English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 116849/147881 (79%)
Visitors : 64162469      Online Users : 177
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 財務管理學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/157784
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/157784


    Title: 機構投資人持股與 ESG 風險:探討主動型基金、指數型基金與 ETF 在公司治理成效上的差異
    Institutional Ownership and ESG Risk: Examining Active Funds, Index Funds, and ETFs in Governance Outcomes
    Authors: 郭士瑋
    Kuo, Shih-Wei
    Contributors: 邱健嘉
    Chiou, Jian-Jia
    郭士瑋
    Kuo, Shih-Wei
    Keywords: 機構投資人持股
    ESG風險
    共同基金
    Institutional Ownership
    ESG Risk
    Mutual Fund Types
    Date: 2025
    Issue Date: 2025-07-01 14:52:26 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究探討不同類型共同基金之機構投資人持股,包括主動型基金、指數型基金與交易型開放式指數基金(ETFs)如何影響企業的 ESG(環境、社會與公司治理)風險曝險與永續表現。研究採用 2015 至 2021 年間美國上市公司之縱橫面資料,結合ESG 事件型風險指標與 S&P Global 的 ESG 評分,並計算機構持股比例。實證方法採用公司與年度固定效果,並對解釋變數做一期間滯後處理,以降低內生性偏誤。結果顯示,主動型基金持股與 ESG 事件發生頻率、嚴重性與新穎性均呈負向關係,但與 ESG 評分呈顯著負相關,可能反映其針對低評分企業進行參與與改善之策略。相對地,指數型基金持股與 ESG 風險事件呈正向關聯,但卻與 ESG 評分正相關,顯示其偏好揭露度高之大型企業。值得注意的是,ETF 持股與 ESG 事件頻率呈顯著負相關,顯示並非所有被動型基金皆對公司治理產生相同效果。研究結果凸顯區分被動基金類型的重要性,並指出 ETF 在結構上可能更能靈活反應 ESG 風險。本研究有助於深化機構投資人異質性在 ESG 影響力上的理解,並對資產治理政策與風險監管實務提供實證參考。
    This study investigates how institutional ownership by different types of mutual funds—namely active mutual funds, index mutual funds, and exchange-traded funds (ETFs)—affects firms’ exposure to ESG (environmental, social, and governance) risks and their sustainability performance. Using a panel dataset of U.S. publicly listed firms from 2015 to 2021, I link incident-based ESG risk measures and S&P Global ESG scores with disaggregated institutional ownership data. My empirical strategy employs firm and year fixed effects with lagged independent variables to mitigate endogeneity. The results show that active mutual fund ownership is consistently associated with lower ESG incident frequency, reduced incident severity and novelty, yet paradoxically linked to lower ESG scores—suggesting targeted engagement with underperforming firms. Index fund ownership, by contrast, is linked to higher ESG risk frequency and intensity, but positively associated with ESG scores, likely reflecting a preference for large-cap firms with strong disclosure. Interestingly, ETF ownership is negatively associated with ESG incident frequency, rejecting the hypothesis that all passive funds exert similar governance effects. These findings underscore the importance of distinguishing among passive fund types and suggest that ETF structures may allow for greater responsiveness to ESG risks. Overall, the study contributes to the growing literature on institutional investor heterogeneity and provides timely implications for asset stewardship policies and ESG risk oversight.
    Reference: Appel, I. R., Gormley, T. A., & Keim, D. B. (2016). Passive investors, not passive owners. Journal of Financial Economics, 121(1), 111–141.
    Boone, A. L., & White, J. T. (2020). The effect of institutional ownership on firm transparency and information production. Journal of Financial Economics, 117(3), 508–533.
    Bubb, R., & Catan, E. M. (2019). The party structure of mutual funds. The Review of Financial Studies, 35(6), 2839–2878.
    Calluzzo, P., & Kedia, S. (2016). Mutual fund board connections and proxy voting. Journal of Financial Economics, 134(3), 669–688.
    Chen, X., Dong, H., & Lin, C. (2020). Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Financial Economics, 135(2), 483–504.
    Dannhauser, C. D., & Pontiff, J. (2024). FLOW. Working paper.
    Gibson, R., Glossner, S., Krueger, P., Matos, P., & Steffen, T. (2022). Do Responsible Investors Invest Responsibly? Review of Finance, 26(6), 1389–1432.
    Heath, T., Macciocchi, D., Michaely, R., & Ringgenberg, M. C. (2022). Do Index Funds Monitor? The Review of Financial Studies, 35(1), 91–131.
    Hwang, C.-Y., Titman, S., & Wang, Y. (2022). Investor tastes, corporate behavior, and stock returns: An analysis of corporate social responsibility. Management Science, 68(10), 7065-7791.
    Krueger, P., Sautner, Z., & Starks, L. T. (2020). The importance of climate risks for institutional investors. Review of Financial Studies, 35(3), 1067–1111.
    Levit, D., & Malenko, N. (2015). The labor market for directors and externalities in corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 71(2), 775–808.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    財務管理學系
    112357033
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112357033
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[財務管理學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    703301.pdf873KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback