.
    • Fatihat, G. G. (2021). The effect of the employee stock ownership program and growth on return on equity (Case studies in manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2015–2019). Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(8), 1267-1275.
    • Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms’ competitive moves. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 659-684.
    • Hasmath, R. (2020). New ESG practices in China and its implications for foreign actors. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs.
    • Hu, J., Li, K., Xia, Y., & Zhang, J. (2023). Gender diversity and financial flexibility: Evidence from China. International Review of Financial Analysis, 90, Article 102934.
    • Jung, H., & Choi, S. (2021). The effects of employee stock ownership on stock liquidity: Evidence from the Korean market. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 58, Article 101468.
    • Kim, E. H., & Ouimet, P. (2014). Broad-based employee stock ownership: Motives and outcomes. Journal of Finance, 69(3), 1273-1319.
    • Klein, K. J. (1987). Employee stock ownership and employee attitudes: A test of three models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 319-332.
    • Kramer, B. (2010). Employee ownership and participation effects on outcomes in firms majority employee-owned through employee stock ownership plans in the US1. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31(4), 449-476.
    • Kurland, N. (2018). ESOP plus benefit corporation: Ownership culture with benefit accountability. California Management Review, 60(4), 51-73.
    • Kurnia, T., & Tandiontong, M. (2015). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and financial ratio to corporate values. Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research, 18(2), 227-252.
    • La Porta, R., Lopez-De-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471-517.
    • Lai, S., Liang, H., Liu, Z., Pu, X., & Zhang, J. (2022). Ownership concentration among entrepreneurial firms: The growth-control trade-off. International Review of Economics & Finance, 78, 122-140.
    • Lee, S. P., & Chuang, T. H. (2009). The determinants of corporate performance: A viewpoint from insider ownership and institutional ownership. Managerial Auditing Journal, 24(3), 233-247.
    • Liang, Y., Xue, C., & Zhang, J. (2023). The impact of ESG ratings on stock liquidity risk: Evidence from the Chinese market. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 12(4), 1-16.
    • Lopez-de-Silanes, F., McCahery, J. A., & Pudschedl, P. C. (2024). Institutional investors and ESG preferences. Corporate Governance: An International Review.
    • Lu, S., & Cheng, B. (2023). Does environmental regulation affect firms’ ESG performance? Evidence from China. Managerial and Decision Economics, 44(4), 2004-2009.
    • Madison, N., & Schiehll, E. (2021). The effect of financial materiality on ESG performance assessment. Sustainability, 13(7), Article 3652.
    • Mazibuko, N. E., & Boshoff, C. (2003). Employee perceptions of share ownership schemes: An empirical study. South African Journal of Business Management, 34(2), 31-44.
    • Park, S. R., & Jang, J. Y. (2021). The impact of ESG management on investment decision: Institutional investors’ perceptions of country-specific ESG criteria. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(3), Article 48.
    • Rajesh, R., & Rajendran, C. (2020). Relating environmental, social, and governance scores and sustainability performances of firms: An empirical analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1247-1267.
    • Sang, Y., Loganathan, K., & Lin, L. (2024). Digital transformation and firm ESG performance: The mediating role of corporate risk-taking and the moderating role of top management team. Sustainability, 16(14), Article 5907.
    • Schneider, N. (2020). Broad-based stakeholder ownership in journalism: Co-ops, ESOPs, blockchains. Media Industries Journal, 7(2), 45-67.
    • Schwenk, C. (1993). Management tenure and explanations for success and failure. Omega, 21(4), 449-456.
    • Sheikh, S. (2019). An examination of the dimensions of CEO power and corporate social responsibility. Review of Accounting and Finance, 18(2), 221-244.
    • Velte, P. (2020). Institutional ownership, environmental, social, and governance performance and disclosure – A review on empirical quantitative research. SSRN Electronic Journal.
    • Weissbourd, J., Conway, M., Klein, J., Chang, Y., Kruse, D., Hoover, M., Leverette, T., McKinley, J., & Trenholm, Z. (2021). Race and gender wealth equity and the role of employee share ownership. Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership, 4(2), 116-135.
    • Xiao, H., Shi, Y., & Varma, A. (2019). The effects of employee stock ownership plans on career development in a new era: Evidence from China’s manufacturing transformation. Career Development International, 24(5), 453-474.
    • Xu, X., & Duan, L. (2023). Confucianism and employee stock ownership plans: Evidence from Chinese listed firms. Economic Analysis and Policy, 78, 859-872.
    • Zhang, Y. (2023). Employee stock ownership plans and corporate innovation. Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 2(1), 54-59.
    • Zheng, S., Zhang, Q., & Zhang, P. (2023). Can customer concentration affect corporate ESG performance? Finance Research Letters, 58, Article 104432.
    • Zhou, L., Wei, F., & Kong, Y. (2022). Do employee stock ownership plans affect corporate social responsibility? Evidence from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(3), Article 1055.
    • Zito, M. J. (2014, June 30). CSRC announces employee stock ownership plan. China Briefing.
    • Conceptualization
      Yasi Liu, Jianing Zhang
    • Data curation
      Yasi Liu
    • Formal Analysis
      Yasi Liu, Shaun McDowell, Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Investigation
      Yasi Liu, Shaun McDowell, Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Methodology
      Yasi Liu, Shaun McDowell, Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Resources
      Yasi Liu
    • Software
      Yasi Liu
    • Visualization
      Yasi Liu
    • Writing – original draft
      Yasi Liu
    • Supervision
      Shaun McDowell, Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Validation
      Shaun McDowell, Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Writing – review & editing
      Shaun McDowell, Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Funding acquisition
      Chunxiao Xue, Jianing Zhang
    • Project administration
      Jianing Zhang
Related Articles
  • The nature of China’s role in development of Africa: the case of Zimbabwe

    Fortune Hogwe , Handson Banda doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(1-1).2017.11
    Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 15, 2017         Issue #1 (cont.)         pp. 237-247 Views: 1959 Downloads: 1473 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    China’s involvement in Africa has become one of the contentious topics in the development literature. The background of the study is that Sino-African relations can be grouped into two phases thus: past relations and contemporary relations. The two phases are dissimilar, as past relations are categorized by solidarity against imperialism, while contemporary relations are characterized by economic relations. The study uses a historical approach to analyze China’s resurgence into Africa and Zimbabwe, a case study is used to examine the contemporary Sino-African relations. Secondary data were utilized to come to sound conclusion of the study. The study mainly found out that China’s resurgence into Africa presents both negative and positive impacts for Africa and that the negatives need to be regulated in order for African countries to benefit from the relations.

  • Green bonds of supranational financial institutions: On the road to sustainable development

    Nataliia VersalORCID Researcher ID, Antonina SholoikoORCID Researcher ID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(1).2022.07
    Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 19, 2022         Issue #1         pp. 91-105 Views: 1839 Downloads: 491 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    The move to sustainable development and building a carbon-low economy needs funding. In this regard, a new direction in finance – green (sustainable) finance – has emerged. One of the green finance instruments is green bonds, first issued by supranational financial institutions. This paper aims to identify the features of green bond issues and implemented green projects by the World Bank (the WB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the EBRD). Data were obtained from databases and reports of the WB, the EBRD, and the Climate Bonds Initiative. Data analysis was provided using statistical methods, particularly descriptive and comparative statistics. A positive trend in the issue of green bonds in the volumes and timing of the WB and the EBRD was revealed, despite the shift in emphasis caused by COVID-19. Renewable energy, energy efficiency, and clean transportation remain the primary directions of the WB, and the EBRD green projects amounted to more than 60% of total projects funding. The geography of green projects financed through the WB and the EBRD green bonds indicates that green projects are receiving significant funding from countries facing environmental challenges and demonstrating intent to green transition (the WB – China and India, the EBRD – Turkey, Poland, and Egypt). Supranational financial institutions were the first to come to the forefront of sustainable development funding and are now spearheading the creation of new financial instruments aimed at financing both green and social projects, leading to the emergence of sustainability bonds.

    Acknowledgment(s)
    The authors would like to thank the participants of the 1st International Conference on Sustainable Development (SDL 2021) for providing the valuable remarks and a fruitful discussion. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Demystifying the relationship between ESG and SDG performance: Study of emerging economies

    Tarun Kumar SoniORCID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.20(3).2023.01
    Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 20, 2023         Issue #3         pp. 1-12 Views: 1519 Downloads: 393 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    Companies and investors in emerging markets have started paying attention to ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) issues. There has been a growing demand for aligning ESG disclosure of companies to UN SDGs (United Nations Sustainable Development Goals), so understanding how the firm-level ESG affects the country-level SDG is very important for evaluating the advances in ESG and SDG implementation in emerging markets. This study examines the linkage between firm-level ESG disclosures and their relationship with country-level SDG scores over ten years for three emerging countries: India, China, and Brazil. The analysis of 1,500 top-listed firms in these countries reveals an increasing trend of firms going for ESG disclosures and increased ESG scores over the years in the three markets. Out of the total sample, almost 75% of firms make ESG disclosures in Brazil, followed by 54% in India and 32% in China. Additionally, companies in all these countries tend to emphasize governance-related disclosures more, with Brazil having higher ESG disclosures than India and China. The correlation and causality tests indicate a significant positive correlation between mean ESG scores and country-specific SDG scores. The Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel causality tests provide stronger linkages between firm-specific Environment scores and SDG scores, indicating that a firm’s environment disclosures translate into higher SDG scores. However, the same is not valid for Social and Governance factors. These findings have important implications given the global attention on the linkages between ESG disclosure and SDG score.

    Acknowledgments
    The financial and infrastructure support provided by FORE School of Management, New Delhi in completing this paper is gratefully acknowledged.

< Prev Next >
Download Preview
Close
Environmental Economics
Environmental Economics
  • Issue #2
  • Journal Homepage
  • Indexed/Abstracted
  • Aims and Scope
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Policies and Publication Ethics
  • Submission Guidelines for Authors
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Acceptance rate
  • Self-Archiving Policy
  • Article processing charge
 

COOKIES
The cookie settings on this website are set to 'allow all cookies' to give you the best experience.

If you continue without changing these settings, you consent to this Read more

Accept
newsletter
We accept payment with:
  • visa
  • mastercard
  • ISNI: 0000 0004 6439 8257
  • Copyright © 2025 LLC “CPC “Business Perspectives”,
    except Open Access articles

Developed by MindK. Designed by Crisp.

  • About Us
    • Company
    • News
    • Cooperation and partners
    • Advertising
    • Manuscript Administration System
  • Users support
    • Your profile
    • External services instructions
    • Site navigation
Contact us
  • Hryhorii Skovoroda lane, 10 Sumy, 40022 , Ukraine
  • +380-542-221707
  • +38-063-2891070
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
Tweets by LLC “Business Perspectives”