Advertisement

Corporate Social Performance and Ownership Structure

  • Megumi SutoEmail author
  • Hitoshi Takehara
Chapter
  • 573 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Japanese Business and Economics book series (AJBE)

Abstract

In the development of global business and increased cross-border investment, it has become important for corporate governance research to explore the effects of changing ownership structures on corporate social performance (CSP) and related issues.

References

  1. Aggarwal, R., L. Klapper, and P. Wysocki. 2005. Portfolio preference of foreign institutional investors. Journal of Banking & Finance 29 (12): 2919–2946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadjan, C. 2007. Foreign investors and corporate governance in Japan. In Corporate governance in Japan: Institutional change and organizational diversity, ed. M. Aoki, G. Jackson, and H. Miyajima, 125–150. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Asian Corporate Governance Association. 2008. White paper on corporate governance in Japan. Retrieved January 2018. http://acga-asia.org/upload/files/advocacy/20170402191458_69.pdf.
  4. Barnea, A., and A. Rubin. 2010. Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics 97 (1): 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brickley, J.A., C.W. Smith, and J.L. Zimmerman. 2003. Corporate governance, ethics, and organizational architecture. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 15 (3): 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaganti, R., and F. Damanpour. 1991. Institutional ownership, capital structure, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal 12 (7): 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choe, H., B.C. Koh, and R.M. Stulz. 2005. Do domestic investors have an edge? The trading experience of foreign investors in Korea. The Review of Financial Studies 18 (3): 795–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coffey, B.S., and G.E. Fryxell. 1991. Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics 10 (6): 437–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cox, P., S. Brammer, and A. Millington. 2004. An empirical examination of institutional investor preferences for corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 52 (1): 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cox, P., S. Brammer, and A. Millington. 2008. Pension funds and corporate social performance: An empirical analysis. Business and Society 47 (2): 213–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cox, P., and M. Schneider. 2010. Is corporate social performance a criterion in the overseas investment strategy of U.S. pension plans? An empirical examination. Business and Society 49 (2): 252–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dam, L., and B. Scholtens. 2012. Does ownership type matter for corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance: An International Review 20 (3): 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dam, L., and B. Scholtens. 2013. Ownership concentration and csr policy of european multinational enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics 118 (1): 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deakin, S., and R. Hobbs. 2007. False dawn for CSR? Shifts in regulatory policy and the response of the corporate and financial sectors in Britain. Corporate Governance: An International Review 15 (1): 68–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Graaf, F.J., and J.W. Stoelhorst. 2013. The role of governance in corporate social responsibility: Lessons from Dutch finance. Business and Society 52 (2): 282–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dhaliwal, D.S., O.Z. Li, A. Tsang, and Y.G. Yang. 2011. Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The Accounting Review 86 (1): 59–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edmans, A. 2011. Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices. Journal of Financial Economics 101 (3): 621–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Faleye, O., and E.A. Trahan. 2011. Labor-friendly corporate practices: Is what is good for employees good for shareholders? Journal of Business Ethics 101 (1): 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fama, E.F., and K.R. French. 1992. The cross-section of expected stock returns. Journal of Finance 47: 427–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gompers, P.A., and A. Metrick. 2001. Institutional investors and equity prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (1): 229–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Graves, S.B., and S.A. Waddock. 1994. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal 37 (4): 1034–1046.Google Scholar
  22. Griffin, J.J., and J.E. Mahon. 1997. The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty–five years of incomparable results. Business and Society 36 (1): 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jagannathan, R., K. Kubota, and H. Takehara. 1998. Relationship between labor-income risk and average return: Empirical evidence from the Japanese stock market. Journal of Business 71 (3): 319–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnson, R.A., and D.W. Greening. 1999. The effect of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal 42 (5): 564–576.Google Scholar
  25. Kang, J.K., and R.M. Stulz. 1997. Why is there a home bias? An analysis of foreign portfolio equity ownership in Japan. Journal of Financial Economics 46 (1): 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kho, B.C., R.M. Stulz, and F.E. Warnock. 2006. Financial globalization, governance, and the evolution of the home bias. NBER Working Paper Series 12389.Google Scholar
  27. Kurtz, L. 2008. Socially responsible investment and shareholder activism. In The oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility, ed. A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, and D.S. Stiegel, 249–280. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Leuz, C., K.V. Lins, and F.E. Warnock. 2009. Do foreigners invest in poorly governed firms? The Review of Financial Studies 23 (3): 3245–3285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mahoney, L., and R.W. Roberts. 2007. Corporate social performance, financial performance, and institutional ownership in Canadian firms. Accounting Forum 31 (3): 233–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miyajima, H., and K. Nitta. 2011. Diversification of shareholding structure and the results: Dissolution and revive of cross-shareholdings and role of foreign investors. RIETI Discussion Paper Series 11-J-011 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  31. Neubaum, D.O., and S.A. Zahra. 2006. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon, activism, and coordination. Journal of Management 32 (1): 108–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Omura, K., M. Suto, and M. Masuko. 2002. Corporate governance of Japanese institutional investors: Major results of questionnaires concerning corporate governance by institutional investors. PRI Discussion Paper Series (No. 22A-28), Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan.Google Scholar
  33. Petersen, M.A. 2009. Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies 22: 435–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Research Institute for Policies on Pension and Aging. 2008. Research report on SRI and PRI (SRI oyobi PRI nikansuru Chosahoukokusho) (in Japanese), Retrieved January 2018. http://www.nensoken.or.jp/pastresearch/pdf/sripri_houkokusyo.pdf.
  35. Scholtens, B., and Y. Zhou. 2008. Stakeholder relations and financial performance. Sustainable Development 16 (3): 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stewart, F., and J. Yermo. 2010. Options to improve the governance and investment of Japan’s government pension investment fund. OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions.Google Scholar
  37. Suto, M. 2002. New development in Japanese corporate governance in the 1990s: The role of corporate pension funds. In Japanese economy and society under pax-Americana, ed. H. Shibuya, M. Maruyama, and M. Yasaka, 249–274. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
  38. Suto, M., and M. Toshino. 2005. Behavioral biases of Japanese institutional investors: Fund management and corporate governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review 13 (4): 466–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Suto, M., and H. Takehara 2018. Does foreign ownership enhance the corporate social performance of Japanese firms? In Building new bridges between business and society, ed. H. Lu, R. Schmidpeter, N. Capadi, and L. Zu, 171–189. Springer International Publishing AG.Google Scholar
  40. Turban, D.B., and D.W. Greening. 1997. Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employers. Academy of Management Journal 40 (3): 658–672.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Waseda UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Waseda UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations