The Impact of CSR on the Capital Structure of High-Tech Companies in Poland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
2.1. CSR in High-Tech Companies
2.2. Relationships between CSR and Capital Structure Theories in the Context of High-Tech Companies
2.3. Determinants of Capital Structure in High-Tech Companies
2.4. Hypotheses Development
3. Sample Characteristics, Research Design, and Results
- social issues,
- employee matters,
- natural environment,
- respect for human rights,
- counteracting corruption.
- issuers of securities preparing individual financial statements admitted to public trading or trading on one of the regulated markets of the European Economic Area,
- entities included in the capital group in which the parent company prepares consolidated financial statements in accordance with IAS,
- a unit that is a branch of a foreign entrepreneur that prepares financial statements in accordance with IAS.
4. Concluding Remarks
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Cheng, B.; Ioannou, I.; Serafeim, G. Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strat. Mgmt. J. 2014, 35, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branco, M.C.; Rodrigues, L.L. Factors Influencing Social Responsibility Disclosure by Portuguese Companies. J Bus Ethics 2008, 83, 685–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fiori, G.; Di Donato, F.; Izzo, M.F. Corporate Social Responsibility and Firms Performance—An Analysis on Italian Listed Companies. SSRN J. 2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ngwakwe, C.C. Environmental responsibility and firm performance: Evidence from Nigeria. Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 2009, 97–103. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. Main Science and Technology Indicators; OECD: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Matten, D.; Moon, J. “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility. AMR 2008, 33, 404–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Waddock, S.; Bodwell, C. Managing Responsibility: What Can Be Learned from the Quality Movement? Calif. Manag. Rev. 2004, 47, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McWilliams, A.; Siegel, D. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective. AMR 2001, 26, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguinis, H.; Glavas, A. What We Know and Don’t Know About Corporate Social Responsibility. J. Manag. 2012, 38, 932–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Threlfall, R.; King, A.; Shulman, J.; Bartles, W. The Time Has Come: The KPMG Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2020: KPMG IMPACT. 2020. Available online: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf (accessed on 25 April 2021).
- Escamilla-Solano, S.; Fernandez-Portillo, A.; Paule-Vianez, J.; Plaza-Casado, P. Effect of the Disclosure of Corporate Social Responsibility on Business Profitability. A Dimensional Analysis in the Spanish Stock Market. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Faisal, F.; Situmorang, L.S.; Achmad, T.; Prastiwi, A. The Role of Government Regulations in Enhancing Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Firm Value. JAFEB 2020, 7, 509–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.-C.; Hung, M.; Wang, Y. The effect of mandatory CSR disclosure on firm profitability and social externalities: Evidence from China. J. Account. Econ. 2018, 65, 169–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boulouta, I.; Pitelis, C.N. Who Needs CSR? The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on National Competitiveness. J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 119, 349–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coppa, M.; Sriramesh, K. Corporate social responsibility among SMEs in Italy. Public Relat. Rev. 2013, 39, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Benitez-Amado, J. How information technology influences environmental performance: Empirical evidence from China. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015, 35, 160–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.-H.; Kim, J.-W. Current status of CSR in the realm of supply management: The case of the Korean electronics industry. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2009, 14, 138–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.-P. The relationships among corporate social responsibility, corporate image and economic performance of high-tech industries in Taiwan. Qual. Quant. 2009, 43, 417–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fama, E.F.; Miller, M.H. The Theory of Finance; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 1972; ISBN 0030867320. [Google Scholar]
- Jensen, M.C. Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers. Am. Econ. Rev. 1986, 323–329. [Google Scholar]
