Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Risk: Controversial Versus Noncontroversial Industries

被引:5
|
作者
Eriandani, Rizky [1 ]
Wijaya, Liliana Inggrit [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Surabaya, Fac Business & Econ, Dept Accounting, Surabaya 60293, Jawa Timur, Indonesia
[2] Univ Surabaya, Fac Business & Econ, Dept Management, Surabaya, Indonesia
来源
关键词
Corporate Social Responsibility; Firm Risk; Controversial Industry; Systematic Risk; Perceived CSR; CSR; PERFORMANCE; REPUTATION; IMPACT; DISCLOSURE; LEGITIMACY;
D O I
10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no3.0953
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This study aims to analyze the benefits of corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance on corporate risk in controversial and noncontroversial industries. The hypothesis of this study is based on the conflicting effects of industry type on CSR and firm risk. The research sample consisted of 927 companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange from 2016 to 2019. The main method for data processing was the ordinary least square method and subgroup analysis as a robustness test. The findings suggest that the performance of CSR can reduce corporate risk. However, the impact was only significant for non-controversial firms and weakened for controversial industries. These results support risk management and signaling theory. Firm risk in this study reflects the company's total risk, further research can categorize it into systematic and idiosyncratic risk. Besides, the number of samples of controversial industry research is not as much as noncontroversial; further research can use paired samples. Regulators can use the results to create a new policy regarding CSR implementation. This study contributes to the existing literature by showing that the ability of social responsibility to reduce corporate risk only works in non-controversial industries. This result may be due to the controversial industry receiving negative stigma from its stakeholders.
引用
收藏
页码:953 / 965
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Corporate Environmental Responsibility and Firm Risk
    Li Cai
    Jinhua Cui
    Hoje Jo
    Journal of Business Ethics, 2016, 139 : 563 - 594
  • [32] Corporate Environmental Responsibility and Firm Risk
    Cai, Li
    Cui, Jinhua
    Jo, Hoje
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2016, 139 (03) : 563 - 594
  • [33] Corporate governance and firm's risk behavior: the moderating role of corporate social responsibility
    Shahzad, Khurram
    Ali, Rizwan
    Rehman, Ramiz Ur
    MANAGERIAL FINANCE, 2024, 50 (07) : 1324 - 1343
  • [34] Corporate social responsibility and firm value: the role of enterprise risk management and corporate governance
    Farooq, Muhammad
    Khan, Imran
    Kainat, Mariam
    Mumtaz, Adeel
    CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS IN SOCIETY, 2025, 25 (03): : 631 - 663
  • [35] Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Idiosyncratic Risk in Different Market States
    Chen, Roger C. Y.
    Hung, Shih-Wei
    Lee, Chen-Hsun
    CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2018, 25 (04) : 642 - 658
  • [36] The combined effects of innovation and corporate social responsibility on firm financial risk
    Liu, Bai
    Ju, Tao
    Gao, Simon S. S.
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT & ACCOUNTING, 2021, 32 (03) : 283 - 310
  • [37] Corporate social responsibility's influence on firm risk and firm performance: the mediating role of firm reputation
    Rehman, Zia ur
    Khan, Asad
    Rahman, Asim
    CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2020, 27 (06) : 2991 - 3005
  • [38] Profitability of corporate social responsibility in network industries
    Fanti L.
    Buccella D.
    International Review of Economics, 2018, 65 (3) : 271 - 289
  • [39] Corporate social responsibility and firm-value: the role of sensitive industries and CEOs power in China
    Ahsan, Tanveer
    Al-Gamrh, Bakr
    Mirza, Sultan Sikandar
    APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2022, 54 (16) : 1844 - 1863
  • [40] Corporate social responsibility in unionised network industries
    Fanti L.
    Buccella D.
    International Review of Economics, 2021, 68 (2) : 235 - 262