請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/93361
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 邵慶平 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Ching-Ping Shao | en |
dc.contributor.author | 林祖威 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Tsu-Wei Lin | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-07-30T16:07:48Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-07-31 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2024-07-30 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2024-07-09 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 一、 中文文獻
(一) 中文書籍(以作者姓氏筆劃遞增排序) 吳聰敏(2018),《經濟學原理》,第三版,雙葉書廊。 徐沛然(2018),《社企是門好生意?社會企業的批判與反思》,時報出版。 傅仰止, 關秉寅, 吳齊殷, 廖培珊, & 謝淑惠(2020),《臺灣社會變遷基本調查計畫第七期第五次報告 - 社會不平等組》,中央研究院社會學研究所。 劉連煜(2019),《現代公司法》,增訂十四版,新學林。 蕭新煌(2014),《書寫台灣第三部門史Ⅰ》,巨流圖書。 (二) 中文期刊(以作者姓氏筆劃遞增排序) 王志誠(2006),〈股東之盈餘分派請求權〉,《月旦法學教室》,41 期,頁 26-27。 王家宏(2014),〈失業對策與福利國家 - 凱因斯的觀點〉,《台灣社區工作與社區研究學刊》,4 卷 2 期,頁 127-148。 吳惠林(2013),〈長期,我們都死了!〉,《經濟前瞻》,148 期,頁 95-98。 周振鋒(2015),〈談美國社會企業立法 - 以公益公司為中心〉,《國立中正大學法學集刊》,46 期,頁 55-108。 易明秋(2013),〈公司社會責任的實驗品-美國社會型企業制度〉,《成大法學》,26 期,頁 59-144。 林仁光(2024),〈機構投資人盡職治理制度對 ESG 推動之影響-兼論漂綠之防制〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,347 期,頁 6-27。 邵慶平(2009),〈從權力到責任 - 蓋茲、尤努斯與公司社會責任的發展〉,《萬國法律》,164 期,頁 26-36。 洪令家(2015),〈社會企業之治理架構初探:以英美規範為基礎〉,《全國律師》,19 卷 9 期,頁 62-74。 張藏文(2023),〈公司社會責任與公司選擇適用公司法或財團法人法相關問題芻議〉,《輔仁管理評論》,30 卷 1 期,頁 65-94。 郭大維(2012),〈論英國企業社會責任之推動與實踐及其對我國之啟示〉,《證券暨期貨月刊》,30 卷 3 期,頁 25-36。 郭大維(2016),〈從企業社會責任到社會企業-論英國公司型態社會企業法制對我國之啟示〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,258 期,頁 5-19。 陳俊仁(2007),〈論公司本質與公司社會責任 - 董事忠實義務之規範與調和〉,《台灣本土法學雜誌》,94 期,頁 79-109。 黃琪(2021),〈試論我國社會創新政策,對社會企業法制化之影響〉,《萬國法律》,240 期,頁 102-111。 黃銘傑(2018),〈公司法應如何回應社會企業發展之挑戰〉,《月旦會計實務研究》,4 期,頁 13-21。 楊岳平(2019),〈新公司法與企業社會責任的過去與未來 - 我國法下企業社會責任理論的立法架構與法院實務〉,《中正財經法學》,18 期,頁 43-91。 楊雅智(2015),〈淺談企業社會責任之國際發展趨勢與國內推動現況〉,《證券暨期貨月刊》,33 卷 1 期,頁 5-15。 劉連煜(2006),〈公司捐贈的法律問題〉,《日新法律半年刊》,7 期,頁 55-63。 蔡英欣(2008),〈論公司社會責任之規範模式︰以日本法之經驗為例〉,《台大法學論叢》,37 卷 3 期,頁 189-244。 賴英照(2007),〈從尤努斯到巴菲特 - 公司社會責任的基本問題〉,《台灣本土法學雜誌》,93 期,頁 150-180。 (三) 中文譯著 Friedman, M., & Schwartz, A.(著),巴曙松 and 王勁松(譯)(2009),《美國貨幣史》,北京大學出版社。 Stephens-Davidowitz, S.(著),陳琇玲(譯)(2017),《數據、謊言與真相》,商周出版。 穆罕默德·尤努斯(著),曾育慧(譯)(2017),《富足世界不是夢讓貧窮去逃亡吧!》,三版,五南。 穆罕默德·尤努斯(著),林麗雪(譯)(2018),《三零世界》,大塊文化。 穆罕默德·尤努斯, & 艾倫‧喬利斯(著),曾育慧(譯)(2007),《窮人的銀行家》,聯經。 (四) 中文網路文章 封昌宏 (2018),《公司盡企業社會責任的法律爭議》,載於:https://www.angle.com.tw/accounting/current/post.aspx?ipost=3077。 (五) 中文網頁 王育敏 (2014),《公益公司法草案》,載於:https://ppg.ly.gov.tw/ppg/download/agenda1/02/pdf/08/04/18/LCEWA01_080418_00018.pdf。 全球變遷與永續科學中心 (2023),《2023 臺灣永續投資調查》,載於:https://cgcss.ntpu.edu.tw/lyadmin/pages/uploads/file/f1_xwk0lax0oc.pdf。 余宛如 (2017),《社會企業發展條例草案》,載於:https://ppg.ly.gov.tw/ppg/download/agenda1/02/pdf/09/03/13/LCEWA01_090313_00019.pdf。 社企流 ,《社企十年:你所看見與還沒看見的社會企業》,載於:https://udn.com/upf/ubrand/2019_data/seinsights/。 社團法人台灣公益責信協會 (2021),《公益觀察 2021:風險社會裡的信任與連結》,載於:https://www.apa-tw.org/observation2021。 許毓仁 (2016),《公司法增訂部分條文草案》,載於:https://ppg.ly.gov.tw/ppg/download/agenda1/02/pdf/09/02/15/LCEWA01_090215_00022.pdf。 菱傳媒 (2022),《台灣人好有愛!一年捐款 1026 億元 但分配不均「公益巨人」吸走 76%善款》,載於:https://rwnews.tw/article.php?news=303。 新聞稿 (2013),《為強化公司治理,金管會規劃「2013 強化我國公司治理藍圖」》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=201312260002&toolsflag=Y&dtable=News。 新聞稿 (2020),《金管會正式啟動「公司治理 3.0-永續發展藍圖」》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202008250004&dtable=News。 新聞稿 (2023),《金管會發布「上市櫃公司永續發展行動方案(2023 年)」》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202303280001&dtable=News。 新聞稿 (2023),《金管會發布我國接軌國際財務報導準則(IFRS)永續揭露準則藍圖,持續提升永續資訊報導品質及透明度》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202308170002&dtable=News。 簡報 (2013),《強化我國公司治理藍圖》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/uploaddowndoc?file=news/201507061123310.pdf&filedisplay=%E5%85%AC%E5%8F%B8%E6%B2%BB%E7%90%86%E8%97%8D%E5%9C%96%E7%B0%A1%E5%A0%B1%E6%A0%B8%E5%AE%9A%E7%89%88for%2B%E6%96%B0%E8%81%9E%E7%A8%BF%281021226%29.pdf&flag=doc。 簡報 (2020),《公司治理 3.0 - 永續發展藍圖》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/fckdowndoc?file=/%E5%85%AC%E5%8F%B8%E6%B2%BB%E7%90%863_0-%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E8%97%8D%E5%9C%96.pdf&flag=doc。 簡報 (2023),《推動我國接軌 IFRS 永續揭露準則藍圖簡報》,載於:https://www.fsc.gov.tw/uploaddowndoc?file=news/202308171508441.pdf&filedisplay=%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B62-%E6%88%91%E5%9C%8B%E6%8E%A5%E8%BB%8CIFRS%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E6%8F%AD%E9%9C%B2%E6%BA%96%E5%89%87%E8%97%8D%E5%9C%96%E7%B0%A1%E5%A0%B1.pdf&flag=doc。 (六) 中文報紙 經濟日報(09/05/2014),〈社企元年-將啟動修法工程〉,A22 版。 二、 英文文獻 (一) 英文書籍 Banks, J. A. (1972). The Sociology of Social Movements. London: Macmillan. Friedman, M. (2020). Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Keynes, J. M. (2007). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. New York, N. Y.: Palgrave Macmillan. Levitt, T. (1973). THE THIRD SECTOR: New Tactics for a Responsive Society. New York, NY: AMACOM. Lewis, D. (2014). Non-Governmental Organizations, Management and Development(3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Locke, J. (2002). The Second Treatise of Government and a Letter Concerning Toleration (Paul Negri Ed. Dover Thrift ed.). Mineola, New York: Dover publications, Inc. Sheldon, O. (1923). The Philosophy of Management. London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons. Smith, A. (1910). The Wealth of Nations Vol. I (Everyman's Library ed.). London: J. M. Dent & Sons. Smith, A. (1910). The Wealth of Nations Vol. II (Everyman's Library ed.). London: J. M. Dent & Sons. Yunus, M., & Weber, K. (2010). Building Social Business: The New Kind of Capitalism that Serves Humanity's Most Pressing Needs. New York, NY: PublicAffairs. (二) 英文期刊 Basta, D. J., & Dohner, C. K. (2012). Proposed Rules: Examples of Program-Related Investments. Federal Register, 77(76), 23429-23432. Berrey, E. (2018). Social Enterprise Law in Action: Organizational Characteristics of U.S. Benefit Corporations. THE TENNESSEE JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LAW, 20, 21-114. Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-48. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G Dalrymple, J., & Mazur, M. J. (2016). Rules and Regulations: Examples of Program Related Investments. Federal Register, 81(79), 24014-24019. Dodd, E. M., Jr. (1932). For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees? Harvard Law Review, 45(7), 1145-1163. Doeringer, M. F. (2010). Fostering Social Enterprise: A Historical and International Analysis. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 20(2), 291-329. Elkington, J. (1998). Accounting For The Triple Bottom Line. Measuring Business Excellence, 2(3), 18-22. doi:10.1108/eb025539 Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times Magazine, pp. 122-126. Hoffman, R. C. (2007). Corporate social responsibility in the 1920s: an institutional perspective. Journal of Management History, 13(1), 55-73. doi:10.1108/17511340710715179 Kerlin, J. A. (2006). Social Enterprise in the United States and Europe: Understanding and Learning from the Differences. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 17(3), 247-263. doi:10.1007/s11266-006-9016-2 Lehrer, E. (2023). ESG and the States. National Affairs, 57, 71-85. Murray, J. H. (2011). Purpose with profit: Governance, enforcement, capital-raising and capital-locking in low-profit limited liability companies. University of Miami Law Review, 66(1), 1-52. Safi, A., Chen, Y., Qayyum, A., Wahab, S., & Amin, M. (2023). How does corporate social and environmental responsibility contribute to investment efficiency and performance? Evidence from the financial sector of China. Economic Research Ekonomska Istraživanja, 36(2), 1-23. doi:10.1080/1331677X.2022.2142816 Stoian, C., & Zaharia, R. M. (2012). CSR development in post-communist economies: employees' expectations regarding corporate socially responsible behaviour – the case of Romania. Business Ethics: A European Review, 21(4), 380-401. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12000 (三) 英文網路文章 Behbin, M., Goldberg, E. S., & Mann, R. (2023, July 21). ESG Investing Regulations Across The 50 States. Morgan Lewis. Retrieved February 1, 2024 from https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2023/07/esg-investing-regulations-across the-50-states Chiodini, S. R. (2015, September 17). IRS Clarifies Position on Private Foundation Mission-Related Investments Under Section 4944. ADLER & COLVIN. Retrieved from https://www.adlercolvin.com/blog/2015/09/17/irs-clarifies-position-on-private-foundation-mission-related-investments-under-section-4944/ Dial, L. C., Crowley, D. F. C., McCoy, J. R., & Chainey, B. R. (2023, July 25). 2023 ESG STATE LEGISLATION WRAP UP. K&L Gates. Retrieved February 1, 2024 from https://www.klgates.com/2023-ESG-State-Legislation-Wrap-Up-7-19-2023 Evans, A., Petrovits, C., & Walberg, G. The Exempt Organization Tax Review. (2009, May). L3C: Will New Business Entity Attract Foundation Investment? from https://secure.goozmo.com/user_files/11833.pdf Gaumer, L. M. (2023, June 20). GIVING USA 2023: INSIDE THE NUMBERS AND A LOOK AHEAD. STELTER. Retrieved from https://blog.stelter.com/2023/06/20/giving-usa-2023-inside-the-numbers-and-a look-ahead/ Goldberg, E. S., & Mann, R. (2022, August 25). The State of Anti-ESG State Legislation. Morgan Lewis. Retrieved February 2, 2024 from https://www.morganlewis.com/blogs/mlbenebits/2022/08/the-state-of-anti-esg state-legislation Jacobson, L. (2024, May 7). Are America’s Best States Red or Blue? U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/news/best states/articles/2024-05-07/divided-nation-are-americas-best-states-red-or-blue Levitt, D. A. (2016, April 22). Final PRI Regulations Released. ADLER & COLVIN. Retrieved from https://www.adlercolvin.com/blog/2016/04/22/final-pri regulations-released/ Levitt, D. A. (2012, April 20). New Guidance from the IRS on Program-Related Investments. ADLER & COLVIN. Retrieved from https://www.adlercolvin.com/wp-content/themes/adlercolvin/pdf/NewGuidance-from-the-IRS-on-Program-Related-Investments.pdf Malone, L., Holland, E., & Houston, C. (2023, March 11). ESG Battlegrounds: How the States Are Shaping the Regulatory Landscape in the U.S. Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Retrieved February 5, 2024 from https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2023/03/11/esg-battlegrounds-how-the-states are-shaping-the-regulatory-landscape-in-the-u-s/ Newsom, G. (2023, October 7). Governor's Letter to the Members of the California Senate. California State Office of the Governor. from https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SB-253-Signing.pdf Schroder, J. M. (2022, October 5). State Treasurer Letter to BlackRock CEO. Louisiana State Treasurer. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://a4de8bd9-8c02-4b69-8f48-7792cfcaf8fd.usrfiles.com/ugd/a4de8b_38fdc8b7e3c04c9490bf332ce14f8d2f.pdf (四) 英文網頁 L3C interSector Partners. Retrieved February 29, 2024 from https://www.intersectorl3c.com/ About. Social Enterprise Law Tracker. Retrieved February 20, 2024 from https://socentlawtracker.org/#/map UNPRI. About the PRI. Retrieved May 16, 2024 from https://www.unpri.org/about us/about-the-pri BOOKS. Becoming a Public Benefit Corporation. STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS. Retrieved March 22, 2024 from https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=35488 B Lab United States & Canada. (2023, February 20). Benefit Corporation vs. B Corp. Retrieved from https://usca.bcorporation.net/benefit-corporation-vs-b-corp/ Fact Sheet. (2024, March 6). The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures: Final Rules. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Retrieved May 28, 2024 from https://www.sec.gov/files/33-11275-fact-sheet.pdf Official Opinion 2022-3. (2022, September 1). Indiana Public Retirement System and ESG Investments. Indiana State Office of the Attorney General. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/INAG/2022/09/01/file_attachments/2259125/Official%20Opinion%202022-3.pdf Take Action. Integrate the Principles for Responsible Investment. United Nations Global Compact. Retrieved May 16, 2024 from https://unglobalcompact.org/take-action/action/responsible-investment Arizona State Treasurer's Office. (2022, August 30). Investment Policy Statement. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://www.aztreasury.gov/_files/ugd/88330d_964dec07d6804fdcafb722658c4d8bff.pdf Internal Revenue Bulletin: Notice 2015-62. Investments Made for Charitable Purposes. IRS. Retrieved February 28, 2024 from https://www.irs.gov/irb/2015-39_IRB#NOT-2015-62 Grunin Center for Law and Social Entrepreneurship. Mapping The State of Social Enterprise and the Law 2017–2018. NYU School of Law, 31. Retrieved January 29, 2024 from https://socentlawtracker.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2017-2018_Grunin_Tepper_Report.pdf State Net Insights. (2023, May 18). Red-State Blue-State Divide on ESG Legislation. Lexis Nexis. Retrieved February 1, 2024 from https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/insights/legal/capitol-journal/b/state net/posts/red-state-blue-state-divide-on-esg-legislation The State Board of Administration of Florida. (2022, August 23). A Resolution Directing an Update to the Investment Policy Statement. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/ESG Resolution-Final.pdf Press Release. Secretary-General Launches ‘Principles for Responsible Investment’ Backed by World’s Largest Investors. United Nations. Retrieved May 16, 2024 from https://press.un.org/en/2006/sg2111.doc.htm The New York State Senate. Senate Bill S897A. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2023/S897/amendment/A Learning & Insights. (2024, February 13). Six things you need to know about California’s Climate Disclosure Laws. KEY ESG. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://www.keyesg.com/article/six-things-you-need-to-know-about californias-climate-disclosure-laws BALLOTPEDIA. State legislative approaches opposing ESG investing. Retrieved March 29, 2024 from https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_approaches_opposing_ESG_investing BALLOTPEDIA. State legislative approaches supporting ESG investing. Retrieved March 29, 2024 from https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_approaches_supporting_ESG_investing Grunin Center for Law and Social Entrepreneurship. The State of Social Enterprise and the Law 2019–2020. NYU School of Law, 32. Retrieved January 29, 2024 from https://socentlawtracker.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/ICBRSSEL21.1-Grunin-Tepper-Report_Web.pdf Grunin Center for Law and Social Entrepreneurship. The State of Social Enterprise and the Law 2021–2022. NYU School of Law, 15. Retrieved January 29, 2024 from https://socentlawtracker.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2021-2022_Grunin_Tepper_Report.pdf Grunin Center for Law and Social Entrepreneurship. The State of Social Enterprise and the Law 2022–2023. NYU School of Law. Retrieved January 29, 2024 from https://socentlawtracker.org/wp content/uploads/2023/09/2022_2023_Grunin_Tepper_Report.pdf Status. Social Enterprise Law Tracker. Retrieved February 22, 2024 from https://socentlawtracker.org/#/spblps Governor's Task Force. (2013, January). Task Force Report on Social Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Enterprise. The State of Illinois, 9. Retrieved February 26, 2024 from https://web.archive.org/web/20131102140113/http://socialenterprise chicago.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Task-Force-Report_1.16.13-to General-Assembly.pdf Press Release. (2022, October 18). Treasurer Fitzpatrick Announces MOSERS Has Pulled $500 Million in State Pension Funds from BlackRock. Missouri State Treasurer. Retrieved March 27, 2024 from https://treasurer.mo.gov/newsroom/news-and-events-item?pr=80669a5f-5c6b-491f-a0f0-6abe4c012604 Newsroom. (2022, November 14). Treasurer McRae Urges PERS to Reject ESG Policies. State Treasury of Mississippi. Retrieved March 28, 2024 from https://treasury.ms.gov/2022/11/14/treasurer-mcrae-urges-pers-to-reject-esg policies/ US Research. Lexis Advance. Retrieved February 22, 2024 from https://advance.lexis.com/usresearchhome/?pdmfid=1000516&identityprofileid=7DRGMV61445&cbc=0%2C0&crid=e3c45c80-319e-4f85-908c-06e1a988e39e The Global Compact. Who Cares Wins. United Nations and Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Retrieved May 16, 2024 from https://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/events/2004/stocks/who_cares_wins_global_compact_2004.pdf International Finance Corporation. Who Cares Wins, 2004-08 Issue Brief. World Bank Group. Retrieved May 16, 2024 from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/444801491483640669/pdf/113850-BRI-IFC-Breif-whocares-PUBLIC.pdf | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/93361 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 有關「社會企業法制化」這個議題,不論是在政府的立法與行政部門,或是橫跨企業與民間團體,都曾在台灣引起不小的熱潮。例如,若水國際是台灣的第一家社會企業,早在2007年就已經創立。行政院也在2014年9月核定「社會企業行動方案」,並採取先行政後立法的施政方針。相關媒體更大肆報導時任行政院長的江宜樺,定調2014年就是台灣社會企業元年。因此在2014年之後的數年間,各種不同版本的立法或修法建議,紛紛被立法院或民間組織提出來討論。
但是從所謂的元年至今已過10年,這個立意良善的新組織型態,為何無法被具體落實在台灣各種相關的法人組織體系當中?在2018年《公司法》修法後,隨著社會企業行動方案的落日,雖然行政院又核定了「社會創新行動方案」,宣示將繼續朝向達成聯合國所倡議的人類永續目標邁進,但目光卻逐漸轉移到ESG相關法規的制定上。此後社會企業法制化在台灣的熱度不再,學術界的討論也逐漸出現冷卻的現象。 所謂鑒往知來,為了探索台灣社會企業法制化未來的發展方向,本文試從各種不同面向來解析「企業社會責任」,並透過人類歷史的反思,發現社會企業的起源可追溯至古典自由主義時期由社會企業家所設立的各種非營利團體,並在新自由主義時代演變為一種符合社會企業概念的組織。而有關企業社會責任的探究,則是先將社會責任的範圍限定在「解決現有的社會問題」與「避免產生新的社會問題」後,借助三部門架構的歷史脈絡,導引出社會上由企業來承擔社會責任的普遍期望。 本文接著透過企業社會責任相關文獻的探討,發現在企業社會責任金字塔的四種組成成分中,社會企業與ESG兩者分別是慈善責任與倫理責任的具體實踐方式,理應具有關聯性,而且是相生的正相關性,僅不過是具有自因性與他因性的區別實益罷了。但是經過比較法的研究後,本文則是發現兩者在台灣並不像美國可以產生正相關性,因此造成立法上的不同結果。實證研究的結果也證明,近6年來ESG的網路搜尋熱度,雖在美台兩地均有急速上升的趨勢,但不論是與社會企業或慈善捐款相關的網路搜尋,台灣卻都呈現出不同的趨勢變化。如果社會企業與ESG兩者分屬企業社會責任四種組成成分當中,有關慈善責任與倫理責任的具體實踐方式,而台灣卻無法在理應相輔相成的慈善責任與倫理責任之間取得適當的平衡點,這絕對不會是台灣社會之福。 本文最後根據以上四種研究方法來判斷美台兩地所以出現法制化上的不同結果,應該是肇因於幾個地區性的變因:一來是因為台灣的公司股東,對經營者實有欠缺較為有效的究責機制,所以具有社會企業家精神的經營者比較欠缺將社會企業法制化的驅動力,加上政府因為可能會犧牲稅收所以都轉趨保守;二來是因為因應世界上對於ESG投資的熱度之後可以熱絡國內的證券市場,加上ESG會加諸企業的經營成本而擴大金融與會計相關產業的產值,所以對政府具有較為強大的立法誘因。 總而言之,在適當的法制環境下,不論是慈善捐款或社會企業,都可擇一來達成相同的公益目的。如果台灣目前尚不須要對社會企業立法,好讓社會企業家來履行其自因性的企業社會責任,未來或許可以參考美國的法制生態,改善並增強慈善組織的財務透明性、經營多元性與財務永續性,讓具有社會企業家精神的公司,能與慈善團體充分合作,滿足其想善盡企業社會責任的渴望,並充分發揮彼此共同的慈善精神。本文甚至建議,可以充分運用ESG的法律上強制力與財務上誘因,逐步加入一些企業社會責任中的慈善責任成分,如此不但可以取代社會企業的部分功能,還可以讓較大型的企業來產生對於社會的正面影響力與解決問題的能力。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The issue of legalization of social enterprises has ever sparked considerable enthusiasm in Taiwan, whether within the government's legislative and administrative departments or across businesses and civil society organizations. For example, FLOW, Inc. was Taiwan’s first social enterprise, established as early as 2007. In September 2014, the Executive Yuan approved the “Social Enterprise Action Plan” and adopted a policy of administrative action before legislation. The media extensively reported that then-Executive Yuan Premier Jiang Yi-huah had declared 2014 as the first year of Taiwan’s social enterprise. Consequently, in the years following 2014, various legislative proposals or amendments were put forward by the Legislative Yuan or civil society organizations for discussion.
However, over ten years have passed since the so-called first year, yet this well-intentioned new organizational form has not been effectively implemented within Taiwan’s various corporate systems. Following the 2018 amendment to the Company Act and the decline of the “Social Enterprise Action Plan”, despite the Executive Yuan approving the successive “Social Innovation Action Plan” and declaring its continued commitment towards achieving the UN-initiated Sustainable Development Goals, attention has gradually shifted towards the formulation of ESG regulations. Subsequently, in Taiwan, why has the enthusiasm for legalizing