2015 6 79 DEA-Tobit 1 2 1. 130012 2. 130012 CSR DEA-Tobit DEA-Tobit F062. 9 A 1671-9301 2015 06-0021-11 DOI:10.13269/j.cnki.ier.2015.06.014 Corporate Social Responsibility CSR 2014 500 31. 06 2013 GDP 41. 98% 2014 500 56. 68 2013 GDP 99. 64% Corporate Social Performance CSP 2015-05-15 2015-09-22 1973 1987 12JJD790007 13&ZD022 21
Lech 1 2 Coffey and Jia 3 4 5 6 7 8 Corporate Financial Performance CFP CSP CFP 9 Preston O Bannon 10 CSP CFP 11 12 Margolis et al. 13 167 14 Sun abd Stuebs 15 16 17 18 U 19 22
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH Freeman 20 stakeholder 21 1 X p px X Y R X = X a + X b 1 1 X a Y X b R X X a X b R R = r X b X b R V Z V = ν R ν R Z R Z VV = ν R Z = ν r X b Z V = g X b Z r v Z g Z X b Y 23 2
Y = f X a V T T X a V max X a X bπ = Y - px = f Xa g X b Z T - px 4 1 1 4 π X b = - f X a 3 + f V ν X b = 0 5 5 X b f V ν X b X a f X a X a X b 0 X R V Z * f V ν X < f b Z = Z X b 0 X X = X a + X b * X axa π X b < 0 X Xa X b t t X t p t p t X t X t X t = X a t + X b t t = 1 2 Y t R t X a t R t = r X b t X b t R t t t V t t - 1 R t -1 t Z t V t = ν R t -1 Z t = ν r X b t -1 Z t 6 7 24
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH 7 V t = g X b t -1 Z t Y t Y t = f X a t V t T t = f X a t g X b t -1 Z t T t t maxπ = lim X a t Xb t n n t = 1 Y t = f X 1 a g 0 - p t X t = lim f X a n n t g X b t -1 Z t T t - p t X t t = 1 Z 1 T 1 - p 1 X 1 + f X 2 a g X 1 b Z 2 T 2 - p 2 X 2 + + f X a t g X b t -1 Z t T t - p t X t + 8 9 10 6 6 10 X a t t = 1 2 π t = i π X b i X b t = - f X a i + f V i ν X b i -1 = 0 11 11 f ν X V i a f X b i i -1 X a i t = n X n = X a n π < 0 X a t X b t 0 X t X b t t X t π = 0 X a t 0 X t X b t X b t X a X b X t Z t 22 23 KLD DEA 25 X b i -1
DEA Banker et al 1984 BCC CCR Charnes et al 1978 TE PTE SE 1 20102013 4 100 CPI 2 100 20112014 4 CR Magazine 100 Osiris CPI 3 100 4 TE 0 ~ 1 DEA-Tobit DEA Tobin 1958 Censored Regression Model Tobit Tobit TE lnasset AL SOE TE i t = α + β 1 CSP i t + β 2 CSP i t -1 1 + γ 1 lnasset i t + γ 2 AL i t + γ 3 SOE i t + ε i t 12 TE i t = α + βcsp i t + γ 1 lnasset i t + γ 2 AL i t + γ 3 SOE i t + ε i t 13 TE i t = α + βcsp i t -1 + γ 1 lnasset i t + γ 2 AL i t + γ 3 SOE i t + ε i t 14 13 4 14 26
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH 1 TE TE 0 ~ 1 = 100 /100 = CSP CSP 100 / 100 CSP1 CSP CSP lnasset AL = / / / SOE 1 0 1 2 DEAP2. 1 2 TE PTE SE 2 2011 0. 573 0. 669 0. 863 2012 0. 527 0. 633 0. 846 2013 0. 553 0. 652 0. 854 2014 0. 573 0. 676 0. 851 TE 2010 0. 319 0. 446 0. 736 PTE SE 2011 0. 270 0. 392 0. 731 2012 0. 248 0. 356 0. 760 Tobit 2013 0. 242 0. 349 0. 767 Tobit DEA McDonald 24 DEA 3 12 13 14 0. 024 109 2 0. 035 380 4 * CSP 0. 259 0. 088 DEA-Tobit 0. 002 287 3 0. 000 883 3 CSP1 0. 910 0. 966-0. 099 815 6 *** - 0. 111 819 *** - 0. 097 601 2 GLS *** lnasset 0. 001 0. 001-6. 906 048-10. 698 47-8. 764 451 AL 0. 696 0. 510 0. 615 0. 979 92 *** 1. 045 891 *** 0. 944 243 4 *** GLS _cons 3 4 0. 194 001 2 *** 0. 195 083 9 *** 0. 191 152 7 *** sigma_u 3 0. 040 934 4 *** 0. 051 459 4 *** 0. 041 492 *** sigma_e 1 P 2 * ** *** 10% 5% 1% 27
4 CSP 12 13 14 Tobit GLS Tobit Tobit GLS 0. 000 378 4 0. 982-0. 011 765 9 0. 401 0. 016 471 7 0. 367 CSP1 0. 024 385 5 0. 135 0. 035 193 7 *** 0. 005 0. 024 440 2 0. 13 0. 028 957 *** lnasset - 0. 118 472 5 *** - 0. 103 145 *** - 0. 159 790 6 *** - 0. 118 433 9 *** - 0. 104 616 3 *** AL 5. 233 998 *** 5. 056 887 *** 8. 125 633 *** 5. 232 299 *** 5. 241 891 *** SOE 0. 106 719 6 *** 0. 069 600 1 *** 0. 194 144 2 *** 0. 106 725 *** 0. 070 043 1 *** _cons 0. 713 360 5 *** 0. 649 553 4 *** 0. 852 618 8 *** 0. 713 281 9 *** 0. 653 865 6 *** sigma_u 0. 138 740 4 *** 0. 146 628 5 *** 0. 138 738 7 *** sigma_e 0. 031 334 1 *** 0. 046 070 4 *** 0. 031 334 3 *** 1 P 2 * ** *** 10% 5% 1% 4 DEA DEA DEA 28
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH DEA DEA 25 5 5 DEAP2. 1 BCC - DEA A B 12 13 14 6 7 3 4 DEA TE A 6 12 B A 13 B A 14 B CSP 0. 039 746 6 *** 0. 022 799 4 0. 037 170 2 *** 0. 031 822 3 0. 003 0. 252 0. 001 0. 108 CSP1 0. 020 158 6 0. 009 251 7 0. 019 214 0. 008 528 3 0. 124 0. 617 0. 160 0. 648 lnasset - 0. 232 998 *** - 0. 175 925 3 *** - 0. 232 197 3 *** - 0. 190 180 5 *** - 0. 231 515 7 *** - 0. 179 984 4 *** AL 115. 735 8 *** 51. 842 27 *** 100. 043 7 *** 42. 703 31 *** 114. 204 *** 53. 150 98 *** 0. 008 _cons 1. 105 081 *** 1. 261 936 *** 1. 099 683 *** 1. 339 963 *** 1. 054 418 *** 1. 252 984 *** sigma_u 0. 136 115 *** 0. 204 398 3 *** 0. 133 642 6 *** 0. 206 934 1 *** 0. 137 384 3 *** 0. 204 778 1 *** sigma_e 0. 026 369 2 *** 0. 036 676 8 *** 0. 027 458 *** 0. 047 431 8 *** 0. 027 555 8 *** 0. 037 064 4 *** 1 P 2 * ** *** 10% 5% 1% TE A 7 12 B A 13 B A 14 B CSP 0. 012 117 2 0. 011 608 4-0. 026 208 5 0. 025 745 4 0. 498 0. 535 0. 334 0. 193 CSP1 0. 040 206 7 ** 0. 035 899 9 ** 0. 041 904 0. 037 426 3 ** 0. 017 0. 042 0. 012 0. 033 lnasset - 0. 167 528 1 *** - 0. 156 56 *** - 0. 145 014 1 *** - 0. 177 072 6 *** - 0. 166 208 9 *** - 0. 155 355 3 *** AL 10. 173 12 *** 8. 856 324 *** 9. 385 11 *** 11. 521 56 *** 10. 119 31 *** 8. 803 576 *** SOE 0. 064 210 2 * 0. 092 615 6 *** 0. 051 1931 0. 149 458 3 *** 0. 064 216 9 * 0. 092 786 2 *** 0. 051 0. 009 0. 129 0. 051 0. 009 _cons 0. 88 856 93 *** 0. 927 483 9 *** 0. 827 540 2 *** 0. 983 853 1 *** 0. 885 765 1 *** 0. 925 015 4 *** sigma_u 0. 150 830 5 *** 0. 165 145 2 *** 0. 145 941 7 *** 0. 165 743 3 *** 0. 150 719 7 *** 0. 165 108 5 *** sigma_e 0. 032 282 *** 0. 033 584 2 *** 0. 070 416 6 *** 0. 049 437 7 *** 0. 032 314 7 *** 0. 033 609 7 *** 1 P 2 * ** *** 10% 5% 1% CSR 29
DEA - Tobit 1 Lech A. 2013 Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance. Theoretical and Empirical Aspects Comparative Economic Research 16 3 49-62. 2. J. 2012 4 72-80. 3 Coffey B. S. Jia W. 1998 Board Diversity and Managerial Control as Predictors of Corporate Social Performance Journal of Business Ethics 17 14 1595-1603. 4. J. 2007 21 1 1-4. 5. J. 2005 9 91-98. 6. J. 2008 22 123-125. 7. J. 2013 03 101-110. 8. J. 2011 9 138-159. 9. J. 2008 10 150-160. 10 Preston L. E. O' Bannon D. P. 1997 The Corporate Social-Financial Performance Relationship A Typology and Analysis Business and Society 36 4 419-429. 11. 20072008 J. 2011 3 88-93. 12. J. 2006 16 11 186-187. 13 Margolis J. D. Elfenbein H. A. Walsh J. P. 2007 Does It Pay to be Good A Meta-analysis and Redirection of Research on the Relation between Corporate Social and Financial Performance Working Paper 1-79. 14. J. 2010 11 75-85. 15 Sun L. Stuebs M. 2013 Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Productivity Evidence from the Chemical Industry in the United States Journal of Business Ethics 118 2 251-263. 16. J. 2010 24 9 100-106. 17. J. 2013 8 32-39. 18. J. 2015 3 74-81. 30
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS RESEARCH 19 Friedman M. 1970 The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits New York Times Magazine 13 32-33. 20 Freeman R. E. 1984 Strategic Management A Stakeholder Approach Boston Pitman /Ballinger 18-35. 21 Mohr L. A. Webb D. J. 2005 The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility and Price on Consumer Responses Journal of Consumer Affairs 39 1 121-147. 22. J. 2007 7 3-11. 23. J. 2006 1 158-159. 24 McDonald J. 2009 Using Least Squares and Tobit in Second Stage DEA Efficiency Analyses European Journal of Operational Research 197 2 792-798. 25 Pastor J. T. 1996 Translation Invariance in Data Envelopment Analysis A Generalization Annals of Operations Research 66 2 91-102. 1 TE = PTE SE 2 CPI http / /www. stats. gov. cn / 3 CPI http / /www. bls. gov / 4 100 100 Mechanism of Corporate Social Responsibility Influencing on Technical Efficiency of Large-scale Corporations in China and USA Based on the DEA-Tobit Two Step Method DING Yibing 1 FU Lin 2 1. Center for China Public Sector Economy Research Jilin University Changchun 130012 China 2. School of Economics Jilin University Changchun 130012 China Abstract Firstly a behavior of the selection process model is built to explain how corporate social responsibility CSR is fulfilled. Secondly under the intertemporal condition when the marginal product of fulfilling corporate social responsibility during the last period is equal to the marginal product of direct production in current period the corporate efficiency is optimized. After this corporate social responsibility influencing on technical efficiency of large-scale corporations in China and USA is estimated based on the DEA-Tobit two step method. The results show that the corporate social performance increases the technical efficiency in the same year in USA while the corporate social performance in last year increases the technical efficiency in current year in China because stakeholders in USA response on CSR is faster than stakeholders in China. Key words corporate social responsibility corporate social performance technical efficiency DEA-Tobit large-scale corporations lagging effects 31