← 論文一覧に戻る

Impact of Carbon Emission Trading Schemes on Firms' Environmental and Social Disclosure Under Institutional Pressure

制度的圧力下における排出権取引制度が企業の環境・社会開示に与える影響 (AI 翻訳)

Fu Jia, Yingjie Ju, Robert D. Klassen, Lujie Chen, Tobias Schoenherr

Journal of Operations Management📚 査読済 / ジャーナル2026-08-12#AI×ESGOrigin: CN経営インパクト: 調達リスク対象セクター: cross_sector
DOI: 10.1002/joom.70057
原典: https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.70057

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

中国の排出権取引制度（CETS）が企業の環境・社会（E&S）開示に与える影響を、制度理論に基づく圧力・能力・認知フレームワークで分析。2013～2024年の段階的導入を自然実験とし、2010～2024年の上場企業1,682社・16,348社年データを用いた多期間DID推定により、CETSがE&S開示を有意に増加させることを示した。強制的参加では社会的開示のみ促進（正当性補償メカニズム）、非強制的参加では環境・社会の両開示を促進（戦略的シグナリング）する。さらに、業務効率は負に、経営者の環境関心は正に調整効果を持つ。

English

This study examines how China's carbon emissions trading schemes (CETS) affect firms' environmental and social (E&S) disclosure using an institutional theory framework. Exploiting staggered CETS implementation (2013-2024) as a quasi-natural experiment with 16,348 firm-year observations from 1,682 listed firms, multi-period DID analysis shows CETS significantly increases E&S disclosure. Coercive participation triggers legitimacy compensation (social disclosure only), while non-coercive participation promotes both environmental and social disclosure as strategic signaling. Operational efficiency negatively moderates, while managerial environmental focus positively moderates, the relationship.

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

日本のGX文脈では、カーボンプライシング（排出量取引）が企業開示行動に与える影響を示す点で示唆的。SSBJ開示義務化やカーボンプライシング導入議論において、企業の開示戦略が制度圧力と内部能力に依存することを示し、日本の政策設計や企業対応に参考となる。

In the global GX context

Globally, this paper contributes to the literature on carbon pricing and corporate disclosure, relevant to TCFD/ISSB/CSRD frameworks. It demonstrates that market-based instruments like ETS can drive E&S disclosure beyond environmental reporting, with heterogeneous responses based on institutional pressures and firm capabilities. This informs global policymakers designing carbon pricing mechanisms and disclosure mandates.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on how carbon pricing affects E&S disclosure, extending institutional theory to sustainability disclosure research.

🏢実務担当者:Highlights how firms can strategically respond to carbon pricing by enhancing E&S disclosure, considering internal capabilities and managerial focus.

🏛政策担当者:Shows that ETS design (coercive vs. non-coercive) influences disclosure outcomes, suggesting that policy design can shape corporate transparency.

📄 Abstract（原文）

ABSTRACT Carbon emissions trading schemes (CETS) are a prominent market‐based instrument for addressing climate change, yet their effects on corporate disclosure remain insufficiently understood. Drawing on institutional theory, we develop a pressure–capability–cognition framework to examine how CETS influence firms' environmental and social (E&S) disclosure and how institutional pressures and internal organizational factors shape heterogeneous disclosure responses. Exploiting the staggered implementation of China's CETS between 2013 and 2024 as a quasi‐natural experiment, we employ a multi‐period difference‐in‐differences design using 16,348 firm‐year observations from 1682 listed firms between 2010 and 2024. We report three principal findings. First, CETS significantly increase the level of firm E&S disclosure, indicating that the influence of CETS extends beyond environmental reporting to social responsibility disclosure. Second, institutional pressures generate distinct disclosure strategies. Under coercive participation, CETS exhibits a marginally significant positive effect on social disclosure but no significant effect on environmental disclosure, consistent with a legitimacy compensation mechanism whereby firms offset environmental legitimacy deficits through low‐cost, highly visible symbolic reporting. By contrast, under non‐coercive participation, CETS significantly promotes both environmental and social disclosure, suggesting that firms use disclosure as a strategic signaling device. Third, operational efficiency negatively moderates the CETS–disclosure relationship, whereas managerial environmental focus positively moderates this relationship, revealing that internal capabilities and managerial cognition condition the effectiveness of institutional pressures in shaping disclosure outcomes. These findings contribute to sustainable operations management research by demonstrating how institutional pressures interact with operational capabilities and managerial cognition to shape corporate sustainability disclosure.

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 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。