Green finance and corporate environmental investment: "Scale Up" or "Efficiency Up"?

Qu Yang, Shiyi Ming, Rongguang Zhang, Haitao Yan
Author Information
  1. Qu Yang: Business School, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China.
  2. Shiyi Ming: Business School, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China. ORCID
  3. Rongguang Zhang: Business School, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China.
  4. Haitao Yan: Business School, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu, 610066, China.

Abstract

The establishment of green finance reform and innovation (GFRI) pilot zone is an important measure of the Chinese government to urge enterprises to develop green transformation. This paper explores the impact of pilot policies in the GFRI pilot zone on corporate environmental investment. Based on 819 A-share listed enterprises from 2010 to 2020, our staggered difference-in-differences (staggered DID) estimation documents revealed that enterprises in the GFRI pilot zone significantly increased the corporate environmental investment efficiency but reduced the scale of corporate environmental investment.This conclusion remained robust after Propensity Scores Matching difference-in-differences (PSM-DID), replacing dependent variables, and shortening the time window. We contend that the increased research and development (R&D) expenditure and technological innovation are the potential mechanisms at work. Heterogeneity analysis showed that the establishment of GFRI improved the environmental investment efficiency of polluting enterprises but had no effect on green enterprises.Meanwhile, the effect of GFRI exhibited heterogeneity in the type of enterprise ownership. This paper evaluates the implementation effect of GFRI from the perspective of corporate environmental investment, and provides theoretical support and an empirical basis for green finance policy to serve China's green economy.

References

  1. J Environ Public Health. 2022 Aug 3;2022:1833377 [PMID: 35967479]
  2. PLoS One. 2022 Dec 13;17(12):e0278985 [PMID: 36512617]
  3. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 13;19(12): [PMID: 35742501]
  4. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Jan;30(5):12041-12058 [PMID: 36103065]
  5. Trends Ecol Evol. 2017 Jul;32(7):500-505 [PMID: 28457498]

MeSH Term

China
Environmental Policy
Fiscal Policy
Government
Investments
Organizations
Economic Development
Sustainable Growth
Sustainable Development

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0GFRIenvironmentalgreenenterprisescorporateinvestmentpilotfinancezoneeffectestablishmentinnovationpaperstaggereddifference-in-differencesincreasedefficiencyreformimportantmeasureChinesegovernmenturgedeveloptransformationexploresimpactpoliciesBased819A-sharelisted20102020DIDestimationdocumentsrevealedsignificantlyreducedscaleThisconclusionremainedrobustPropensityScoresMatchingPSM-DIDreplacingdependentvariablesshorteningtimewindowcontendresearchdevelopmentR&DexpendituretechnologicalpotentialmechanismsworkHeterogeneityanalysisshowedimprovedpollutingMeanwhileexhibitedheterogeneitytypeenterpriseownershipevaluatesimplementationperspectiveprovidestheoreticalsupportempiricalbasispolicyserveChina'seconomyGreeninvestment:"ScaleUp""EfficiencyUp"?

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.