联系我们

论文查询结果	返回搜索

论文编号：	15952
作者编号：	1120211197
上传时间：	2026/3/9 13:59:18
中文题目：	董事会绿色理念对企业碳效协同的影响研究
英文题目：	Research on the Impact of the Board of Directors'''' Green Philosophy on Enterprises'''' Carbon Efficiency Synergy
指导老师：	李维安
中文关键字：	董事会绿色理念；行政经济型治理；碳效协同；文本分析；词典法
英文关键字：	Board of Directors'''' Green Philosophy; Administrative-Economic Governance; Carbon Efficiency Synergy; Text Analysis; Dictionary Method
中文摘要：	在“碳达峰、碳中和”目标和中国式现代化等国家重大战略要求背景下，企业面临降碳和提效的双重现实挑战，亟需从形式绿色向实质绿色转型。董事会作为企业最高决策层，其绿色理念直接决定企业绿色战略的制定与执行。如何将董事会的绿色理念转化为实际的行动力，进而促使企业实现碳效协同，对于当前企业绿色治理研究具有紧迫的现实意义。然而，受制于研究思路和技术手段，现有研究多从外部市场资源等角度展开企业降碳或提效的单一维度研究，不仅忽视董事会理念对碳效协同的根源驱动影响，也尚缺乏对行政型和经济型董事会理念差异的细分考量。基于此，本文将降碳与经营效率纳入协同分析，并从董事会理念层面破解经济—环境目标冲突，旨在揭示绿色理念驱动碳效协同的动态机制，以期为企业提供从合规到价值创造的转型路径。 本文整合新制度理论、高阶梯队理论和资源依赖理论，遵循“绿色理念偏好—董事会决策机制—企业碳效协同”的逻辑路径，聚焦董事会绿色理念对企业碳效协同的影响。具体而言，研究思路为：（1）通过构建董事会绿色理念词典并进行机器学习分类的有效性测试，形成董事会行政型、经济型和行政经济型绿色理念度量依据，通过博弈论组合赋权和弹性函数，构建碳效协同度量指标。（2）聚焦董事会行政型绿色理念偏好，基于行政风险规避和行政注意力视角，探讨行政型绿色理念通过增强企业风险防范韧性和企业合规响应能力的降碳效应；（3）聚焦董事会经济型绿色理念偏好，基于经济风险规避和经济注意力视角，探讨经济型绿色理念通过提高董事绿色关注度，增强价值创造韧性的提效效应；（4）聚焦董事会行政经济型绿色理念偏好，基于企业降碳和提效的协同机制，对碳效协同的长短期效应进行分析。（5）通过调节效应、产权性质差异、地区和环境规制差异，探讨董事会会绿色理念对碳效协同影响的异质性，通过构建机器学习回归模型，实现董事会绿色理念对碳效协同的预测。 本研究以2017—2024年上市公司年报和样本数据进行实证研究，得到的主要结论为：第一，董事会行政型绿色理念会显著提升企业降碳水平。具体通过行政型风险规避机制，增强企业风险防范韧性，通过行政注意力机制，增强企业合规响应能力，进而提升企业降碳水平。董事会行政型绿色理念对东部地区和国有企业的降碳水平提升的推动力更强。第二，董事会经济型绿色理念会显著提升企业提效水平。具体通过经济风险规避机制，提高董事绿色关注度，通过经济注意力机制，增强价值创造韧性，进而提升企业经营效率。董事会经济型绿色理念对西部地区和董事长持股较高企业的降碳水平提升的推动力更强，而实控人所有权起到了抑制作用。第三，董事会行政经济型绿色理念会显著提升企业碳效协同。具体通过长期降碳机制和长期提效机制来实现企业长期碳效协同，通过降碳措施和提效措施来实现企业的短期碳效协同。东部地区、民营及外资企业、高环境规制地区的企业表现更为出色，董事长持股和实控人所有权分别起到了促进作用和抑制作用。第四，随机森林（RF）、决策树（DT）、线性回归（LR）、逻辑回归（LR）、支持向量机（SVM）和K近邻（KNN）对董事会绿色理念和企业碳效协同的关系具有较好的预测作用。 本文从环保实践的指导思想出发探讨绿色降碳发展的长效机制，一定程度上拓展绿色治理的研究视角；基于词典法度量董事会绿色理念，并进行有效性测试，有助于丰富绿色治理相关评价成果；提炼降碳—提效协同效应机制，促使企业由形式性绿色行为向实质性绿色行为进行转变，实现理念绿色到行为绿色的动态映射，为企业提供满足降碳要求和实现效率提升的高质量发展提供了实用指导。本文的研究对于政府部门加快政策激励落实、优化上市公司董事治理结构政策指引、完善董事会绿色可持续发展制度，对于企业加快战略调整和优化董事配置、完善董事会绿色治理决策机制、打通绿色治理顶层设计落地通道等方面具有意义。
英文摘要：	In response to the “dual carbon” goals (carbon peaking and carbon neutrality) and other national strategies such as the Chinese path to modernization, enterprises face the twin challenges of cutting carbon while improving efficiency and must urgently move from token greenness to genuine sustainability. As the highest decision-making level of the enterprise, the board of directors’ green philosophy directly determines the formulation and execution of the enterprises' green strategy. How to convert this green philosophy into actual action, and thereby enable enterprises to achieve carbon efficiency synergy, is a question of urgent practical significance for current research on corporate green governance. Yet, constrained by research perspectives and technical means, existing studies have mostly examined either carbon reduction or efficiency improvement in a single dimension from the angle of external market resources. Such approaches not only ignore the board philosophy’s root-driving effect on carbon efficiency synergy but also lack fine-grained consideration of the differences between administrative-type and economic-type board philosophies. Based on this, this study incorporates both carbon reduction and operational efficiency into a collaborative analysis and seeks to resolve the conflict between economic and environmental objectives at the level of board philosophy, aiming to reveal the dynamic mechanism through which green philosophy drives carbon efficiency synergy and to provide enterprises with a transformation pathway from compliance to value creation. This study integrates new institutional theory, upper-echelons theory and resource-dependence theory, and follows the logical path of “green philosophy preference - board decision-making mechanism - enterprise carbon efficiency synergy”, focusing on how the board’s green philosophy affects carbon efficiency synergy. Specifically, the research steps are: (1) This study constructs a board green philosophy dictionary and tests the validity of the machine learning classification, thereby providing measures for administrative, economic and administrative-economic green philosophies; a carbon-efficiency-synergy index is then