請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/96556完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 林竣達 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Jiun-Da Lin | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 賴科維 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Ke-Wei Lai | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-02-19T16:30:30Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-02-20 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-02-19 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-02-06 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | CSR@天下(2024)。全球氣候法規的三大趨勢：碳關稅、碳有價和碳揭露。https://csr.cw.com.tw/article/43606。
KPMG(2024) 。 氣 候 變 遷 及 企 業 永 續 發 展 電 子 報 -2024 年 5 月 號 。https://kpmg.com/tw/zh/home/insights/2024/05/ccs-monthly-news.html。 PwC(2023) 。 淨 零 趨 勢 下 供 應 鏈 溫 室 氣 體 範 疇 三 的 挑 戰 ！https://www.pwc.tw/zh/publications/sustainability-news/pdf/sustainability-news-230306.pdf。 PwC(2023)。打造淨零轉型競爭力！為何企業需要注重綠色供應鏈管理？https://www.pwc.tw/zh/topics/trends/what-is-greensupplychain.html。 TEJ 台灣經濟新報(2023)。碳盤查是什麼？帶你從範疇一二三了解碳盤查相關資訊與方法！https://www.tejwin.com/insight/carbon-footprint-verification/。 元 大 金 融 控 股 股 份 有 限 公 司 (2023) 。 元 大 金 控 2023 年 永 續 報 告 書 。https://www.yuanta.com/Files/ESGReport/2023/TW/2023%E5%B9%B4%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A%E6%9B%B8.pdf。 日月光投資控股股份有限公司(2023)。2023 日月光投資控股永續報告書。https://www.aseglobal.com/ch/pdf/aseh-2023-csr-ch-final.pdf。 世界企業永續發展協會(2004)。溫室氣體盤查議定書—企業會計與報告標準。https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/2022-12/ghg_protocol_chinese.pdf。 林灼榮、黃琛瑞、謝俊魁、陳靜瑜(2015)。〈國際化、國內就業效果與外銷貢獻高估問題〉，《經濟研究》，51(1)，135-169。 財團法人會計研究發展基金會(2022) 。永續揭露準則第 S2 號草案「氣候相關揭露」草案正體中文版。https://www.ardf.org.tw/tifrssustainable/20221209-1.pdf。 張育琳(2019)。〈節能減碳、企業綠色環境管理策略與公司績效之關連性〉。《中山管理評論》，27(2)，279-326。 張育琳、劉俊儒(2018)。〈低水電有助於公司績效嗎〉，《管理學報》， 35(1)，103-136。 張淳堅、陳智奇、余程洋、林勝賢(2022)。〈碳排放量與公司績效之關聯性探討〉《當代商管論叢》，7(1)，41-56。 黃朝琮(2022)。〈環境、社會與治理(ESG)資訊揭露之規範－以重大性之判斷為核心〉，《臺北大學法學論叢》，(122)，1-111。 曾昭玲、郭迺鋒、施柏仰(2018)。<影響全球第三方支付企業經營績效之因素〉，《應用經濟論叢》，(104)，31-95。 經 濟 部 中 小 及 新 創 企 業 署 (2023) 。 國 際 間 主 要 國 家 碳 稅 費 制 度 之 評 析 。https://green.sme.gov.tw/detail.php?lang=tw&type=1&id=2969。 趙 瑀 嫻 (2023) 。 「 供 應 鏈 減 碳 」 是 什 麼 ？ 一 文 看 懂 企 業 淨 零 重 要 趨 勢 。https://www.reccessary.com/zh-tw/research/a-guide-to-decarbonize-your-business-supply-chain。 蔡裕明、黃觀松、周文琪(2024)。〈綠色會計對臺灣上市公司碳排放與財務績效影響之研究〉，《管理資訊計算》，(13)，30-43。 鄭仲凱(2022)。ISO20400 永續採購指南邁向 SDGs。 https://www.bsigroup.com/localfiles/zh-tw/e-news/no192/from-iso-20400-to-sdgs-ivan-cheng.pdf。 Akin, C. S., Aytun, C., & Aktakas, B. G. (2014). The Impact of Economic Freedom upon Economic Growth: An Application on Different Income Groups. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 4(8), 1024. Anquetin, T., Coqueret, G., Tavin, B., & Welgryn, L. (2022). Scopes of carbon emissions and their impact on green portfolios. Economic Modelling, 115, 105951. Arian, A. G., & Sands, J. (2024). Do corporate carbon emissions affect risk and capital costs? International Review of Economics & Finance, 93, 1363–1377. Bolton, P., & Kacperczyk, M. (2021). Do investors care about carbon risk? Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 517-549. Bui, B., Moses, O., & Houqe, M. N. (2020). Carbon disclosure, emission intensity and cost of equity capital: multi‐country evidence. Accounting & Finance, 60(1), 47-71. Busch, T., Bassen, A., Lewandowski, S., & Sump, F. (2022). Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance Revisited. Organization & environment, 35(1), 154-171. Busch, T., Johnson, M., & Pioch, T. (2022). Corporate carbon performance data: Quo vadis? Journal of industrial ecology, 26(1), 350-363. CDP (2022). Technical Note: Relevance of Scope 3 Categories by Sector. https://cdn.cdp.net/cdpproduction/cms/guidance_docs/pdfs/000/003/504/original/CDP-technical-note-scope-3-relevance-by-sector.pdf. Cheema-Fox, A., LaPerla, B. R., Serafeim, G., Turkington, D., & Wang, H. (2021). Decarbonizing Everything. Financial analysts journal, 77(3), 93-108. Coeslier, M., Louche, C., & Hétet, J.-F. (2016). On the relevance of low-carbon stock indices to tackle climate change. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 6(4), 247-262. Dahlmann, F., Brammer, S., & Roehrich, J. K. (2023). Navigating the“performing-organizing” paradox: tensions between supply chain transparency, coordination, and scope 3 GHG emissions performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management., 43(11), 1757-1780. Doğan, M. (2013). Does Firm Size Affect The Firm Profitability? Evidence from Turkey. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 4, 53-59. Downie, J., & Stubbs, W. (2013). Evaluation of Australian companies’ scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions assessments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56, 156-163. Ducoulombier, F. (2021). Understanding the importance of scope 3 emissions and the implications of data limitations. The Journal of Impact and ESG Investing, 1(4), 63-71. Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance. Management science, 60(11), 2835-2857. Elkington, J. (2018). 25 years ago I coined the phrase “triple bottom line.” Here’s why it’s time to rethink it. Harvard business review, 25, 2-5. Emmanuel, Y. L. (2023). Carbon emission disclosure and financial performance of quoted Nigerian financial services companies. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 13(6), 628-635. Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Global finance journal, 38, 45-64. Freeman, R. E. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge University Press. Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder Theory and "The Corporate Objective Revisited". Organization science (Providence, R.I.), 15(3), 364-369. Grolleau, G., Mzoughi, N., & Pekovic, S. (2015). Environmental management practices: good or bad news for innovations delivering environmental benefits? The moderating effect of market characteristics. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 24(4), 339-359. Gallego-Álvarez, I., Segura, L., & Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2015). Carbon emission reduction: the impact on the financial and operational performance of international companies. Journal of cleaner production, 103, 149-159. Ganda, F., & Milondzo, K. (2018). The Impact of Carbon Emissions on Corporate Financial Performance: Evidence from the South African Firms. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 10(7), 2398. GHG Protocol (2011).Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard. https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Corporate-Value-Chain-Accounting-Reporing-Standard_041613_2.pdf Giglio, S., Maggiori, M., Rao, K., Stroebel, J., & Weber, A. (2021). Climate Change and Long-Run Discount Rates: Evidence from Real Estate. The Review of financial studies, 34(8), 3527-3571. Harris, J. (2015). The emerging importance of carbon emission-intensities and scope 3 (supply chain) emissions in equity returns. SSRN Electronic Journal. Hart, S. L. (1995). A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm. The Academy of Management review, 20(4), 986-1014. Hertwich, E. G., & Wood, R. (2018). The growing importance of scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions from industry. Environmental research letters, 13(10), 104013. Huang, Y. A., Weber, C. L., & Matthews, H. S. (2009). Categorization of Scope 3 Emissions for Streamlined Enterprise Carbon Footprinting. Environmental Science & Technology, 43(22), 8509-8515. IFRS (2022). ISSB unanimously confirms Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosure requirements with strong application support, among key decisions. https://www.ifrs.org/news-and-events/news/2022/10/issb-unanimously-confirms-scope-3-ghg-emissions-disclosure-requirements-with-strong-application-support-among-key-decisions/. Ilya Levtov (2024). Top Supply Chain Risks to Watch in 2025 and How to Mitigate Them.https://www.supplychain247.com/article/top-supply-chain-risks-2025-chinaforcedlaborcyberthreats?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&u tm_campaign=news&oly_enc_id=3803F0492578G7X. IPCC (2023). Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_LongerReport.pdf. Khanna, M. (2001). Non‐mandatory approaches to environmental protection. Journal of economic surveys, 15(3), 291-324. Kim, Y. B., An, H. T., & Kim, J. D. (2015). The effect of carbon risk on the cost of equity capital. Journal of Cleaner Production, 93, 279-287. Kumar, P., & Firoz, M. (2018). Corporate Carbon Intensity Matter: Predicting Firms’Financial Performance. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 15(4), 74. Lewandowski, S. (2017). Corporate Carbon and Financial Performance: The Role of Emission Reductions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(8), 1196-1211. Mahapatra, S. K., Schoenherr, T., & Jayaram, J. (2021). An assessment of factors contributing to firms’ carbon footprint reduction efforts. International journal of production economics, 235, 108073. Martín-Peña, M. L., Díaz-Garrido, E., & Sánchez-López, J. M. (2014). Analysis of benefits and difficulties associated with firms’ Environmental Management Systems: the case of the Spanish automotive industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 70, 220–230. Mao, R. (2023). Verify the Relationship Between a Company’s Earning per Share, Return on Equity, Return on Asset, Sales Growth, Price to Earning Ratio, Current Ratio, Gross Profit Margin, Quick Ratio, Asset Turnover and Its Stock Price. SHS Web of Conferences, 163, 3003. McGahan, A. M., & Porter, M. E. (1997). How much does industry matter,really?.Strategic management journal, 18(S1), 15-30. Nicolaescu, E., Alpopi, C., & Zaharia, C. (2015). Measuring Corporate Sustainability Performance. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 7(1), 851-865. Nishitani, K., Kaneko, S., Komatsu, S., & Fujii, H. (2014). How does a firm's management of greenhouse gas emissions influence its economic performance? Analyzing effects through demand and productivity in Japanese manufacturing firms. Journal of productivity analysis, 42(3), 355-366. Panjwani, A., Melin, L., & Mercereau, B. (2023). Do Scope 3 Carbon Emissions Impact Firms’ Cost of Debt? Journal of portfolio management, 50(2), 175-198. Perdichizzi, S., Buchetti, B., Cicchiello, A. F., & Dal Maso, L. (2024). Carbon emission and firms’ value: Evidence from Europe. Energy Economics, 131, 107324. Radonjič, G., & Tompa, S. (2018). Carbon footprint calculation in telecommunications companies – The importance and relevance of scope 3 greenhouse gases emissions. Renewable & sustainable energy reviews, 98, 361-375. S&P Dow Jones Indices (2023). Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS®) Methodology. https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/tc/landing/topic/gics/. SBTi (2022). SCIENCE-BASED NET-ZERO Scaling Urgent Corporate Climate Action Worldwide SCIENCE BASED TARGETS INITIATIVE ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT. https://sciencebasedtargets.org/reports/sbti-progress-report-2021. Schaltegger, S., & Figge, F. (2000). Environmental shareholder value: economic success with corporate environmental management. Eco‐Management and Auditing: The Journal of Corporate Environmental Management, 7(1), 29-42. Schaltegger, S., & Synnestvedt, T. (2002). The link between ‘green’ and economic success: environmental management as the crucial trigger between environmental and economic performance. Journal of Environmental Management, 65(4), 339-346. Srivastava, S. K. (2007). Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. International journal of management reviews : IJMR, 9(1), 53-80. Van Emous, R., Krušinskas, R., & Westerman, W. (2021). Carbon Emissions Reduction and Corporate Financial Performance: The Influence of Country-Level Characteristics. Energies (Basel), 14(19), 6029. Wagner, M., & Schaltegger, S. (2004). The effect of corporate environmental strategy choice and environmental performance on competitiveness and economic performance: an empirical study of EU manufacturing. European management journal, 22(5), 557-572. WRI (2022). Trends Show Companies Are Ready for Scope 3 Reporting with US Climate Disclosure Rule. https://www.wri.org/update/trends-show-companies-are-ready-scope-3-reporting-us-climate-disclosure-rule. Yasar, A., & Yalçın, N. (2023). Voluntary disclosure of scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions and earnings management: Evidence from UK companies. Cogent Business & Management, 10(3), 2275849. Yoon, B., Lee, J., & Byun, R. (2018). Does ESG Performance Enhance Firm Value? Evidence from Korea. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 10(10), 3635. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/96556 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本文以2019至2023年間在全球76個國家的證券市場上市之4171家企業為研究對象，探討企業的範疇三排放量及排放強度，是否與企業績效具關聯性。本研究從不同角度探討範疇三排放對企業績效的影響及其調節因素，研究問題包括以下四個方面：範疇三排放量是否會降低企業績效、範疇三排放強度是否會降低企業績效、執行綠色供應鏈策略是否能弱化範疇三排放量對企業績效之影響及執行綠色供應鏈策略是否能弱化範疇三排放強度對企業績效之影響。