social enterprises waned, and why has there been a cooling trend in related academic discussions? The phrase “learning from the past to understand the future” embodies the essence of this article, which aims to explore the future development of social enterprise legislation in Taiwan. This article analyzes CSR from various aspects. Through a reflection on human history, it is revealed that the origins of social enterprises can be traced back to the classical liberalism era, where various non-profit organizations were established by social entrepreneurs. These organizations evolved in the era of neoliberalism into entities that align with the concept of social enterprises. The examination of CSR begins by defining its scope as “solving existing social problems” and “preventing the creation of new social problems”. Utilizing the historical context of the three-sector framework, this analysis leads to the prevalent expectation in society that business corporations should undertake social responsibility. This article proceeds to explore the relevant literature on CSR and finds that among the four components of the CSR pyramid, social enterprises and ESG are specific practices of philanthropic and ethical responsibilities, respectively. They should inherently be related and positively correlated, albeit with a distinction between endogenous and exogenous aspects. However, through comparative legal research, the article discovers that this positive correlation between the two does not manifest in Taiwan as it does in the United States, leading to different legislative outcomes. Empirical research also shows that while the online search interest for ESG has rapidly increased in both the U.S. and Taiwan over the past six years, the trends in online searches related to social enterprises or charitable donations in Taiwan show different patterns. If social enterprises and ESG are to be considered specific practices of philanthropic and ethical responsibilities within the four components of CSR, and Taiwan cannot achieve an appropriate balance between these mutually complementary responsibilities, it will not be beneficial for Taiwanese society. Based on the above four research methods, the article concludes that the different outcomes in legal frameworks between the U.S. and Taiwan can be attributed to several regional factors. Firstly, in Taiwan, shareholders lack an effective accountability mechanism for executives, resulting in a weaker drive among executives with a social entrepreneurial spirit to push for the legalization of social enterprises. Additionally, the government tends to be conservative due to potential tax revenue sacrifices. Secondly, aligning with the global enthusiasm for ESG investments can invigorate the domestic securities market. Additionally, ESG increases the operating costs for companies, thereby expanding the output of financial and accounting-related industries. Therefore, the government has a stronger legislative incentive. In summary, within an appropriate legal framework, either charitable donations or social enterprises can achieve the same public welfare goals. If Taiwan currently does not require legislation for social enterprises to allow social entrepreneurs to fulfill their endogenous CSR, it might consider the legal ecosystem of the United