Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/87748Full metadata record
| ???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 王淑美 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Shu-Mei Wang | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 郜凱聞 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | KAI-WEN GAO | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-07-19T16:16:02Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2023-11-09 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2023-07-19 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-06-07 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 參考文獻
吳濟華、何柏正（2009）。組織效率與生產力評估：資料包絡分析法。台北：前程文化。 薄喬萍（2013）。績效評估之資料包絡分析法。台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 王筱琪（2022）。ESG對企業在新冠肺炎衝擊下之影響-以臺灣上市櫃企業為例。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/ry2k55 李欣（2021）。新冠狀肺炎（COVID-19）對各國醫療系統之效率分析。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/m92wzp 林育偉（2021）。環境, 社會, 公司治理績效與企業成長性之實證研究。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/7nufcn 何峻瑋（2013）。應用DEA評估上市公司績效之研究-以食品業為例。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/29fgst 姜采妤（2022）。運用資料包絡分析法探討我國地方財源之分配。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/geb893 施名茹（2022）。台灣電網用儲能系統產業效率評估-資料包絡分析法之應用。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/9gb837 張德儀、黃旭男（2006）。台灣地區國際觀光旅館績效評估之研究－灰色關聯分析與資料包絡分析法應用之比較，觀光研究學報，12（1），67-90。 許哲強、黃揚閔（2016）。台灣線上遊戲產業財務績效評估。明道學術論壇，10（2），79-100。 陳文彬（2021）。臺灣食品業執行企業社會責任對經營績效之影響。（碩士論文）。取自https://etds.lib.ntu.edu.tw/ETDS/Home/Detail/U0001-2607202121070200 陳泓予、林益倍（2018）。台灣非金控商業銀行經營績效分析-灰色關聯分析法之應用。中華管理評論，第21卷2期。 陳麒宇（2022）。全球主要金融服務公司ESG評等介紹。TEJ觀測與信用平等。第154期，取自https://eshop.tej.com.tw/E-Shop/journal_detail?journal_id=2022030508 羅靖霖、陳岱佑（2022）。TEJ ESG量化指標編制。貨幣觀測與信用評等。第156期，4-18。取自https://lawdata.com.tw/tw/detail.aspx?no=478485 劉俊鴻（2012）。企業社會責任與經營績效關係之研究－以台灣食品工業為例。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/ncj5au 劉毓莉（2018）。台灣強制食品工業公司發布企業社會責任報告書之市場反應。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5256h8 蔡明勳（2016）。食品業企業社會責任報告書與公司治理關聯性之研究。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/u9nbj2 蔡怡馨（2015）。台灣倉儲運輸業之營運績效評估。（碩士論文）。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/j6wce5 鐘鈺雯（2020）。從食安問題探討企業社會責任對於公司財務績效之影響。（碩士論文）。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。（系統編號：108LTC00304004） 中國國家市場監管總局官方網站（2003）。檢自：http://www.samr.gov.cn/ 行政院主計處（2005）。中華民國行業標準分類（第九次修行版）。取自https://www.mof.gov.tw/singlehtml/219?cntId=8ef38544c5bf4cde9b6763779e6c4787 財政部（2022）。飲料業發展趨勢。檢自：https://www.twtrend.com/trend-detail/beverage_service_activities_2022/ 經濟部工業局（2014）。IDB 103年度報告。檢自：https://www.moeaidb.gov.tw/22external/ctlr?PRO=executive.rwdExecutiveInfoList&cate=2559 產業價值鏈資訊平台（2022）。食品產業鏈簡介。取自https://ic.tpex.org.tw/introduce.php?ic=M000 台灣經濟新報（2022）。TESG永續發展指標2022年最新等級發布。檢自：https://www.tej.com.tw/news/291 台灣經濟新報（2022）。TESG永續發展指標，台灣企業專屬的ESG指標。檢自：https://www.tej.com.tw/news/191 今周刊（2022年5月）。ESG是什麼？企業顯學要知道，清楚了解和SDGs、CSR 有何不同。取自https://www.businesstoday.com.tw/article/category/80401/post/202205310020/ 經理人（2021年5月）。為什麼ESG這麼紅？頂尖企業怎麼做ESG？領導者該有的商業與品牌策略。取自https://www.managertoday.com.tw/columns/view/63060? 商業周刊（2021年7月）。食品業淨零策略大全——解析31家企業永續報告，報告如何寫？怎麼提方案？。取自https://www.businessweekly.com.tw/business/blog/3007138 商業周刊（2022年9月）。ESG永續發展——給企業看的永續指南，一篇搞懂ESG要做什麼。取自https://www.businessweekly.com.tw/carbon-reduction/blog/3010720 CSRone（2021）。2021臺灣食品產業永續報告現況與趨勢。取自https://csrone.com/reports/4293 ITIS（2023）。2022年第四季及全年我國食品產業回顧與展望。檢自：https://www2.itis.org.tw/netreport/NetReport_Detail.aspx?rpno=459673098 ITIS（2019）。2019年產業季報。檢自：https://cloudcdn.taiwantradeshows.com.tw/2020/food/download/20200205-2.pdf Kelvin（2020年12月）。ESG永續投資是什麼?為什麼越來越多企業重視ESG呢。取自https://www.kelvintaispace.com/what-is-esg/ Andrianarimanana, M. H., Yongjian, P., & Tanteliniaina, M. F. R. (2023). Assessment of the importance of climate, land, and soil on the global supply for agricultural products and global food security: Evidence from Madagascar. Food Policy, 115, 102403. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management science, 30(9), 1078-1092. Cele, L. P., Hennessy, T., & Thorne, F. (2022). Regional technical efficiency rankings and their determinants in the Irish dairy industry: A stochastic meta‐frontier analysis. Agribusiness. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European journal of operational research, 2(6), 429-444. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: an application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Management science, 27(6), 668-697. Chung, Y. H., Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 51(3), 229-240. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2007). Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software (Vol. 2, p. 489). New York: Springer. EFSA（1999）。Retrieved from https://www.efsa.europa.eu/ Engida, T. G., Oude Lansink, A. G., & Rao, X. (2022). A dynamic by‐production framework for measuring productivity change in the presence of socially responsible and undesirable outputs: Evidence from European food processors. Agribusiness, 38(2), 279-294. Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the royal statistical society: series A (General), 120(3), 253-281. FDA（1997）。Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/food Kapelko, M., Oude Lansink, A., & Guillamon‐Saorin, E. (2021). Corporate social responsibility and dynamic productivity change in the US food and beverage manufacturing industry. Agribusiness, 37(2), 286-305. Kim, S. O. (2023). Review of food upcycling in South Korea: regulation, limitation, and prospects. Food Science and Biotechnology, 32(1), 1-10. Kuo, C. C. (2021). COVID-19 in Taiwan: Economic impacts and lessons learned. Asian Economic Papers, 20(2), 98-117. Legrand, W., & Matthew-Bolofinde, A. (2022). ESG, SDGs, and Hospitality: Challenges and Opportunities in Activating Sustainability. Business in the 21st Century, 25-39. Martínez‐Falcó, J., Marco‐Lajara, B., Zaragoza‐Sáez, P., & Millán‐Tudela, L. A. (2023). Analyzing the effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Green Innovation Performance in the Spanish wine industry: A structural equation modeling analysis. Agribusiness. Mercadé‐Melé, P., Fandos‐Herrera, C., & Velasco‐Gómez, S. (2021). How corporate social responsibility influences consumer behavior: An empirical analysis in the Spanish agrifood sector. Agribusiness, 37(3), 590-611. Monaco, F. (2022). Exploring the relationship between ESG and corporate financial performance in food & beverage industry: a global evidence. (Master dissertation). Retrieved from https://tesi.luiss.it/id/eprint/35277 Nodin, M. N., Mustafa, Z., & Hussain, S. I. (2022). Assessing rice production efficiency for food security policy planning in Malaysia: A non-parametric bootstrap data envelopment analysis approach. Food Policy,107, 102208. Padhan, R., & Prabheesh, K. P. (2021). The economics of COVID-19 pandemic: A survey. Economic analysis and policy, 70, 220-237. Peykani, P., Gheidar-Kheljani, J., Farzipoor Saen, R., & Mohammadi, E. (2022). Generalized robust window data envelopment analysis approach for dynamic performance measurement under uncertain panel data. Operational Research, 22(5), 5529-5567. Raimo, N., de Nuccio, E., Giakoumelou, A., Petruzzella, F., & Vitolla, F. (2020). Non-financial information and cost of equity capital: An empirical analysis in the food and beverage industry. British Food Journal, 123(1), 49-65. Sætra, H. S. (2021). A Framework for Evaluating and Disclosing the ESG Related Impacts of AI with the SDGs. Sustainability, 13(15), 8503. Sánchez, M. V., Cicowiez, M., & Ortega, A. (2022). Prioritizing public investment in agriculture for post-COVID-19 recovery: A sectoral ranking for Mexico. Food Policy, 109, 102251. Sandberg, H., Alnoor, A., & Tiberius, V. (2022). Environmental, social, and governance ratings and financial performance: Evidence from the European food industry. Business Strategy and the Environment. 1–19. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3259 Shen, H., Fu, M., Pan, H., Yu, Z., & Chen, Y. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on firm performance. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 56(10), 2213-2230. Skevas, T., & Grashuis, J. (2020). Technical efficiency and spatial spillovers: Evidence from grain marketing cooperatives in the US Midwest. Agribusiness, 36(1), 111-126. Yang, C. Y., Lu, C. C., Chiu, Y. H., & Lin, T. Y. (2022). Analysis of coffee production efficiency and productivity strategy in African and non‐African countries. Agribusiness, 38(4), 946-969. Yang, F. A., Chang, H. H., & Wang, J. H. (2022). The economic impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the Taiwanese food industry: Empirical evidence using business transaction data. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(2), 376-395. Yenerall, J., Jensen, K., Chen, X., & Yu, T. E. (2022). COVID-19 risk perception and restaurant utilization after easing in-person restrictions. Food policy, 107, 102206. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/87748 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究旨在探討2016年至2020年期間，臺灣24家上市櫃食品與飲料產業的ESG績效，利用資料包絡法（Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA）探討董事酬金和員工福利對企業ESG績效的影響。本研究同時進行二個面向的ESG績效比較，一是比較不同權重對ESG績效的影響，利用TEJ的ESG資料與entropy權重來計算ESG投入與產出之表現；二是比較各企業每一年ESG績效，採用了視窗資料包絡分析法（Window data envelopment analysis，WDEA)來對每家企業進行動態績效評估，尤其是對疫情前後的分析。