研究數據來源彭博資料庫(Bloomberg Terminal) ，涵蓋企業的財務及環境相關數據，並以縱貫資料(Panel Data)分析方法進行實證。企業所屬國家與年度依據彭博資料庫進行分類，而產業則按照依全球行業分類標準(GICS)劃分。在模型選擇方面，本研究使用固定效果模型中的雙元固定效果模型，並以R語言進行數據處理與統計估計。 本研究發現，選定之三項企業績效當中，受範疇三排放量顯著正向影響的有：股東權益報酬率(ROE)及每股盈餘(EPS)；未受到顯著影響的則是資產報酬率(ROA)。受範疇三排放強度顯著正向影響的是：ROE，但顯著程度較範疇三排放量略為削弱；未受到顯著影響的則是ROA及EPS。另有研究結果表明，執行綠色供應鏈策略皆無法強化範疇三排放量或範疇三排放強度對企業績效的影響。最後，額外分析之匯總項顯示範疇三子類別的排放量中類別五(Category 5)與EPS呈現顯著正向影響，範疇三子類別的排放量強度中類別五與EPS呈現顯著正向影響，而類別七(Category 7)和ROE會呈現顯著正向影響，而獨立項發現類別五(Category 5)排放量與排放強度會與ROE會呈現顯著正向影響，類別六(Category 6)排放強度會與ROA呈現顯著負向影響，該排放量與排放強度也會與EPS呈現顯著負向影響。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This study examines the relationship between Scope 3 emissions, Scope 3 intensity, and financial performance, using a sample of 4,171 publicly traded companies across 76 countries between 2019 and 2023. It investigates the impact of Scope 3 on financial performance from multiple perspectives, focusing on four key research questions: (1) whether Scope 3 emissions reduce financial performance, (2) whether Scope 3 intensity reduces financial performance, (3) whether implementing green supply chain strategies mitigates the impact of Scope 3 emissions on financial performance, and (4) whether green supply chain strategies mitigate the effect of Scope 3 intensity on financial performance.
The data for this study were sourced from the Bloomberg Terminal, encompassing financial and environmental metrics, and analyzed using a panel data approach. Companies were categorized by country and year based on Bloomberg classifications, while industries were classified according to the Global Industry Classification Standard. This research employs a Time and Entity Fixed Effects within the Fixed Effect Model, with statistical estimations conducted using the R programming language. The empirical findings reveal that among the three selected corporate performance indicators, Scope 3 emissions significantly positively impact ROE and EPS, but show no significant effect on ROA. Similarly, Scope 3 intensity significantly positively influences ROE, though to a lesser extent than total Scope 3 emissions, while its effects on ROA and EPS are insignificant. Another key finding indicates that green supply chain strategies do not strengthen the relationship between either Scope 3 emissions or emission intensity and financial performance. Furthermore, the summary of additional analyses revealed that among the subcategories of Scope 3 emissions, Category 5 emissions showed a significant positive impact on EPS, and Category 5 emission intensity also showed a significant positive impact on EPS. Category 7 emissions had a significant positive impact on ROE. Independent findings showed that Category 5 emissions and emission intensity had a significant positive impact on ROE. Category 6 emission intensity had a significant negative impact on ROA, and both emissions and emission intensity had a significant negative impact on EPS. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-02-19T16:30:30Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-02-19T16:30:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目次
摘要 i Abstract ii 目次 iv 圖次 vi 表次 vii 第一章 緒 論 1 第一節 研究緣起與問題意識 1 第二節 研究目的與主要研究問題 7 第二章 相關理論回顧與文獻探討 13 第一節 ESG概念文獻探討 13 第二節 環境指標文獻探討 15 第三節 範疇三文獻探討 17 第四節 綠色供應鏈策略文獻探討 21 第三章 研究設計 25 第一節 變數定義與衡量 28 第二節 研究模型及方法 32 第四章 研究結果 36 第一節 敘述性統計 36 第二節 相關性分析 38 第三節 縱貫資料分析 38 第四節 額外分析 42 第五章 結論 54 第一節 研究發現與貢獻 54 第二節 研究限制 59 第三節 後續研究建議 60 參考文獻 62 壹、中文 62 貳、英文 63 附錄一 範疇三子類別定義 71 附錄二 上游範疇三子類別排放量縱貫資料分析 74 附錄三 上游範疇三子類別排放強度縱貫資料分析 80 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.title | 全球企業範疇三排放量及排放強度與企業績效之關聯性 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Relationship Between Global Corporate Scope 3 Emissions, Emission Intensity and Financial Performance | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 113-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 邱皓政;楊曉文 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Haw-Jeng Chiou;Sharon S. Yang | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 範疇三排放量,範疇三排放強度,縱貫資料,固定效果模型,綠色供應鏈, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Scope 3 Emissions,Emission intensity,Panel data,Fixed Effect Model,Green Supply Chain, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 85 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202500435 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-02-07 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 國家發展研究所 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2025-02-20 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 國家發展研究所 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-113-1.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用（校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務） | 2.09 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。