Ultimate ownership, corporate social responsibility and firm value: evidence from China
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to investigate the relationship among ultimate ownership, corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firm value using firm-level data from Chinese listed companies. Design/methodology/approach Using a panel data of Chinese listed firms during 2010–2018, this paper estimates with correlation analysis and multiple regression analysis. Findings The larger the divergence between ultimate owner’s control rights and cash flow rights, the stronger motivation is to infringe corporate interests and cover up misconduct through CSR. While the larger the cash flow rights, the more conducive to restrain the ultimate owner from CSR investment. The state-owned enterprises have a higher CSR. Furthermore, the separation of control rights and cash flow rights is significantly negatively related to firm value, whereas cash flow rights positively affect it. State-owned ultimate owner has a negative impact on firm value. CSR plays a significant mediating effect between ultimate ownership and firm value. Originality/value This paper reveals the tunneling and disguising effect of CSR and provides a new approach for the affecting mechanisms between ultimate ownership and firm value.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it