OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Environmental science and pollution research international
Feb, 2023;30 (9): 24533-24552.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) and market efficiency of China's commercial banks under market competition.

Li Ji, Yanan Sun, Jiawei Liu, Yung-Ho Chiu
Author Information
  1. Li Ji: School of Economics and Management, Nantong University, No. 9 Seyuan Road, Jiangsu, 226019, People's Republic of China.
  2. Yanan Sun: School of Economics and Management, Nantong University, No. 9 Seyuan Road, Jiangsu, 226019, People's Republic of China.
  3. Jiawei Liu: School of Economics and Management, Nantong University, No. 9 Seyuan Road, Jiangsu, 226019, People's Republic of China.
  4. Yung-Ho Chiu: Department of Economics, Soochow University, No. 56, Kueiyang St., Sec. 1 , Taipei, 100, Taiwan. echiu@scu.edu.tw. ORCID
PMID: 36336738 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-23742-x

Abstract

As the leading financial institutions in China, it is crucial for commercial banks to pay attention to environmental protection (E), social responsibility (S), and corporate governance (G) in order to enhance operational efficiency and to advance the high-quality development of the country's social economy. This research explores the market share of banks as exogenous variables in the profit stage and the market and sustainability stage to investigate the efficiency of 20 listed banks in China over 2016-2020 and innovatively incorporates indicators such as green credit, social giving, executive compensation, and ESG score into the meta-dynamic two-stage SBM under the exogenous variable DEA model. The results demonstrate the following. (1) By integrating market share as an exogenous variable in the model, the efficiency estimate is more precise. (2) In overall, UCBs are the most efficient type of banks, JSCBs are the second, SOCBs are the least efficient. All three types of banks are more efficient in profit stage versus the market and sustainability stage, JSCBs perform best in the profit stage, where SOCBs perform best in the market and sustainability stage. The three different bank types' TGR performance is comparable to their efficiency value performance. (3) SOCBs lead in ESG investment and have the best ESG performance due to their distinct state-owned background. With their ongoing dedication to profit maximization and disregard for social responsibility and sustainable development, JSCBs have the worst ESG performance. (4) Policy recommendations are made based on the study's findings for commercial banks, stakeholders, and regulators to support ESG investment and to bring about long-term sustainable development. Finally, as ESG develops in China, future research can consider longer time scales and larger perspectives to investigate the sustainability efficiency of commercial banks themselves, as well as their role in the local economy and industrial transformation.

