Shaping corporate ESG performance: role of social trust in China's capital market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study investigates the influence of social trust on the attainment of corporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) objectives. Design/methodology/approach This study conducts panel regression analysis on a distinctive dataset for 2009–2017 on Chinese firms. Findings The analysis reveals a significant positive association between social trust and firm-level ESG practices. Moreover, the impact of social trust on shaping ESG outcomes is further amplified by factors such as economic growth, corporate governance standards and institutional quality. This relationship remains statistically positive when the authors employ alternative measures and methodologies, such as the instrumental variables, propensity score matching and difference-in-differences approaches. Notably, the results of heterogeneity tests indicate that the Trust–ESG nexus is more prominent for state-owned enterprises and firms with substantial market capitalization, superior profitability and higher leverage. Originality/value This study expands the comprehension of the determinants of ESG and underscores the influential role of social trust as an informal institution in enhancing a firm's ESG performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".