碳黑為橡膠產業不可或缺之補強材料，其製程高度依賴石化原料與高溫裂解技術，屬於典型之高碳密集產業。面對全球ESG浪潮與淨零碳排政策加壓，碳黑產業同時承受法規、成本與市場三重風險，如何在資源受限下推動永續轉型，成為傳統製造業的重要課題。尤其中小型企業長期受限於資本與技術門檻，對於ESG的回應更需仰賴可行之實務策略與同業標竿。本研究以台灣碳黑產業龍頭國際中橡為個案，聚焦其在營運承壓情境中推動ESG的策略選擇與轉型歷程，探討其作為供應鏈中介角色對CSR的上下游傳遞作用，並評估其在循環經濟、綠色製程與策略聯盟等面向上的具體作為與轉型成效。
本研究以個案研究法結合半結構式訪談與次級資料分析，佐以TESG等量化評級指標評估其永續實踐表現。結果顯示，國際中橡已由傳統減污導向轉向雙軌永續產品與製程創新策略，並透過美國合資擴廠與環保碳黑產品開發強化其國際競爭力與低碳供應鏈整合能力。然而轉型過程亦暴露製程依賴性高、財務彈性不足與碳費政策敏感度高等潛在風險，凸顯中小型高碳產業在ESG轉型中所面臨的結構性困境。
最終，透過系統性歸納與效益評估，本研究提出中小型製造企業可依據自身體質選擇「由製程升級至產品創新」之路徑，並搭配SASB重大性分析、綠色融資與產業協作三項配套策略，作為在轉型壓力下兼顧經營價值與永續責任的具體建議，期許能協助企業在永續轉型之路上達致營運價值之最大化。

Carbon black, a key reinforcement material in the rubber industry, is highly carbon-intensive and dependent on energy-heavy production. As ESG standards and net-zero policies tighten globally, the industry—especially SMEs—faces rising regulatory and cost pressures. This study explores how Continental Carbon, a leading Taiwanese carbon black producer, responds through ESG strategies, influencing CSR both upstream and downstream in the supply chain. It evaluates the firm’s circular economy efforts, green production, and strategic alliances.
Using case studies with semi-structured interviews and secondary data, the research assesses ESG performance via TESG scores. Results show a transition from traditional pollution control to dual strategies of sustainable products and process innovation. Through international joint ventures and biochar tech, the firm enhances low-carbon competitiveness, though challenges remain—revenue concentration, financial constraints, and carbon cost exposure.
This study outlines a pathway for SMEs: evolve from process upgrades to product innovation, supported by SASB-based materiality, green finance, and cross-sector collaboration to sustain operational value amid ESG pressures.

中文文獻
1. 林茂文（2019）。邁向高值化與循環經濟的石化產業。石油季刊，55(2)，1-30。
英文文獻
1. Böhringer, C., Peterson, S., Rutherford, T. F., Schneider, J., & Winkler, M. (2021). Climate policies after paris: Pledge, trade and recycle: Insights from the 36th energy modeling forum study (emf36). Energy Economics, 103, 105471.
2. Cherkasova, V., & Nenuzhenko, I. (2022). Investment in ESG projects and corporate performance of multinational companies. Journal of Economic Integration, 37(1), 54-92.
3. Dwivedi, C., Manjare, S., & Rajan, S. K. (2020). Recycling of waste tire by pyrolysis to recover carbon black: Alternative & environment-friendly reinforcing filler for natural rubber compounds. Composites Part B: Engineering, 200, 108346.
4. Dai, R., Liang, H., & Ng, L. (2021). Socially responsible corporate customers. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 598-626.
5. MacArthur, E. (2013). Towards the circular economy, economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Cowes, UK, 1.
6. European Commission. (2020). Taxonomy: Final report of the Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance.
7. Esty, D. C., & Cort, T. (2020). Values at work: Sustainable investing and ESG reporting. Springer Nature.
8. Fan, Y., Fowler, G. D., & Zhao, M. (2019). The Past, Present and Future of Carbon Black as A Rubber Reinforcing Filler – A Review. Journal of Cleaner Production.
9. Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: The expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 114, 11-32.
10. Giese, G., Lee, L. E., Melas, D., Nagy, Z., & Nishikawa, L. (2019). Foundations of ESG investing: How ESG affects equity valuation, risk, and performance. Journal of portfolio management, 45(5), 69-83.
11. Hopewell, J., Dvorak, R., & Kosior, E. (2009). Plastics recycling: Challenges and opportunities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1526), 2115–2126.
12. Huang, C. J., Ke, W. C., & Lin, C. P. (2020). Does CSR Materiality Affect Financial Performance in Taiwan?. 財務金融學刊, 28(4), 59-109.
13. Madison, N., & Schiehll, E. (2021). The effect of financial materiality on ESG performance assessment. Sustainability, 13(7), 3652.
14. Sassen, R., Hinze, A. K., & Hardeck, I. (2016). Impact of ESG factors on firm risk in Europe. Journal of business economics, 86, 867-904.
15. Skjærseth, J. B. (2021). Towards a European Green Deal: The evolution of EU climate and energy policy mixes. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 21(1), 25-41.