グリーン化は数字を変えるか？タイにおけるカーボンフットプリント認証、コーポレートガバナンス、企業成果

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Staggered DiDと等価性検定を組み合わせ、認証の『無効果』を頑健に示す手法設計が参考になる。

🏢実務担当者:炭素認証の取得を財務報告品質や企業価値向上の根拠として対外的に訴求する際の限界を示す。

🏛政策担当者:任意認証制度の設計において、財務報告や環境実践への波及を意図するなら追加的措置が必要だと示唆する。

ABSTRACT Voluntary environmental certification is often assumed to signal broader improvements in corporate accountability, including financial reporting quality. This study tests that assumption using Thailand's Carbon Footprint for Organization (CFO) certification, a third‐party‐verified carbon‐accounting scheme administered by the country's Greenhouse Gas Management Organization. We ask whether certification is associated with earnings quality and financial performance among Stock Exchange of Thailand‐listed non‐financial firms, and whether firm‐level corporate governance moderates this relationship. Using a staggered difference‐in‐differences design on a propensity‐score‐matched panel of 409 firms over fiscal years 2013–2024, we triangulate four estimators of increasing robustness to bias—a naive baseline, stacked two‐way fixed effects with contaminated comparisons removed, and two heterogeneity‐robust staggered‐adoption estimators—so that our conclusions do not rest on any single method's assumptions; governance moderation is tested using a hand‐collected, seven‐component governance index measured before certification. Certification shows no detectable effect on earnings management, accrual quality, or accounting profitability, and interval and equivalence tests rule out effects larger than roughly 0.3 standard deviations for each outcome. Market valuation is the one exception: certified firms show a positive association with Tobin's Q , but this result is weak and specification‐dependent, and does not survive alternative comparison groups or multiple‐testing adjustment. Governance moderation is likewise exploratory: a few raw signals emerge when governance is measured before certification, but none survives correction for multiple testing. These patterns are consistent with certification that is genuinely implemented yet decoupled from internal financial‐reporting behavior, extending institutional accounts of voluntary certification and signaling theory. Because our outcomes capture financial‐reporting spillovers rather than the scheme's environmental ends, we cannot speak to whether certification changes environmental practice itself. For policymakers and investors, the findings caution against inferring improved financial‐reporting quality, or genuine environmental commitment, from certification status alone.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.71130first seen 2026-11-01 05:03:50 · last seen 2026-11-06 04:59:54
• semanticscholar https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/csr.71130first seen 2026-11-04 05:50:08 · last seen 2026-11-06 05:47:30