built by combining game theory-based combined weighting and an elasticity function. (2) Focusing on the board’s administrative green philosophy preference, and drawing on administrative risk-aversion and administrative-attention perspectives, this study examines the carbon-reduction effect that arises because this philosophy strengthens enterprises’ risk prevention resilience and compliance response capacity. (3) Focusing on the board’s economic green philosophy preference, and adopting economic risk aversion and economic attention perspectives, this study explores the efficiency improvement effect produced by the philosophy’s enhancement of directors’ green attention and value creation resilience. (4) Focusing on the board’s administrative economic green-philosophy preference, this study analyses the short-term and long-term effects of carbon efficiency synergy through the synergy mechanism of carbon reduction and efficiency improvement. (5) Through moderation analysis, and by considering differences in property rights type, regional context and environmental regulation, this study investigates the heterogeneity of the impact of the board’s green philosophy on carbon efficiency synergy; finally, a machine learning regression model is constructed to predict this impact. This study empirically examines annual reports and sample data of listed companies from 2017 to 2024. The main findings are as follows: First, the board’s administrative green philosophy significantly increases enterprises’ carbon reduction level. By strengthening risk prevention resilience via administrative risk avoidance mechanisms and enhancing compliance response capacity through administrative attention mechanisms, this philosophy improves carbon performance; the effect is stronger for the eastern region and state-owned enterprises. Second, the board’s economic green philosophy significantly raises corporate efficiency. It heightens directors’ green attention through economic risk avoidance mechanisms and boosts value creation resilience via economic attention mechanisms, thereby improving operational efficiency. This economic green philosophy exerts a stronger impact on carbon reduction levels in the western region and in enterprises whose chair holds large shareholdings, whereas actual-controller ownership restrains the effect. Third, the board’s administrative economic green philosophy significantly enhances carbon efficiency synergy. Long-term synergy is achieved through enduring carbon reduction and efficiency improvement mechanisms, while short-term synergy is realized through specific carbon reduction and efficiency enhancement measures. The effect is more pronounced among the eastern region, private and foreign-funded firms, and in areas with stringent environmental regulation; chair shareholdings amplify the effect, whereas actual controller ownership dampens it. Fourth, random forest (RF), decision tree (DT), linear regression (LR), logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), and K-nearest neighbor (KNN) have a good predictive effect on the relationship between the green philosophy of the board of directors and the carbon efficiency synergy of enterprises. This study explores a long-term mechanism for green carbon reduction from the guiding ideology of environmental practice, expanding the research perspective on green governance. It measures the board’s green philosophy with a dictionary method and tests validity, enriching evaluation tools for green governance. By identifying a synergy mechanism that couples carbon reduction with efficiency gains, this study helps enterprises shift from symbolic to substantive green actions and maps how green philosophy translates into green behavior, offering practical guidance for meeting carbon targets while improving efficiency. The findings inform government efforts to accelerate policy incentives, refine guidance on board governance in listed companies and strengthen boards’ green sustainability frameworks. They also help enterprises adjust strategy, optimize board composition, improve green governance decision making and ensure top-level green designs reach implementation.
查看全文：	预览  下载(下载需要进行登录)