隨著全球氣候風險升溫，環境、社會與公司治理(ESG)已成為影響金融業長期價值創造之關鍵。本研究旨在探討臺灣銀行業在綠色金融與永續轉型政策下，ESG表現與經營績效之間的關聯性，並深入剖析「金控體制」如何調節兩者間之績效轉化效率，進一步檢驗淨利差(NIM)與資金成本率(COF)之中介傳導機制。
本研究以2016年至2025年臺灣上市銀行為研究樣本，ESG表現採用臺灣經濟新報(TEJ)之TESG永續發展指標衡量，經營績效則以資產報酬率(ROA)、股東權益報酬率(ROE)及每股盈餘(EPS)衡量。
實證結果顯示：(1)ESG表現與銀行經營績效未呈現一致之顯著關聯，其中僅與ROA呈現顯著微弱的負向關聯，對ROE及EPS之關聯則未達統計顯著；(2)金控體制對ESG與經營績效之關係具有正向調節效果；(3)NIM與COF雖與銀行獲利能力具有一定關聯，但未形成顯著中介效果；(4)異質性分析結果顯示，不同組織結構及股權型態銀行之獲利來源與績效決定因素存在差異，顯示組織特性在ESG效益之發揮具有重要影響。
整體而言，本研究探討ESG表現與銀行短期財務績效之間的關聯相對有限，但組織結構與治理能力可能是攸關永續發展能否轉化為經營績效之關鍵因素。研究結果可提供銀行業推動永續發展策略及主管機關制定永續金融政策之參考。

As global climate risks escalate, Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) considerations have become a key factor influencing long-term value creation in the financial industry. This study aims to explore the association between ESG performance and operating performance in Taiwan’s banking industry under the context of green finance and sustainable transformation policies. Furthermore, it investigates how the financial holding company (FHC) structure moderates the efficiency of translating ESG initiatives into performance, and further examines the mediating mechanisms of Net Interest Margin (NIM) and Cost of Funding (COF).
Using a sample of publicly listed banks in Taiwan from 2016 to 2025, this study measures ESG performance using the TESG Sustainability Index provided by the Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ). Bank operating performance is assessed by Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Equity (ROE), and Earnings Per Share (EPS).
The empirical results indicate that: (1) ESG performance does not exhibit a consistently significant association with bank operating performance. Specifically, ESG performance shows only a marginally significant and weak negative association with ROA, while its associations with ROE and EPS are not statistically significant; (2) The FHC structure positively moderates the relationship between ESG and operating performance; (3) Although NIM and COF are associated with bank profitability, they do not exert a significant mediating effect; (4) The heterogeneity analysis reveals differences in profit sources and performance determinants among banks with different organizational structures and ownership types, demonstrating that organizational characteristics play a crucial role in the realization of ESG benefits.
Overall, this study finds that the association between ESG performance and banks' short-term financial performance is relatively limited. However, organizational structure and governance capabilities appear to be critical factors determining whether sustainable development can be effectively translated into operating performance. The findings provide useful implications for banks in formulating sustainability strategies and for regulatory authorities in developing sustainable finance policies.

Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders and managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0496-z
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777-798.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American Economic Review, 76(2), 323–329.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 237-263.
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355-374.
Stein, J. C. (1997). Internal capital markets and the competition for corporate resources. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 111–133.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
United Nations. (2004). Who cares wins: Connecting the financial markets to a changing world. UN Global Compact Office.
Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. Free Press.
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.
朱安信 (2025)。台灣的銀行 ESG 表現與經營效率之關係〔碩士論文，國立陽明交通大學〕。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/x42jj2
池祥萱、池祥麟、梁綺羚 (2016)。企業社會責任之策略性分析。管理評論，35(1)，21-45。https://doi.org/10.6656/MR.2016.35.1.CHI.21
何政昌 (2024)。金融控股公司透過ESG創造可持續競爭優勢之研究〔碩士論文，淡江大學〕。https://doi.org/10.6846/tku202400194
巫承宥 (2025)。金控母公司ESG表現對其證券子公司績效的外溢效應〔碩士論文，國立臺灣大學〕。https://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/98402
金融監督管理委員會 (2017)。綠色金融行動方案。
https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=616&parentpath=0,7
金融監督管理委員會 (2020)。綠色金融行動方案2.0。
https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=616&parentpath=0,7
金融監督管理委員會 (2022)。綠色金融行動方案3.0。
https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=616&parentpath=0,7
金融監督管理委員會 (2024)。綠色及轉型金融行動方案。
https://www.fsc.gov.tw/websitedowndoc?file=chfsc/202411011142040.pdf&filedisplay=%E7%B6%A0%E8%89%B2%E5%8F%8A%E8%BD%89%E5%9E%8B%E9%87%91%E8%9E%8D%E8%A1%8C%E5%8B%95%E6%96%B9%E6%A1%88.pdf
許永欽、李裕勳 (2022)。ESG發展趨勢下金融業之機會與挑戰。金融聯合徵信，(40)，21-28。
陳玉涓、沈鵬飛 (2007)。金控公司子銀行與獨立銀行之成本效率分析。運籌與管理學刊，6(2)，45-56。https://doi.org/10.7047/JLM.200712.0045
謝博瑜 (2025)。ESG各構面分數對臺灣金融業財務績效的影響〔碩士論文，國立中山大學〕。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/qp4t6x
羅緯軒 (2023)。臺灣銀行業ESG、企業社會責任與經營成效探究- 成本與風險觀點〔碩士論文，朝陽科技大學〕。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/wj295d