States in the future. This could involve improving and enhancing the financial transparency, operational diversity, and financial sustainability of charitable organizations. By doing so, companies with a social entrepreneurial spirit can fully collaborate with charitable organizations to satisfy their desire to fulfill CSR and to maximize their collective philanthropic spirit. The article even suggests that the legal enforcement and financial incentives of ESG could be effectively utilized to gradually incorporate some philanthropic responsibility components of CSR. This approach could not only substitute some functions of social enterprises but also enable larger enterprises to exert a positive influence on society and enhance capabilities to solve problems in society. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-07-30T16:07:48Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-07-30T16:07:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 iii 中文摘要 v 英文摘要 vii 目次 xi 圖次 xiv 表次 xv 英文縮寫全名與中英文對照表 xvii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 第二節 研究方法 7 第一目 歷史回顧法 8 第二目 文獻探討法 8 第三目 比較法 8 第四目 實證研究法 9 第二章 歷史回顧 13 第一節 自由主義三階段與社會企業的源起 13 第一目 古典自由主義時期 14 第二目 現代自由主義時期 16 第三目 新自由主義時期 17 第四目 社會企業的源起 18 第二節 三部門架構與社會責任的發展 20 第一目 社會責任的定義 21 第二目 三部門架構 22 第三目 三部門架構與社會責任 24 第一款 公部門與社會責任 25 第二款 私部門與社會責任 26 第三款 第三部門與社會責任 29 第四款 社會企業與社會責任 31 第三節 ESG的濫觴 33 第四節 小結:社會企業與ESG應是CSR框架下的具體實踐 34 第三章 文獻探討 36 第一節 CSR的組成成分與CSR金字塔 36 第二節 權力面與責任面的CSR 38 第三節 積極意義與消極意義的CSR 41 第四節 兼善天下與獨善其身的CSR 42 第五節 裁量型與義務型的CSR 43 第六節 自因性與他因性的CSR 45 第一目 自因性的CSR 47 第二目 他因性的CSR 48 第三目 區別實益 49 第七節 小結:重繪CSR金字塔 50 第四章 比較法 53 第一節 美國各州有關CSR框架下的立法實踐 53 第一目 2008年以來L3C的立法現狀 55 第二目 2010年以來公益公司的立法現狀 63 第三目 2021年以來ESG的立法現狀 73 第二節 台灣有關CSR框架下的立法實踐 81 第一目 2013-2018年間對社會企業法制化之嘗試 81 第一款 《公益公司法草案》 81 第二款 《公司法部分增訂草案》 83 第三款 《社企發展條例草案》 84 第二目 2013年起對ESG投資的立法現狀 86 第三節 小結 88 第五章 實證研究 90 第一節 比較美國社會企業與ESG的網路搜尋熱度 91 第二節 比較美國慈善捐款與ESG的網路搜尋熱度 93 第三節 比較台灣社會企業與ESG的網路搜尋熱度 94 第四節 比較台灣慈善團體與ESG的網路搜尋熱度 96 第五節 小結:社會企業與ESG之間的關係 99 第六章 結論 101 參考文獻 105 一、 中文文獻 105 (一) 中文書籍(以作者姓氏筆劃遞增排序) 105 (二) 中文期刊(以作者姓氏筆劃遞增排序) 105 (三) 中文譯著 106 (四) 中文網路文章 106 (五) 中文網頁 106 (六) 中文報紙 108 二、 英文文獻 108 (一) 英文書籍 108 (二) 英文期刊 108 (三) 英文網路文章 109 (四) 英文網頁 111 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 社會企業法制化的回顧與未來發展 - 以社會企業與ESG之間的關係為中心 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Retrospect and Future Development of Social Enterprise Legislation - Focusing on the Relationship between Social Enterprises and ESG | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 112-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蔡英欣;郭大維 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Ying-Hsin Tsai;Ta-Wei Kuo | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 企業社會責任,社會企業,ESG投資,自因性CSR,他因性CSR,自由主義,三部門架構, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | CSR,social enterprise,ESG investing,endogenous CSR,exogenous CSR,liberalism,three-sector framework, | en |
dc.relation.page | 113 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202401414 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2024-07-09 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 科際整合法律學研究所 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 科際整合法律學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-112-2.pdf | 2.31 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。