Keywords

Bank DEA ESG Exogenous variables Sustainability Two-stage SBM

References

  1. Abbas F, Iqbal S, Aziz B (2019) The impact of bank capital, bank liquidity and credit risk on profitability in postcrisis period: a comparative study of US and Asia. Cogent Econ Finance 7:1605683. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2019.1605683 [DOI: 10.1080/23322039.2019.1605683]
  2. Alexander GJ, Buchholz RA (1978) Corporate social responsibility and stock market performance. Acad Manag J 21:479–486. https://doi.org/10.5465/255728 [DOI: 10.5465/255728]
  3. Aupperle KE, Carroll AB, Hatfield JD (1985) An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Acad Manage J 28(2):446–463. https://doi.org/10.5465/256210 [DOI: 10.5465/256210]
  4. Azmi W, Hassan MK, Houston R, Karim MS (2021) ESG activities and banking performance: International evidence from emerging economies. J Int Finan Markets Inst Money 70:101277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101277 [DOI: 10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101277]
  5. Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci 30:1078–1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078 [DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078]
  6. Barchiesi MA, FronzettiColladon A (2021) Corporate core values and social responsibility: what really matters to whom. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 170:120907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120907 [DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120907]
  7. Barnett ML (2007) Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Acad Manag Rev 32:794–816. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275520 [DOI: 10.5465/amr.2007.25275520]
  8. Berger A (1995) The profit-structure relationship in banking–tests of market-power and efficient-structure hypotheses. J Money Credit Bank 27:404–431 [DOI: 10.2307/2077876]
  9. Bofinger Y, Heyden KJ, Rock B (2022) Corporate social responsibility and market efficiency: evidence from ESG and misvaluation measures. J Bank Finance 134:106322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2021.106322 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2021.106322]
  10. Bos JWB, Kool CJM (2006) Bank efficiency: The role of bank strategy and local market conditions. J Bank Finance 30(7):1953–1974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2005.07.008 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2005.07.008]
  11. Broadstock DC, Chan K, Cheng LTW, Wang X (2021) The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: evidence from COVID-19 in China. Financ Res Lett 38:101716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716 [DOI: 10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716]
  12. Buallay A (2019) Is sustainability reporting (ESG) associated with performance? Evidence from the European banking sector. Manage Environ Qual: An Int J 30:98–115. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2017-0149 [DOI: 10.1108/MEQ-12-2017-0149]
  13. Carroll AB (1991) The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Bus Horiz 34:39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G [DOI: 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G]
  14. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8 [DOI: 10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8]
  15. Chen Y, Zhu J (2004) Measuring information technology’s indirect impact on firm performance. Inf Technol Manage 5:9–22. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ITEM.0000008075.43543.97 [DOI: 10.1023/B]
  16. Chen Y, Cook WD, Li N, Zhu J (2009) Additive efficiency decomposition in two-stage DEA. Eur J Oper Res 196:1170–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.011 [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.011]
  17. Cheng B, Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2014) Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strateg Manag J 35:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2131 [DOI: 10.1002/smj.2131]
  18. Chernobai A, Ozdagli A, Wang J (2021) Business complexity and risk management: evidence from operational risk events in U.S. bank holding companies. J Monet Econ 117:418–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2020.02.004 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2020.02.004]
  19. Chiaramonte L, Dreassi A, Girardone C, Piserà S (2022) Do ESG strategies enhance bank stability during financial turmoil? Evidence from Europe. Eur J Finance 28:1173–1211. https://doi.org/10.1080/1351847X.2021.1964556 [DOI: 10.1080/1351847X.2021.1964556]
  20. Chouaibi S, Chouaibi J, Rossi M (2021) ESG and corporate financial performance: the mediating role of green innovation: UK common law versus Germany civil law. EuroMed J Bus 17(1):46–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-09-2020-0101 [DOI: 10.1108/EMJB-09-2020-0101]
  21. Di Tommaso C, Thornton J (2020) Do ESG scores effect bank risk taking and value? Evidence from European banks. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manage 27(5):2286–2298. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1964 [DOI: 10.1002/csr.1964]
  22. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Whittaker G (2007) Network DEA. In: Zhu J, Cook WD (eds) Modeling data irregularities and structural complexities in data envelopment analysis. Springer, US, Boston, MA, pp 209–240 [DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-71607-7_12]
  23. Farrell MJ (1957) The measurement of productive efficiency. J R Stat Soc: Series A (general) 120(3):253–281. https://doi.org/10.2307/2343100 [DOI: 10.2307/2343100]
  24. Finger M, Gavious I, Manos R (2018) Environmental risk management and financial performance in the banking industry: a cross-country comparison. J Int Finan Markets Inst Money 52:240–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2017.09.019 [DOI: 10.1016/j.intfin.2017.09.019]
  25. Forster J, Shaffer S (2005) Bank efficiency ratios in Latin America. Appl Econ Lett 12(9):529–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850500120623 [DOI: 10.1080/13504850500120623]
  26. Freeman R (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder perspective. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
  27. Friedman M (1970) A theoretical framework for monetary analysis. J Polit Econ 78:193–238 [DOI: 10.1086/259623]
  28. Ge L, Zhao H, Yang J, Yu J, He T (2022) Green finance, technological progress, and ecological performance—evidence from 30 Provinces in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29:66295–66314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20501-w [DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-20501-w]
  29. Hartzmark SM, Sussman AB (2019) Do investors value sustainability? A natural experiment examining ranking and fund flows. J Financ 74:2789–2837. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12841 [DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12841]
  30. Hu JL, Wang SC (2006) Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy Policy 34(17):3206–3217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.030 [DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.030]
  31. Husted BW, Sousa-Filho JMd (2017) The impact of sustainability governance, country stakeholder orientation, and country risk on environmental, social, and governance performance. J Clean Prod 155:93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.025 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.025]
  32. Jo H, Harjoto MA (2011) Corporate governance and firm value: the impact of corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics 103:351–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0869-y [DOI: 10.1007/s10551-011-0869-y]
  33. Kao C, Hwang S-N (2008) Efficiency decomposition in two-stage data envelopment analysis: an application to non-life insurance companies in Taiwan. Eur J Oper Res 185:418–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.11.041 [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.11.041]
  34. Kuo T-C, Chen H-M, Meng H-M (2021) Do corporate social responsibility practices improve financial performance? A case study of airline companies. J Clean Prod 310:127380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127380 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127380]
  35. Lewis HF, Sexton TR (2004) Network DEA: efficiency analysis of organizations with complex internal structure. Comput Oper Res 31:1365–1410. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0548(03)00095-9 [DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0548(03)00095-9]
  36. Lian Y, Gao J, Ye T (2022) How does green credit affect the financial performance of commercial banks? ——evidence from China. J Clean Prod 344:131069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131069 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131069]
  37. Liu X, Sun J, Yang F, Wu J (2020) How ownership structure affects bank deposits and loan efficiencies: an empirical analysis of Chinese commercial banks. Ann Oper Res 290:983–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-3106-6 [DOI: 10.1007/s10479-018-3106-6]
  38. Lozano-Vivas A, Pastor JT, Pastor JM (2002) An efficiency comparison of European banking systems operating under different environmental conditions. J Prod Anal 18(1):59–77. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015704510270 [DOI: 10.1023/A]
  39. Luh Peter K, KusiBaah A, Gyeke-Dako A, Fiador Vera O (2022) Female corporate board executives and bank profitability: exploring for complementarities and synergies. Afr Finance J 24:37–49
  40. Luo S, Yu S, Zhou G (2021) Does green credit improve the core competence of commercial banks? Based on quasi-natural experiments in China. Energy Econ 100:105335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105335 [DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105335]
  41. Mackey A, Mackey TB, Barney JB (2007) Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: investor preferences and corporate strategies. Acad Manag Rev 32:817–835. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275676 [DOI: 10.5465/amr.2007.25275676]
  42. Neitzert F, Petras M (2022) Corporate social responsibility and bank risk. J Bus Econ 92:397–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-021-01069-2 [DOI: 10.1007/s11573-021-01069-2]
  43. O’Donnell CJ, Rao DSP, Battese GE (2008) Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios. Empir Econ 34:231–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-007-0119-4 [DOI: 10.1007/s00181-007-0119-4]
  44. Omankhanlen A, Ilori N, Isibor A, Okoye L (2021) Monetary policies and the achievement of bank profit objective. J Cent Bank Theor Pract 10:201–220. https://doi.org/10.2478/jcbtp-2021-0020 [DOI: 10.2478/jcbtp-2021-0020]
  45. Ouchen A (2022) Is the ESG portfolio less turbulent than a market benchmark portfolio? Risk Manage 24:1–33. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41283-021-00077-4 [DOI: 10.1057/s41283-021-00077-4]
  46. Ratnovski L (2013) Liquidity and transparency in bank risk management. J Financ Intermediation 22:422–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2013.01.002 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jfi.2013.01.002]
  47. Ray S (2016) Cost efficiency in an Indian bank branch network: a centralized resource allocation model. Omega 65:69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.009 [DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.009]
  48. Reber B, Gold A, Gold S (2022) ESG disclosure and idiosyncratic risk in initial public offerings. J Bus Ethics 179:867–886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04847-8 [DOI: 10.1007/s10551-021-04847-8]
  49. Renneboog L, Ter Horst J, Zhang C (2008) Socially responsible investments: institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. J Bank Finance 32:1723–1742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2007.12.039 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2007.12.039]
  50. Saerang D, Tulung J, Ogi I (2018) The influence of executives’ characteristics on bank performance: the case of emerging market. J Gov Regul 7:13–18. https://doi.org/10.22495/10.22495/jgr_v7_i4_p2 [DOI: 10.22495/10.22495/jgr_v7_i4_p2]
  51. Santomero AM (1997) Commercial bank risk management: an analysis of the process. J Financ Serv Res 12:83–115. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007971801810 [DOI: 10.1023/A]
  52. Seiford LM, Zhu J (1999) Profitability and marketability of the top 55 U.S. commercial banks. Manage Sci 45:1270–1288. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.9.1270 [DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.45.9.1270]
  53. Sexton TR, Lewis HF (2003) Two-stage DEA: an application to major league baseball. J Prod Anal 19:227–249. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022861618317 [DOI: 10.1023/A]
  54. Sheehy B (2015) Defining CSR: problems and solutions. J Bus Ethics 131:625–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2281-x [DOI: 10.1007/s10551-014-2281-x]
  55. Shen C-H, Wu M-W, Chen T-H, Fang H (2016) To engage or not to engage in corporate social responsibility: empirical evidence from global banking sector. Econ Model 55:207–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2016.02.007 [DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2016.02.007]
  56. Shen X, Zhao H, Yu J, Wan Z, He T, Liu J (2022) Digital economy and ecological performance: evidence from a spatial panel data in China. Front Environ Sci 10:1618. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.969878 [DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.969878]