- Colombo, M.G.; Croce, A.; Murtinu, S. Ownership structure, horizontal agency costs and the performance of high-tech entrepreneurial firms. Small Bus. Econ. 2014, 42, 265–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kenourgios, D.; Savvakis, G.A.; Papageorgiou, T. The capital structure dynamics of European listed SMEs. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 2020, 32, 567–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeh, C.-C.; Lin, F.; Wang, T.-S.; Wu, C.-M. Does corporate social responsibility affect cost of capital in China? Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 2020, 25, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villarón-Peramato, O.; García-Sánchez, I.-M.; Martínez-Ferrero, J. Capital structure as a control mechanism of a CSR entrenchment strategy. EBR 2018, 30, 340–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, A.J.; Donaldson, G. Corporate Debt Capacity: A Study of Corporate Debt Policy and the Determination of Corporate Debt Capacity. J. Financ. 1962, 17, 554–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Myers, S.C.; Majluf, N.S. Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. J. Financ. Econ. 1984, 13, 187–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carpenter, R.E.; Petersen, B.C. Capital Market Imperfections, High-Tech Investment, and New Equity Financing. Econ. J. 2002, 112, F54–F72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Revest, V.; Sapio, A. Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: What do we know? Small Bus. Econ. 2012, 39, 179–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kraus, A.; Litzenberger, R.H. A state-preference model of optimal financial leverage. J. Financ. 1973, 28, 911–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sau, L. New Pecking Order Financing for Innovative Firms: An overview; MPRA Paper; Università di Torino: Torino, Italy, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Castro, P.; Tascón, M.T.; Amor-Tapia, B. Dynamic analysis of the capital structure in technological firms based on their life cycle stages. Spanish J. Finance Account. Rev. Española Financiación Contabilidad 2015, 44, 458–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girerd-Potin, I.; Jimenez-Garces, S.; Louvet, P. The Link between Social Rating and Financial Capital Structure. Finance 2011, 32, 9–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunjra, A.I.; Verhoeven, P.; Zureigat, Q. Capital Structure as a Mediating Factor in the Relationship between Uncertainty, CSR, Stakeholder Interest and Financial Performance. JRFM 2020, 13, 117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pijourlet, G. Corporate social responsibility and financing decisions. JEL Classification G 2013, 32, M14. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, S.; He, F.; Zhu, Q.; Li, S. How does corporate social responsibility change capital structure? Asia Pac. J. Account. Econ. 2018, 25, 352–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, H.; Ye, Y. Rethinking capital structure decision and corporate social responsibility in response to COVID-19. Acc. Financ. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banziger, V. The Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Capital Structure and Its Importance over Time. Available online: https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/123456789/5830/B%C3%A4nziger%2C_Vicoria_1.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Ross, S.A. The Determination of Financial Structure: The Incentive-Signalling Approach. Bell J. Econ. 1977, 8, 23–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Augustina, R.; Apriyanto, G. Study of Capital Structure (IDX 2011–2017): FirmGrowth, Firm Size, and CSR Disclosure on FirmValue. Int. Res. J. Adv. Eng. Sci. 2020, 5, 128–133. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, W.-M.; Wang, W.-K.; Lee, H.-L. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate performance: Evidence from the US semiconductor industry. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2013, 51, 5683–5695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goss, A.; Roberts, G. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Cost of Debt Financing; Financial Management Association: Orlando, FL, USA, 2007; pp. 1–50. [Google Scholar]
- Nekhili, M.; Nagati, H.; Chtioui, T.; Rebolledo, C. Corporate social responsibility disclosure and market value: Family versus nonfamily firms. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 77, 41–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuliana, I. Profitability, capital structure and allocation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds to corporate values in basic industrial and chemical industry companies in Indonesia. El Muhasaba J. Akunt. 2019, 10, 159–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bae, K.-H.; El Ghoul, S.; Guedhami, O.; Kwok, C.C.; Zheng, Y. Does corporate social responsibility reduce the costs of high leverage? Evidence from capital structure and product market interactions. J. Bank. Financ. 2019, 100, 135–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper, E.W.; Uzun, H. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Cost of Debt. J. Account. Financ. 2015, 8, 2158–3625. [Google Scholar]
