Advertisement

Effects of Corporate Social Performance on Default Risk: Structural Model-Based Analysis on Japanese Firms

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

In this chapter, we examine how firms’ corporate social performance (CSP) is related to firm default risk. We estimate the default risk of a firm by employing the structural credit risk model first developed by Merton (1974). Using the model, we explain the theoretical linkage between CSP and the probability of default (PD). We find that CSP is positively associated with the PD of financially unconstrained large-capital firms. However, PD among those large-capital firms is extremely low, and CSP exerts little influence over default risk. By contrast, among small-capital firms, CSP is negatively associated with PD. This result implies that a higher degree of CSP alleviates the default risk of small-capital firms. These asymmetric CSP effects on PD can be explained by the difference in risk and profit reduction between large- and small-capital firms. Financially constrained small-capital firms can reduce their PD and cost of debt by improving their CSP, although their corporate social...

References

  1. Ajward, A.R., and H. Takehara. 2014. Does superior corporate social performance ease financial constraints of companies? The Japanese experience. Global Economy and Finance Journal 7 (2): 42–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arikawa, Y., and H. Miyajima. 2005. Relationship banking and debt choice: Evidence from Japan. Corporate Governance: An International Review 13 (3): 408–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Black, F., and M. Scholes. 1973. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of Political Economy 81 (3): 637–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boutin-Dufresne, F., and P. Savaria. 2004. Corporate social responsibility and financial risk. Journal of Investing 13 (1): 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang, T., Y. Yan, and L. Chou. 2013. Is default probability associated with corporate social responsibility? Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics 20 (4): 457–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Delianedis, G., and R. Geske. 2003. Credit risk and risk neutral default probabilities: Information about rating migrations and default. Working Paper, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  7. El Ghoul, S.E., O. Guedhami, C.Y. Kwok, and D.R. Mishra. 2011. Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital? Journal of Banking and Finance 35 (9): 2388–2406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fazzari, S., R.G. Hubbard, and B. Petersen. 1988. Finance constraints and corporate investment. Brookings Paper on Economic Activity 1988 (1): 141–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goss, A., and G.S. Roberts. 2011. The impact of corporate social responsibility on the cost of bank loan. Journal of Banking and Finance 35 (7): 1794–1810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gregory, A., R. Tharyan, and J. Whittaker. 2014. Corporate social responsibility and firm value: Disaggregating the effects on cash flow, risk and growth. Journal of Business Ethics 124 (4): 633–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guariglia, A. 2008. Internal financial constraints, external financial constraints, and investment choice: Evidence from a panel of UK firms. Journal of Banking and Finance 32 (9): 1795–1809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoshi, T., A.K. Kashyap, and D. Scharfstein. 1991. Corporate structure, liquidity, and investment: Evidence from Japanese industrial groups. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106 (1): 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jarrow, R.A., and S.M. Turnbull. 1995. Pricing derivatives on financial securities subject to credit risk. Journal of Finance 50 (1): 53–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Menz, K.M. 2010. Corporate social responsibility: Is it rewarded by the corporate bond market? A critical note. Journal of Business Ethics 96 (1): 117–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Merton, R. 1974. On the pricing of corporate debt: The risk structure of interest rates. Journal of Finance 29 (2): 449–470.Google Scholar
  16. Mishra, S., and S.B. Modi. 2013. Positive and negative corporate social responsibility, financial leverage, and idiosyncratic risk. Journal of Business Ethics 117 (2): 431–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Salama, A., K. Anderson, and J.S. Toms. 2011. Does community and environmental responsibility affect firm risk? Evidence from UK panel data 1994–2006. Business Ethics: A European Review 20 (2): 192–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sundaram, R., and S. Das. 2011. Derivatives: Principles and Practice. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.Google Scholar
  19. Suto, M., and H. Takehara. 2015. The link between corporate social performance and financial performance: Empirical evidence from Japanese firms. International Journal of Corporate Strategy and Social Responsibility 1 (1): 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Vassalou, M., and Y. Xing. 2004. Default risk in equity returns. Journal of Finance 59 (2): 831–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. White, H. 1982. Instrumental variables regression with independent observations. Econometrica 50: 483–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations