4.7 Article

The asymmetric influences of environmental subsidy and non-environmental subsidy on corporate environmental responsibility: evidence from China

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 29, Issue 51, Pages 77057-77070

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-21170-5

Keywords

Government environmental subsidy; Government non-environmental subsidy; Corporate environmental responsibility; China

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71872040]
  2. National Social Science Foundation of China [19ZDA097]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the asymmetric effects of government environmental subsidies and non-environmental subsidies on corporate environmental responsibility. The findings provide meaningful insights for understanding and promoting corporate environmental responsibility as well as guiding the government in effectively utilizing subsidies for the greening process.
This study investigates the asymmetric effects of government environmental subsidies (GES) and non-environmental subsidies (GNES) on corporate environmental responsibility (CER). Using a sample of Chinese listed companies over the period 2010 to 2020, we find that GES exhibits an inverted U-shaped impact on CER, while GNES shows a positive influence on CER, and these associations still exist after using the alternative measure of CER and addressing potential endogenous issues. In addition, we document that the effect of GES is not significant in companies operating in non-heavily polluting industries, and the effect of GNES is not significant in state-owned enterprises, firms with lower financing constraints and registered in regions with a lower degree of marketization. This study not only enriches the research on the influencing factors of CER but also provides theoretical guidance for the government to improve the efficiency of the use of different government subsidies and promote the greening process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available