- Sharfman, M.P.; Fernando, C.S. Environmental risk management and the cost of capital. Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29, 569–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamrouni, A.; Boussaada, R.; Ben Farhat Toumi, N. Corporate social responsibility disclosure and debt financing. JAAR 2019, 20, 394–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benlemlih, M. Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Debt Maturity. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 144, 491–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frank, M.Z.; Goyal, V.K. Capital Structure Decisions: Which Factors Are Reliably Important? Financ. Manag. 2009, 38, 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hall, G.C.; Hutchinson, P.J.; Michaelas, N. Determinants of the Capital Structures of European SMEs. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2004, 31, 711–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cotei, C.; Farhat, J. The Trade-Off Theory and the Pecking Order Theory: Are They Mutually Exclusive? SSRN J. 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- mac an Bhaird, C.; Lucey, B. Determinants of capital structure in Irish SMEs. Small Bus. Econ. 2010, 35, 357–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Halov, N.; Heider, F. Capital Structure, Risk and Asymmetric Information. Quart. J. Financ. 2011, 01, 767–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheikh, N.A. Capital Structure Determinants of Non Financial Listed Firms in Service Sector: Evidence from Pakistan. Pak. J. Soc. Sci. PJSS 2015, 35, 1051–1059. [Google Scholar]
- Branch, B. Research and Development Activity and Profitability: A Distributed Lag Analysis. J. Political Econ. 1974, 82, 999–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kazanjian, R.K. Relation of Dominant Problems to Stages of Growth in Technology-Based New Ventures. AMJ 1988, 31, 257–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Jong, A.; Kabir, R.; Nguyen, T.T. Capital structure around the world: The roles of firm- and country-specific determinants. J. Bank. Financ. 2008, 32, 1954–1969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alipour, M.; Mohammadi, M.F.S.; Derakhshan, H. Determinants of capital structure: An empirical study of firms in Iran. Int. J. Law Manag. 2015, 57, 53–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sogorb-Mira, F. How SME Uniqueness Affects Capital Structure: Evidence From A 1994–1998 Spanish Data Panel. Small Bus. Econ. 2005, 25, 447–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- López-Gracia, J.; Sogorb-Mira, F. Testing trade-off and pecking order theories financing SMEs. Small Bus. Econ. 2008, 31, 117–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kara, E.; Erdur, D.A. Determinants of Capital Structure: A Research on Sectors That Contribute to Exports in Turkey. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Derg. 2015, 44, 27–38. [Google Scholar]
- Eriotis, N.; Vasiliou, D.; Ventoura-Neokosmidi, Z. How firm characteristics affect capital structure: An empirical study. Manag. Financ. 2007, 33, 321–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barclay, M.J.; Smith, C.W. The Maturity Structure of Corporate Debt. J. Financ. 1995, 50, 609–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bisztray, M.; Muraközy, B.; Vonnák, D. Analysis of the Importance of Intangible Capital and Knowledge for Productivity Measurement. 2020. Available online: http://www.microprod.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/D1_5_Intangible_capital_HU_MICROPROD_20200131.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Wilson, K.E. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 24; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Peters, R.H.; Taylor, L.A. Intangible capital and the investment-q relation. J. Financ. Econ. 2017, 123, 251–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, B.H.; Lerner, J. The Financing of R&D and Innovation. Handb. Econ. Innov. 2010, 1, 609–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lim, S.C.; Macias, A.J.; Moeller, T. Intangible assets and capital structure. J. Bank. Financ. 2020, 118, 105873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altomonte, C.; Favoino, D.; Morlacco, M.; Tomaso, S. Markups, Intangible Capital and Heterogeneous Financial Frictions. Available online: http://www.tommasosonno.com/docs/markupsintangibles_afms.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2021).
- Granovettter, M. Economic Action and Social Structure. The Problem of Embeddedness. Am. J. Sociol. 1985, 91, 481–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glavas, A.; Godwin, L.N. Is the Perception of ‘Goodness’ Good Enough? Exploring the Relationship between Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee Organizational Identification. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 114, 15–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meynhardt, T.; Brieger, S.A.; Hermann, C. Organizational public value and employee life satisfaction: The mediating roles of work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2020, 31, 1560–1593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, S.D.; Dunford, B.B.; Boss, A.D.; Boss, R.W.; Angermeier, I. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Benefits of Employee Trust: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 102, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glavas, A.; Kelley, K. The Effects of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility on Employee Attitudes. Bus. Ethics Q. 2014, 24, 165–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brammer, S.; Millington, A.; Rayton, B. The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2007, 18, 1701–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, L.; Marshall, R.; Rallis, D.; Moscardi, M. Women on boards: Global trends in gender diversity on corporate boards. MSCI Res. Insights 2015, 1–31. [Google Scholar]
- Su, R.; Liu, C.; Teng, W. The heterogeneous effects of CSR dimensions on financial performance—A new approach for CSR measurement. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 2020, 21, 987–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brammer, S.; Brooks, C.; Pavelin, S. Corporate Social Performance and Stock Returns: UK Evidence from Disaggregate Measures. Financ. Manag. 2006, 35, 97–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Filbeck, G.; Gorman, R.F. The Relationship between the Environmental and Financial Performance of Public Utilities. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2004, 29, 137–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barla, P. ISO 14001 certification and environmental performance in Quebec’s pulp and paper industry. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2007, 53, 291–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huselid, M.A. The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance. AMJ 1995, 38, 635–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Fetscherin, M.; Alon, I.; Lattemann, C.; Yeh, K. Corporate Social Responsibility in Emerging Markets. Manag. Int. Rev. 2010, 50, 635–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, W.; Frynas, J.G.; Mahmood, Z. Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure in Developed and Developing Countries: A Literature Review. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2017, 24, 273–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Lei, L.; Buttner, E.H. Establishing the boundary conditions for female board directors’ influence on firm performance through CSR. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 121, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, N.; Naveed, R.T.; Scholz, M.; Irfan, M.; Usman, M.; Ahmad, I. CSR Communication through Social Media: A Litmus Test for Banking Consumers’ Loyalty. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.-H.; Shin, D. Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention. Public Relat. Rev. 2010, 36, 193–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Munilla, L.S.; Miles, M.P. The Corporate Social Responsibility Continuum as a Component of Stakeholder Theory. Bus. Soc. Rev. 2005, 110, 371–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jo, H.; Na, H. Does CSR Reduce Firm Risk? Evidence from Controversial Industry Sectors. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 110, 441–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | No. of Obs. | Min. | Max. | Mean | Median | St. Dev. | Variance | Skewness | Kurtosis |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LEV | 92 | 0.004 | 1.000 | 0.447 | 0.387 | 0.289 | 0.084 | 0.315 | 1.946 |
