Symbolic Disclosure, Substantive Disclosure, and Firm Performance
象徴的開示、実質的開示、および企業業績 (AI 翻訳)
Liangjun Liu, Yuanshun Li, Yishen Feng
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本稿では、中国の制度的環境における象徴的（YanScore）と実質的（XingScore）な環境開示の財務的影響の違いを調査。環境負荷の高い「ダーティ」産業では、象徴的開示が短期的な収益性を高める一方、実質的開示は資源負担となる。この「シグナル対ドレイン」の動態はクリーン産業では見られず、非国有企業や自主的开示体制下で顕著。結果は、注目されるセクターでは「行動よりも発言」が一時的に報われ、グリーンウォッシングの戦略的インセンティブが生じることを示唆。
English
This paper investigates the divergent financial implications of symbolic versus substantive environmental disclosure in China's institutional environment. Using YanScore (symbolic rhetoric) and XingScore (substantive action) scores, it finds a 'Masking Effect' in aggregate ESG metrics: in dirty industries, symbolic disclosure enhances short-term profitability (Signal Value), while substantive disclosure is a resource drain. This dynamic is absent in clean industries. The results indicate that markets temporarily reward 'talk' over 'action' in high-scrutiny sectors, creating strategic incentives for greenwashing.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
本論文は中国企業を対象とするが、日本のグリーンウォッシング規制やESG評価の質的向上にも示唆を与える。特にSSBJ開示基準における実質的開示と象徴的開示の区別の重要性を強調し、投資家が企業の環境主張を評価する際のフレームワークを提供する。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to global disclosure scholarship by empirically decomposing ESG metrics into symbolic and substantive components, directly challenging current aggregate ESG scoring practices. Its findings are particularly relevant for regulators (ISSB, SEC, CSRD) seeking to combat greenwashing and for investors seeking to distinguish meaningful climate action from rhetoric.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on the signaling vs. resource drain trade-off of environmental disclosure, useful for understanding greenwashing incentives.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights the risk of rewarding symbolic disclosure over substantive action; suggests firms should balance rhetoric with verifiable environmental investments.
🏛政策担当者:Supports the need for decomposed ESG reporting frameworks that separate symbolic and substantive claims to prevent greenwashing.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study investigates the divergent financial implications of symbolic versus substantive environmental disclosure within the context of China's institutional environment. Utilizing a dual-scoring framework, the YanScore (symbolic rhetoric) and XingScore (substantive action), we examine how different modes of communication influence firm performance (ROA). Drawing on Legitimacy Theory and Signaling Theory, we employ a twostep System GMM estimator on a panel of Chinese listed firms to address performance persistence and endogeneity. Our findings reveal a significant "Masking Effect" in aggregate ESG metrics: in environmentally sensitive ("dirty") industries, symbolic disclosure provides a positive Signal Value that enhances short-term profitability by reducing the perceived legitimacy gap. Conversely, substantive disclosure constitutes a Resource Drain, as the high capital intensity of verifiable environmental actions imposes immediate financial costs. This "Signal vs. Drain" dynamic is absent in "clean" industries, where stakeholder indifference leads to an inverted Ushaped relationship between ESG efforts and performance. Further heterogeneity analysis shows that the payoff for symbolic signaling is amplified for Non-State-Owned Enterprises (Non-SOEs) and under voluntary disclosure regimes, while the drain of substantive action is partially mitigated in Carbon Trading Pilot regions. These results suggest that in high-scrutiny sectors, the market temporarily rewards "talk" over "action," creating a strategic incentive for greenwashing. We conclude by advocating for a decomposed ESG reporting framework that allows regulators and investors to distinguish between rhetorical legitimacy-seeking and tangible environmental commitment.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6211020first seen 2026-07-18 07:55:54
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。