本研究結果顯示，不同權重的模型評估方式和新冠肺炎（Covid-19）疫情前後，ESG績效表現存在顯著差異，並得到以下二個重要發現： 1.在疫情前，以TEJ的資料計算績效時，食品與飲料產業ESG表現進步的多為食品與飲料產業的上下游而非中游製造加工業，而ESG表現退步的則是出口食品與飲料的零售產業。以Entropy調整ESG權重， ESG表現退步的為食品與飲料產業的下游，而ESG表現波動較大的則是食品與飲料產業的中下游。 2.在疫情時，以TEJ的資料計算績效時，食品與飲料產業ESG表現進步的多為與消費者接觸即可輕便帶走的飲料店和菸酒零售業，而ESG表現退步的則是賣生鮮食品類的產業。以Entropy調整ESG權重時品與飲料產業ESG表現進步的多為人們生活必需的鮮食與日常用品類，而ESG表現退步的則是藥類和需要實際進入公共場所消費之產業。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This present study aims to investigate the ESG performance of 24 listed food and beverage industries in Taiwan from 2016 to 2020, and uses Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to explore the impact of director remuneration and employee benefits on corporate ESG performance. This study conducts two ESG performance comparisons at the same time. One is to compare the impact of different weights on ESG performance, using TEJ's ESG data and entropy weights to calculate the performance of ESG input and output; the other is to compare the ESG performance of each company each year For performance, Window data envelopment analysis (WDEA) is used to evaluate the dynamic performance of each company, especially the analysis before and after the epidemic.
The results of this study show that there are significant differences in ESG performance before and after the outbreak of the new crown pneumonia (Covid-19) in different weight model evaluation methods.The empirical results of this study are concluded as following: 1. Before the epidemic, when the performance was calculated using TEJ data, the ESG performance of the food and beverage industry improved mostly in the upstream and downstream rather than the midstream manufacturing and processing industries of the food and beverage industry, while the ESG performance declined in the export of food and beverages retail industry. Using Entropy to adjust the ESG weight, the ESG performance is regressive for the lower reaches of the food and beverage industry, while the ESG performance is more volatile for the middle and lower reaches of the food and beverage industry. 2. During the epidemic, when calculating performance based on TEJ data, most of the food and beverage industries with improved ESG performance are beverage stores and tobacco and alcohol retail industries that can be easily taken away after contact with consumers, while those with ESG performance that have regressed are selling Fresh food industry. Using Entropy to adjust the ESG weighting of the fashion and beverage industries, most of the ESG performance improvements are fresh food and daily necessities that are necessary for people's lives, while the ESG performance declines are pharmaceuticals and industries that require actual consumption in public places. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-07-19T16:16:02Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-07-19T16:16:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目錄
誌謝 I 摘要 II Abstract III 目錄 V 圖目錄 VII 表目錄 VIII 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的與問題 3 第三節 研究章節與架構 4 第二章 文獻探討 5 第一節 食品與飲料產業 5 第二節 ESG之定義與其指標建立評等機制 6 第三節 食品與飲料產業和永續發展的關係 24 第三章 研究方法 30 第一節 資料處理與分析方法 30 第二節 研究對象與資料來源 40 第四章 實證結果及分析 44 第一節 敘述性統計 44 第二節 視窗分析實證 50 第三節 Covid-19 視窗分析趨勢營業項目之比較 60 第五章 研究結果與討論 61 第一節 疫情前（2016-2019）結果與討論 61 第二節 疫情時（2019-2020）結果與討論 65 第三節 DDF模型與Entropy模型之差異 68 第六章 研究限制與建議 73 第一節 研究限制 73 第二節 研究建議 73 參考文獻 75 附錄一 DDF模型之投入產出變數2016-2020年數據匯總表 82 附錄二 Entrppy模型之投入產出變數2016-2020年數據匯總表 88 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.title | 企業ESG之投入對臺灣食品與飲料產業永續發展目標之探討——資料包絡分析法之應用 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Exploring ESG Investing on the Sustainable Development Goals of Taiwan's Food and Beverage Industry——Application of DEA | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 邱永和;黃昱凱 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Yung-Ho Chiu;Yu-Kai Huang | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | ESG平均效率值,資料包絡法,熵權法,新冠肺炎,食品與飲料產業,永續發展, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | ESG performance,DEA,Entropy,Covid-19,Food and beverage industry,Sustainable development, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 97 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202300952 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2023-06-08 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 生物產業傳播暨發展學系 | - |
| Appears in Collections: | 生物產業傳播暨發展學系 | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-111-2.pdf Access limited in NTU ip range | 3.44 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.