CSR_EMP | 92 | 1.000 | 4.000 | 2.543 | 2.000 | 0.895 | 0.800 | 0.100 | 2.234 |
CSR_SOC | 92 | 1.000 | 4.000 | 1.359 | 1.000 | 0.792 | 0.628 | 2.336 | 7.555 |
CSR_ENV | 92 | 1.000 | 4.000 | 1.674 | 1.000 | 0.973 | 0.947 | 1.264 | 3.386 |
SIZE | 92 | 4.143 | 14.952 | 10.207 | 9.892 | 2.031 | 4.124 | −0.101 | 3.787 |
AGE | 92 | 0.000 | 17.000 | 6.946 | 6.000 | 3.906 | 15.261 | 0.500 | 2.909 |
ROE | 92 | −1.000 | 1.000 | -0.202 | −0.019 | 0.457 | 0.209 | −0.538 | 2.542 |
CUR_RATIO | 92 | 0.027 | 10.000 | 2.901 | 1.642 | 3.000 | 9.000 | 1.429 | 3.844 |
SALES_TR | 92 | −1.000 | 1.000 | 0.106 | 0.078 | 0.642 | 0.412 | −0.166 | 2.107 |
INTANGIBILITY | 92 | 0.000 | 0.779 | 0.196 | 0.119 | 0.207 | 0.043 | 1.061 | 3.023 |
RD_INT | 92 | 0.000 | 0.792 | 0.225 | 0.011 | 0.331 | 0.110 | 1.024 | 2.177 |
Variable | LEV | CSR_ EMP | CSR_ SOC | CSR_ ENV | SIZE | AGE | ROE | CUR_ RATIO | SALES_TR | INTANG | RD_ INT |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LEV | 1.000 | −0.030 | −0.013 | −0.117 | −0.130 | 0.460 | −0.056 | −0.628 | 0.046 | 0.150 | −0.043 |
CSR_EMP | −0.016 | 1.000 | 0.311 | 0.256 | 0.254 | −0.124 | −0.032 | 0.222 | 0.138 | 0.030 | 0.045 |
CSR_SOC | −0.025 | 0.319 | 1.000 | 0.538 | 0.260 | −0.001 | −0.060 | 0.093 | 0.093 | −0.204 | 0.230 |
CSR_ENV | −0.085 | 0.259 | 0.612 | 1.000 | 0.301 | 0.047 | 0.008 | 0.138 | 0.028 | −0.002 | 0.220 |
SIZE | −0.139 | 0.254 | 0.305 | 0.301 | 1.000 | 0.211 | 0.328 | 0.132 | 0.100 | 0.059 | 0.175 |
AGE | 0.388 | −0.097 | 0.051 | 0.093 | 0.162 | 1.000 | 0.352 | −0.385 | 0.026 | −0.158 | −0.188 |
ROE | 0.037 | −0.021 | 0.008 | −0.016 | 0.348 | 0.407 | 1.000 | 0.110 | 0.052 | −0.126 | 0.081 |
CUR_RATIO | −0.742 | 0.127 | 0.115 | 0.020 | 0.168 | −0.376 | 0.066 | 1.000 | −0.014 | −0.183 | 0.097 |
SALES_TR | 0.060 | 0.132 | 0.105 | 0.062 | 0.068 | 0.037 | 0.095 | 0.086 | 1.000 | −0.073 | 0.114 |
INTANG | 0.250 | 0.001 | −0.166 | 0.011 | 0.108 | −0.119 | −0.125 | −0.258 | −0.070 | 1.000 | −0.113 |
RD_INT | −0.056 | 0.142 | 0.321 | 0.231 | 0.357 | −0.172 | 0.066 | 0.185 | 0.168 | −0.007 | 1.000 |
Independent Variables | Coefficient | Robust Std. Err. | p-Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
CSR_EMP | 0.051 | 0.028 | 0.081 | * |
CSR_SOC | 0.038 | 0.037 | 0.276 | |
CSR_ENV | −0.044 | 0.030 | 0.129 | |
SIZE | −0.029 | 0.011 | 0.025 | ** |
AGE | 0.033 | 0.006 | 0.000 | *** |
ROE | −0.049 | 0.037 | 0.471 | |
CUR_RATIO | −0.041 | 0.008 | 0.000 | *** |
SALES_TR | 0.009 | 0.038 | 0.782 | |
INTANGIBILITY | 0.251 | 0.102 | 0.041 | ** |
RD_INT | 0.125 | 0.005 | 0.058 | * |
Intercept | 0.434 | 0.009 | 0.003 | |
A number of obs. | 92 | |||
R2 | 0.54 | |||
Adjusted R2 | 0.48 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Grabinska, B.; Kedzior, D.; Kedzior, M.; Grabinski, K. The Impact of CSR on the Capital Structure of High-Tech Companies in Poland. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5467. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105467
Grabinska B, Kedzior D, Kedzior M, Grabinski K. The Impact of CSR on the Capital Structure of High-Tech Companies in Poland. Sustainability. 2021; 13(10):5467. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105467
Chicago/Turabian StyleGrabinska, Barbara, Dorota Kedzior, Marcin Kedzior, and Konrad Grabinski. 2021. "The Impact of CSR on the Capital Structure of High-Tech Companies in Poland" Sustainability 13, no. 10: 5467. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105467