  57. Shi Z, Qin S, Chiu Y-h, Tan X, Miao X (2021) The impact of gross domestic product on the financing and investment efficiency of China’s commercial banks. Financ Innov 7:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-021-00251-3 [DOI: 10.1186/s40854-021-00251-3]
  58. Shi Z, Huang H, Wu Y, Chiu YH, Qin, S (2020) Climate change impacts on agricultural production and crop disaster area in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(13).  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17134792
  59. Skała D, Weill L (2018) Does CEO gender matter for bank risk? Econ Syst 42:64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2017.08.005 [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecosys.2017.08.005]
  60. Staikouras C, Wood G (2004) The determinants of European bank profitability. Int Bus Econ Res J 3:57–68
  61. Tamazian A, Chousa JP, Vadlamannati KC (2009) Does higher economic and financial development lead to environmental degradation: evidence from BRIC countries. Energy Policy 37:246–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.08.025 [DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.08.025]
  62. Tan Y, Zhu Z (2022) The effect of ESG rating events on corporate green innovation in China: the mediating role of financial constraints and managers’ environmental awareness. Technol Soc 68:101906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101906 [DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101906]
  63. Tao H, Zhuang S, Xue R, Cao W, Tian J, Shan Y (2022) Environmental finance: an interdisciplinary review. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 179:121639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121639 [DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121639]
  64. Tian P, Lin B (2018) Regional technology gap in energy utilization in China’s light industry sector: non-parametric meta-frontier and sequential DEA methods. J Clean Prod 178:880–889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.017 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.017]
  65. Tian J, Yu L, Xue R, Zhuang S, Shan Y (2022) Global low-carbon energy transition in the post-COVID-19 era. Appl Energy 307:118205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.118205 [DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.118205]
  66. Tone K (2001) A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 130(3):498–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5 [DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5]
  67. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2009) Network DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. Eur J Oper Res 197:243–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.027 [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.027]
  68. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2010) Dynamic DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. Omega 38:145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2009.07.003 [DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2009.07.003]
  69. Tone K, Tsutsui M (2014) Dynamic DEA with network structure: a slacks-based measure approach. Omega 42:124–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2013.04.002 [DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2013.04.002]
  70. Wang K, Huang W, Wu J, Liu Y-N (2014) Efficiency measures of the Chinese commercial banking system using an additive two-stage DEA. Omega 44:5–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2013.09.005 [DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2013.09.005]
  71. Widyawati L (2020) A systematic literature review of socially responsible investment and environmental social governance metrics. Bus Strateg Environ 29:619–637. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2393 [DOI: 10.1002/bse.2393]
  72. Wong WC, Batten JA, Ahmad AH, Mohamed-Arshad SB, Nordin S, Adzis AA (2021) Does ESG certification add firm value? Financ Res Lett 39:101593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101593 [DOI: 10.1016/j.frl.2020.101593]
  73. Yoo S, Keeley AR, Managi S (2021) Does sustainability activities performance matter during financial crises? Investigating the case of COVID-19. Energy Policy 155:112330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112330 [DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112330]
  74. You X, Sun Y, Liu J (2022) Evolution and analysis of urban resilience and its influencing factors: a case study of Jiangsu Province, China. Nat Hazards 113:1751–1782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05368-x [DOI: 10.1007/s11069-022-05368-x]
  75. Zha Y, Liang N, Wu M, Bian Y (2016) Efficiency evaluation of banks in China: a dynamic two-stage slacks-based measure approach. Omega 60:60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.12.008 [DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2014.12.008]
  76. Zhang X, Zhao X, Qu L (2021) Do green policies catalyze green investment? Evidence from ESG investing developments in China. Econ Lett 207:110028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2021.110028 [DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2021.110028]
  77. Zhao J, Dong K, Dong X, Shahbaz M (2022) How renewable energy alleviate energy poverty? A global analysis. Renew Energy 186:299–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.005 [DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.005]
  78. Zhou B, Zhao H, Yu J, He T, Liu J (2022) Does the growth of the digital economy boost the efficiency of synergistic carbon-haze governance? Evidence from China. Front Environ Sci 10:1621. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.98459 [DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.98459]

MeSH Term

China
Industry
Investments
Social Responsibility
Sustainable Development
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0banksESGmarketefficiencystagesocialcommercialprofitsustainabilityperformanceChinadevelopmentexogenousefficientJSCBsSOCBsbestresponsibilitygovernanceeconomyresearchsharevariablesinvestigateSBMvariableDEAmodelthreeperforminvestmentsustainableleadingfinancialinstitutionscrucialpayattentionenvironmentalprotectionEScorporateGorderenhanceoperationaladvancehigh-qualitycountry'sexplores20listed2016-2020innovativelyincorporatesindicatorsgreencreditgivingexecutivecompensationscoremeta-dynamictwo-stage Theresultsdemonstratefollowing1integratingestimateprecise2overallUCBstypesecondleasttypesversusdifferentbanktypes'TGRcomparablevalue3leadduedistinctstate-ownedbackgroundongoingdedicationmaximizationdisregardworst4Policyrecommendationsmadebasedstudy'sfindingsstakeholdersregulatorssupportbringlong-termFinallydevelopsfuturecanconsiderlongertimescaleslargerperspectiveswellrolelocalindustrialtransformationEnvironmentalChina'scompetitionBankExogenousSustainabilityTwo-stage

Similar Articles

Cited By (1)