本研究以台灣上市公司為對象，分析ESG（環境、社會、治理）三個構面對企業績效的影響，並進一步探討家族企業與非家族企業在這些影響上是否有所不同。研究結果發現，不同ESG構面對企業績效的影響並不一致。環境與社會構面在短期內與績效呈現負相關，顯示企業若短期投入過多資源在ESG活動，可能會對績效造成壓力。不過，治理構面則不論短期或長期，都能穩定提升績效。進一步分析顯示，在家族企業中，治理構面對績效的正面影響更為明顯，但這樣的效果在環境與社會構面則不明顯。值得注意的是，治理構面在長期的正向效果比短期更穩固，而家族企業的強化作用在長期雖稍微減弱，但整體仍然正面。本研究除了說明ESG三構面對績效的不同影響，也揭示家族企業在治理實踐上的優勢，對企業在ESG資源投入與治理策略的規劃，提供實務與政策上的參考。

This study examines the impact of the three ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) dimensions on firm performance using a sample of listed companies in Taiwan and further compares differences between family and non-family businesses. Empirical results demonstrate significant heterogeneity among the three ESG dimensions in terms of their effects on performance. The environmental and social dimensions negatively correlate with short-term performance, suggesting that firms investing heavily in ESG activities in the short run might experience performance pressures. Conversely, the governance dimension consistently contributes positively to firm performance in both the short and long term. Further analysis reveals that family businesses exhibit a stronger positive relationship between the governance dimension and firm performance, though such a moderating effect is insignificant in the environmental and social dimensions. Notably, the positive influence of the governance dimension becomes more stable over time. Although the moderating effect of family businesses slightly weakens in the long run, it remains positive overall. This research highlights the heterogeneous impacts of ESG dimensions on firm performance, underscores the advantages of family businesses in governance practices, and provides practical and policy implications for ESG resource allocation and governance strategy planning.

論文審定書i
摘要ii
Abstractiii
第一章 緒論1
第二章 文獻探討與假說3
2-1 ESG的核心意涵與重要性3
2-2 家族企業的特性與SEW理論5
2-3 家族企業在ESG構面中的表現6
2-4 ESG與企業績效的關係8
2-5 國際比較與文化背景的影響9
2-6 假說建立10
第三章 研究方法12
3-1 實證資料與樣本選取12
3-2 變數定義與操作化12
3-3 實證模型13
3-4 模型比較與研究貢獻17
第四章 實證結果與分析19
4-1 敘述性統計分析19
4-2 相關係數分析21
4-3實證結果分析23
第五章 結論與建議39
參考文獻42

Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301–1328. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00567
Arena, C., & Michelon, G. (2018). A matter of control or identity? Family firms’ environmental reporting decisions along the corporate life cycle. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1596–1608. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2225
Barontini, R., & Caprio, L. (2006). The effect of family control on firm value and performance: Evidence from continental Europe. European Financial Management, 12(5), 689–723. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-036X.2006.00273.x
Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486511435355
Delmas, M. A., & Gergaud, O. (2014). Sustainable certification for future generations: The case of family business. Family Business Review, 27(3), 228–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486514538651
Fitzgerald, M. A., Haynes, G. W., Schrank, H. L., & Danes, S. M. (2010). Socially responsible processes of small family business owners: Exploratory evidence from the national family business survey. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(4), 524–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00307.x
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
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
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.1.106
Lamb, N. H., & Butler, F. C. (2018). The influence of family firms and institutional owners on corporate social responsibility performance. Business & Society, 57(7), 1374–1406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650316648443
Nikolakis, W., Olaru, D., & Kallmuenzer, A. (2022). What motivates environmental and social sustainability in family firms? A cross-cultural survey. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(5), 2351–2364. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3025
Pütz, L., Schell, S., & Werner, A. (2023). Openness to knowledge: Does corporate social responsibility mediate the relationship between familiness and absorptive capacity? Small Business Economics, 60(4), 1449–1482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00671-0
Smulowitz, S. J., Cossin, D., De Massis, A., & Lu, H. (2023). Wrongdoing in publicly listed family- and nonfamily-owned firms: A behavioral perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 47(4), 1233–1264. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221142230
Wu, B., Chen, F., Li, L., Xu, L., Liu, Z., & Wu, Y. (2024). Institutional investor ESG activism and exploratory green innovation: Unpacking the heterogeneous responses of family firms across intergenerational contexts. The British Accounting Review, 101324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2024.101324