環境、社會與公司治理（Environmental, Social and Governance, ESG）已成為衡量企業永續經營及投資價值的重要指標，但既有研究對 ESG 與企業績效之關係仍未有一致結論。本研究主要目的在於探討企業 ESG 評級與財務績效及市場績效之關聯，並進一步分析公司規模及產業特性是否會改變兩者之間的關係。
本研究以 2015 年至 2024 年臺灣上市櫃公司為研究對象，採用臺灣經濟新報（Taiwan Economic Journal, TEJ）建構之 TESG 分數衡量企業 ESG 表現，並以資產報酬率（ROA）及 Tobin’s Q 分別衡量財務績效與市場績效。研究設計以前後 25% TESG 分數區分高 ESG 與低 ESG 企業，並分別建立基本效果、公司規模調節效果兩個模型；另考量金融保險業與一般產業在資本結構、監理制度及風險特性上的差異，本文將兩類產業分別進行分析。
研究結果顯示，企業 ESG 表現與財務績效及市場績效之關聯受企業特性與產業環境影響。在一般產業中，ESG 表現較佳之企業通常具有較佳的獲利能力與市場評價，且公司規模會改變 ESG 與企業績效之關係。然而金融保險業中，高低 ESG 企業之績效差異較不明顯，公司規模亦未呈現明確的調節作用。ESG 與企業績效之關係並非在所有企業與產業中皆以相同方式呈現，而可能受到產業結構、監理環境及 ESG 衡量方式影響。因此，企業在推動 ESG 策略及投資人評估企業永續表現時，應將企業特性與產業差異一併納入考量。

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance is widely used to assess corporate sustainability and investment value, but its relationship with corporate performance remains inconclusive. This study examines the association between ESG ratings and financial and market performance and considers the roles of firm size, and industry characteristics.
The sample covers firms listed on the OTC-Listed Company from 2015 to 2024. ESG performance is measured using TESG scores developed by the Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ), while ROA and Tobin’s Q represent financial and market performance. Firms in the top and bottom quartiles of TESG scores are classified as high-ESG and low-ESG firms. Two models examine the baseline relationship and the moderating effects of firm size. Financial and insurance firms are analyzed separately from other industries.
The findings show that the ESG–performance relationship varies across firms and industries. In non-financial industries, stronger ESG performance is generally associated with higher profitability and market valuation, while firm size alter this relationship. In the financial and insurance industries, performance differences and moderating effects are less evident. The results highlight the importance of firm characteristics, industry structure, regulation, and ESG measurement.

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage Publications.
2. Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., & Zhang, C. (2018). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Science, 65(10), 4451–4469. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043
3. Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 446–463. https://doi.org/10.5465/256210
4. Awaysheh et al. (2020). On the relation between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 41, 965–987. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3122
5. Aydoğmuş et al. (2022). Impact of ESG performance on firm value and profitability. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(Supplement 2), S119–S127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.11.006
6. Azmi, W., Hassan, M. K., Houston, R., & Karim, M. S. (2021). ESG activities and banking performance: International evidence from emerging economies. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 70, 101277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.10127
7. Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275520
8. Buallay, A. (2019). Is sustainability reporting (ESG) associated with performance? Evidence from the European banking sector. Management of Environmental Quality, 30(1), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2017-0149
9. Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2131
10. D’Costa, C. R., Prabhudesai, R., Naik, S. P., Prasad, C. V. V. S. N. V., & Mishra, M. (2024). When bigger is not always better: Exploring the size-dependent nature of the sustainability reporting–firm valuation relationship. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2024-0151
11. Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1), 1–19.
12. Deng, X., Kang, J. K., & Low, B. S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: Evidence from mergers. Journal of Financial Economics, 110(1), 87–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.04.014
13. Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The Accounting Review, 86(1), 59–100. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.00000005
14. Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The roles of stakeholder orientation and financial transparency. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 33(4), 328–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2014.04.006
15. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C. Y., & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital? Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388–2406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.02.007
16. Fatemi, A., Glaum, M., & Kaiser, S. (2018). ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Global Finance Journal, 38, 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001
17. Flammer, C. (2015). Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? A regression discontinuity approach. Management Science, 61(11), 2549–2568. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2038
18. Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
19. Gaies and Jahmane. (2022). Corporate social responsibility, financial globalization and bank soundness in Europe: Novel evidence from a GMM panel VAR approach. Finance Research Letters, 47(Part B), 102772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.102772
20. Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2021.101889
21. Goss, A., & Roberts, G. S. (2011). The impact of corporate social responsibility on the cost of bank loans. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(7), 1794–1810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2010.12.002
22. Hartzmark, S. M., & Sussman, A. B. (2019). Do investors value sustainability? A natural experiment examining ranking and fund flows. The Journal of Finance, 74(6), 2789–2837. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12841
23. Houston, R. J., & Shan, H. (2022). Corporate ESG profiles and banking relationships. The Review of Financial Studies, 35(7), 3373–3417. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhab125
24. Jo, H., & Harjoto, M. A. (2011). Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103, 351–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0869-y
25. Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9507312924
26. Kim, Y., Park, M. S., & Wier, B. (2012). Is earnings quality associated with corporate social responsibility? The Accounting Review, 87(3), 761–796. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-10209
27. Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2017). Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis. Journal of Finance, 72(4), 1785–1824. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12505
28. Peliu, S. A. (2024). Exploring the impact of ESG factors on corporate risk: Empirical evidence for New York Stock Exchange listed companies. Future Business Journal, 10, Article 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-024-00378-6
29. Preston, L. E., & O’Bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039703600406
30. Rastogi, S., Singh, K., & Kanoujiya, J. (2023). Firm’s value and ESG: The moderating role of ownership concentration and corporate disclosures. Asian Review of Accounting, 32(1), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-10-2022-0266
31. Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2013). The impact of corporate social responsibility on firm value: The role of customer awareness. Management Science, 59(5), 1045–1061. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1630
32. Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2009). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463–490. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.820
33. Sylos Labini et al. (2025). Sustainability strategy and financial performance in the insurance company. International Review of Economics & Finance, 98, 103924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.103924
34. Udayasankar, K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and firm size. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9609-8
35. Velte, P. (2017). Does ESG performance have an impact on financial performance? Evidence from Germany. Journal of Global Responsibility, 8(2), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-11-2016-0029
36. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1998). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199704)18:4%3C303::AID-SMJ869%3E3.0.CO;2-G
37. Xiao, Hou, and Kong. (2025). When does ESG matter? Industry heterogeneity of the ESG–firm value relationship in Chinese market. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 7, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2025.09.001