THE HETEROGENEOUS EFFECTS OF CSR DIMENSIONS ON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE – A NEW APPROACH FOR CSR MEASUREMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the differential effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) dimensions on corporate financial performance (CFP) across sectors in China. This research uses a unique data set provided by China Stock Market and Accounting Research (CSMAR), showing expenditure on CSR programs from 568 Chinese publicly traded firm-year observations from 2008 to 2017. Compared to previous studies using scores produced by extra-financial rating agencies, this research quantifies CSR efforts by corporate expenditure on CSR practices, which offers quantitative and precise information in explaining the CSR-CFP link. The results show that the dimension of the environment has negative effects on financial performance in capital-intensive manufacturing industries. The impact of HR expenditure on CFP is negative in the tertiary sector and resourceintensive manufacturing industries. However, CSR investments in the community are positively related to financial performance in resource-intensive industries and other secondary sector (mining, construction, and utilities). Firms, in general, could gain benefits when spending more on business and financial stakeholders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".