Does a Religious Atmosphere Impact Corporate Social Responsibility? A Comparative Study between Taoist and Buddhist Dominated Atmospheres
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses
2.1. Buddhism and Taoism in China
2.2. Religious Influence on CSR
2.3. Buddhism, Taoism, and CSR
2.3.1. Buddhism and CSR
2.3.2. Taoism and CSR
3. Methodology
3.1. Sample and Data
3.2. Measures
3.2.1. Corporate Philanthropy
3.2.2. Environmental Investment
3.2.3. Regional Religion Environment
3.2.4. Control Variables
3.3. Estimation Methods
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistic and Correlation
4.2. Hypothesis Testing
5. Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Angelidis, John, and Nabil Ibrahim. 2004. An exploratory study of the impact of degree of religiousness upon an individual’s corporate social responsiveness orientation. Journal of Business Ethics 51: 119–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asking Zen with a Mortal Heart. 2019. Buddhism: Why Do Monasteries Put Merit Boxes? March 19. Available online: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1628445783792216059&wfr=spider&for=pc (accessed on 19 March 2019).
- Azari, Julia R., and Jennifer K. Smith. 2012. Unwritten rules: Informal institutions in established democracies. Perspectives on Politics 10: 37–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bampatsou, Christina, George Halkos, and Andreas Dimou. 2017. Determining economic productivity under environmental and resource pressures: An empirical application. Journal of Economic Structures 6: 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barnhill, David Landis. 2004. Good work: An engaged Buddhist response to the dilemmas of consumerism. Buddhist-Christian Studies 24: 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barro, Robe J. 2003. Determinants of Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Empirical Study. American Political Science Review 92: 145–477. [Google Scholar]
- Barron, Katelin, and Shih Yung Chou. 2017. Spirituality and social responsibility performance: The perspectives of religiously and non-religiously affiliated individuals. Journal of Global Responsibility 8: 63–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brammer, Stephen, Geoffrey Williams, and John Zinkin. 2007. Religion and attitudes to corporate social responsibility in a large cross-country sample. Journal of Business Ethics 71: 229–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brazier, Caroline. 2003. Buddhist Psychology: Liberate Your Mind, Embrace Life. London: Constable Robinson. [Google Scholar]
- Chan, Wing-tsit. 1963. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Cui, Jinhua, Hoje Jo, and Manuel G. Velasquez. 2015. The influence of Christian religiosity on managerial decisions concerning the environment. Journal of Business Ethics 132: 203–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Díez-Esteban, José María, Conrado Diego García-Gómez, Félix Javier López-Iturriaga, and Marcos Santamaría-Mariscal. 2017. Corporate risk-taking, returns and the nature of major shareholders: Evidence from prospect theory. Research in International Business and Finance 42: 900–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, Xin. 2017. Analysis of Taoist Belief of Compliance with Courtesy from Taoist Philosophy. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Arts, Design and Contemporary Education (ICADCE 2017), Moscow, Russia, May 29–30. [Google Scholar]
- Du, Xingqiang. 2013. Does religion matter to owner-manager agency costs? Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics 118: 319–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Du, Xingqiang. 2017. Religious belief, corporate philanthropy, and political involvement of entrepreneurs in Chinese family firms. Journal of Business Ethics 142: 385–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, Xingqiang, Wei Jian, Quan Zeng, and Yingjie Du. 2014a. Corporate environmental responsibility in polluting industries: Does religion matter? Journal of Business Ethics 124: 485–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Du, Xingqiang, Wei Jian, Yingjie Du, Wentao Feng, and Quan Zeng. 2014b. Religion, the nature of ultimate owner, and corporate philanthropic giving: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics 123: 235–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Du, Xingqiang, Yingjie Du, Quan Zeng, Hongmei Pei, and Yingying Chang. 2016. Religious atmosphere, law enforcement, and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 33: 229–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dyreng, Scott D., William J. Mayew, and Christopher D. Williams. 2012. Religious social norms and corporate financial reporting. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 39: 845–75. [Google Scholar]
- Edelman, Lauren B. 1992. Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: Organizational mediation of civil rights law. American Journal of Sociology 97: 1531–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El Ghoul, Sadok, Omrane Guedhami, Yang Ni, Jeffrey Pittman, and Samir Saadi. 2013. Does information asymmetry matter to equity pricing? Evidence from firms’ geographic location. Contemporary Accounting Research 30: 140–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elbousserghini, Jalila, Sandrine Berger-Douce, and Youssef Jamal. 2019. The CSR of SMEs: The study of the Moroccan context. Revue Internationale PME 32: 19–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estrin, Saul, and Martha Prevezer. 2011. The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 28: 41–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Faccio, Mara, and Larry H. P. Lang. 2002. The ultimate ownership of Western European corporations. Journal of Financial Economics 65: 365–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Litian. 2011. Chinese Buddhism’s Theory of Cosmic Structure. China Religious Academic Network, June 8. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, Yongqiang, and Taïeb Hafsi. 2015. Government intervention, peers’ giving and corporate philanthropy: Evidence from Chinese private SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics 132: 433–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerber, Alan S., Jonathan Gruber, and Daniel M. Hungerman. 2016. Does church attendance cause people to vote? Using blue laws’ repeal to estimate the effect of religiosity on voter turnout. British Journal of Political Science 46: 481–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griffin, Paul A., and Estelle Y. Sun. 2018. Voluntary corporate social responsibility disclosure and religion. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 9: 63–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grullon, Gustavo, George Kanatas, and James Weston. 2009. Religion and corporate (mis) behavior. SSRN Paper, September 12. [Google Scholar]
- Hilary, Gilles, and Kai Wai Hui. 2009. Does religion matter in corporate decision making in America? Journal of Financial Economics 93: 455–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Xiangyu. 2015. A Brief Discussion of Taoism with a Focus on the Ethical Thought of Charity. China National Exhibition. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, Zhiqiang, and Zuoyuan Chen. 2009. A Comparison of Buddhist and Taoist Ecological Philosophy. Journal of the Party School of CPC Zhengzhou Municipa e 6. [Google Scholar]
- Hunjra, Ahmed Imran, Murugesh Arunachalam, and Mahnoor Hanif. 2021. Financial Development-Economic Growth Nexus: Theoretical Underpinnings, Empirical Evidence, and Critical Reflections. In Economic Growth and Financial Development. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 155–78. [Google Scholar]
- Hyun, Lim Tea. 2017. The Notion of Taoism and Fusion in Taoists. The Journal of Humanities and Social Science 8: 661–78. [Google Scholar]
- Jones-Correa, Michael A., and David L. Leal. 2001. Political participation: Does religion matter? Political Research Quarterly 54: 751–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaza, Stephanie, and Kenneth Kraft. 2000. Dharma Rain: Sources of Buddhist Environmentalism. Boulder: Shambhala Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
- Kennedy, Ellen J., and Leigh Lawton. 1998. Religiousness and business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 17: 163–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Tae-yong. 2008. Bioethics of Taoism. Journal of The Studies of Taoism and Culture 28: 127–64. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Sihai, Xianzhong Song, and Huiying Wu. 2015. Political connection, ownership structure, and corporate philanthropy in China: A strategic-political perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 129: 399–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, Louisa. 2010. Chinese turn to religion to fill a spiritual vacuum. National Public Radio, July 18. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Yuanchun. 2021. The Social Significance and Future of Buddhist Education. China National Newspaper, November 10. [Google Scholar]
- Longenecker, Justin G., Joseph A. McKinney, and Carlos W. Moore. 2004. Religious intensity, evangelical Christianity, and business ethics: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics 55: 371–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, Xiaowei Rose, Danqing Wang, and Jianjun Zhang. 2017. Whose call to answer: Institutional complexity and firms’ CSR reporting. Academy of Management Journal 60: 321–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marquis, Christopher, and Cuili Qian. 2014. Corporate social responsibility reporting in China: Symbol or substance? Organization Science 25: 127–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maspero, Henri. 1981. Taoism and Chinese Religion. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press Amherst. [Google Scholar]
- Mazereeuw-van der Duijn Schouten, Corrie, Johan Graafland, and Muel Kaptein. 2014. Religiosity, CSR attitudes, and CSR behavior: An empirical study of executives’ religiosity and CSR. Journal of Business Ethics 123: 437–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCullough, Michael E., and Brian L. B. Willoughby. 2009. Religion, self-regulation, and self-control: Associations, explanations, and implications. Psychological Bulletin 135: 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McGuire, Sean T., Thomas C. Omer, and Nathan Y. Sharp. 2012. The impact of religion on financial reporting irregularities. The Accounting Review 87: 645–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pace, Stefano. 2013. Does religion affect the materialism of consumers? An empirical investigation of Buddhist ethics and the resistance of the self. Journal of Business Ethics 112: 25–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paul, R. Goldin. 2005. Why Daoism Is Not Environmentalism. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32: 75–87. [Google Scholar]
- Ross, T. 1979. From pain to happiness—The Buddha’s way. Nursing Mirror 149: 21–23. [Google Scholar]
- See, Geoffrey Kok Heng. 2009. Harmonious society and Chinese CSR: Is there really a link? Journal of Business Ethics 89: 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seifert, Bruce, Sara A. Morris, and Barbara R. Bartkus. 2004. Having, giving, and getting: Slack resources, corporate philanthropy, and firm financial performance. Business & Society 43: 135–61. [Google Scholar]
- Su, Kun. 2019. Does religion benefit corporate social responsibility (CSR)? Evidence from China. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 26: 1206–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suriyankietkaew, Suparak, and Pornkasem Kantamara. 2019. Business ethics and spirituality for corporate sustainability: A Buddhism perspective. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion 16: 264–89. [Google Scholar]
- Tarakeshwar, Nalini, Kenneth I. Pargament, and Annette Mahoney. 2003. Measures of Hindu pathways: Development and preliminary evidence of reliability and validity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 9: 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tolmie, Carri Reisdorf, Kevin Lehnert, and Hongxin Zhao. 2020. Formal and informal institutional pressures on corporate social responsibility: A cross-country analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 27: 786–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsendsuren, Chuluunbat, Prayag L. Yadav, Seung Hun Han, and Seongjae Mun. 2021. The effect of corporate environmental responsibility and religiosity on corporate cash holding decisions and profitability: Evidence from the United States’ policies for sustainable development. Sustainable Development 29: 987–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vu, Mai Chi. 2018. Skilful means—A Buddhist approach to social responsibility. Social Responsibility Journal 14: 321–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Heli, and Cuili Qian. 2011. Corporate Philanthropy and Financial Performance: The Roles of Social Expectations and Political Access. Academy of Management Journal 54: 1159–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weaver, Gary R., and Bradley R. Agle. 2002. Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review 27: 77–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiese, Harald. 2011. Moderation, contentment, work, and alms—A Buddhist household theory. The Journal of Socio-Economics 40: 909–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williamson, Claudia R., and Carrie B. Kerekes. 2011. Securing private property: Formal versus informal institutions. The Journal of Law and Economics 54: 537–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, Weiwei, Xiaohan Guo, Jun Luo, Hang Ye, Yefeng Chen, Shu Chen, and Weisen Xia. 2021. Religious identity, between-group effects and prosocial behavior: Evidence from a field experiment in China. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 91: 101665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Bo, and Linlin Ma. 2022. Religious values motivating CSR: An empirical study from corporate leaders’ perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 176: 487–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Fenggang. 2016. Exceptionalism or Chinamerica: Measuring religious change in the globalizing world today. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 55: 7–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yao, Haitang, Jiayang Wang, Qingwen Bo, and Mingliang Li. 2022. Sadder but Wiser: The Role of SARS Imprinting and Firms’ Recovery During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology 13: 917337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, Weijia. 2006. The Inner Structure and Modern Significance of Taoist Philosophy of Life. Journal of Anhui University 30: 4. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Jianjun, Christopher Marquis, and Kunyuan Qiao. 2016. Do political connections buffer firms from or bind firms to the government? A study of corporate charitable donations of Chinese firms. Organization Science 27: 1307–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, W. 2006. Will CSR Work in China? Leading Perspectives, CSR in the People’s Republic of China. San Francisco: Business for Social Responsibility. [Google Scholar]
- Zolotoy, Leon, Don O’Sullivan, and Yangyang Chen. 2019. Local religious norms, corporate social responsibility, and firm value. Journal of Banking & Finance 100: 218–33. [Google Scholar]
Variables | Mean | Sd | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | (10) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) Philanthropic donation | 4.647 | 12.267 | 1.000 | |||||||||
(2) Firm size | 22.216 | 1.590 | −0.036 | 1.000 | ||||||||
(3) Firm age | 15.313 | 5.793 | −0.035 | 0.188 | 1.000 | |||||||
(4) Debt ratio | 0.429 | 0.227 | −0.116 | 0.537 | 0.238 | 1.000 | ||||||
(5) Subsidy income | 14.552 | 4.954 | −0.006 | 0.029 | −0.159 | −0.027 | 1.000 | |||||
(6) State ownership | 0.047 | 0.141 | −0.004 | 0.162 | −0.029 | 0.051 | 0.013 | 1.000 | ||||
(7) Political connection | 0.652 | 0.477 | 0.071 | −0.141 | −0.189 | −0.179 | 0.106 | −0.147 | 1.000 | |||
(8) Regional economic development | 10.26 | 0.724 | −0.043 | −0.005 | 0.052 | −0.066 | −0.023 | −0.100 | 0.127 | 1.000 | ||
(9) Regional Bud | 5.525 | 2.044 | 0.044 | −0.173 | 0.000 | −0.054 | 0.036 | −0.086 | 0.123 | 0.261 | 1.000 | |
(10) Regional Tao | 4.015 | 2.193 | 0.026 | −0.157 | −0.029 | −0.069 | 0.046 | −0.084 | 0.140 | 0.342 | 0.914 | 1.000 |
Variables | Mean | Sd | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | (10) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) Environmental investment | 0.010 | 0.783 | 1.000 | |||||||||
(2) Firm size | 22.216 | 1.590 | −0.009 | 1.000 | ||||||||
(3) Firm age | 15.313 | 5.793 | −0.009 | 0.188 | 1.000 | |||||||
(4) Debt ratio | 0.429 | 0.227 | −0.009 | 0.537 | 0.238 | 1.000 | ||||||
(5) Subsidy income | 14.552 | 4.954 | −0.001 | 0.029 | −0.159 | −0.027 | 1.000 | |||||
(6) State ownership | 0.047 | 0.141 | 0.032 | 0.162 | −0.029 | 0.051 | 0.013 | 1.000 | ||||
(7) Political connection | 0.652 | 0.477 | −0.017 | −0.141 | −0.189 | −0.179 | 0.106 | −0.147 | 1.000 | |||
(8) Regional economic development | 10.26 | 0.724 | −0.006 | −0.005 | 0.052 | −0.066 | −0.023 | −0.100 | 0.127 | 1.000 | ||
(9) Regional Bud | 5.525 | 2.044 | 0.009 | −0.173 | 0.000 | −0.054 | 0.036 | −0.086 | 0.123 | 0.261 | 1.000 | |
(10) Regional Tao | 4.015 | 2.193 | 0.009 | −0.157 | −0.029 | −0.069 | 0.046 | −0.084 | 0.140 | 0.342 | 0.914 | 1.000 |
Variables | DV: Environmental Investment | ||
---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
Firm size | 0.754 *** | 0.754 *** | 0.754 *** |
(0.169) | (0.169) | (0.169) | |
Firm age | 0.024 | 0.024 | 0.024 |
(0.035) | (0.035) | (0.035) | |
Debt ratio | −0.519 | −0.519 | −0.519 |
(1.055) | (1.055) | (1.055) | |
Subsidy income | 0.149 *** | 0.149 *** | 0.149 *** |
(0.042) | (0.042) | (0.042) | |
State ownership | 3.739 * | 3.739 * | 3.739 * |
(1.522) | (1.522) | (1.522) | |
Political connection | 0.163 | 0.163 | 0.163 |
(0.41) | (0.410) | (0.410) | |
Regional economic development | 10.265 *** | 10.265 *** | 10.265 *** |
(1.228) | (1.228) | (1.228) | |
Regional Bud | 17.978 * | ||
(7.544) | |||
Regional Tao | −6.171 * | ||
(2.59) | |||
Constant | −150.807 | −228.187 | −131.731 |
(3838.505) | (3838.671) | (3838.497) | |
Observations | 7066 | 7066 | 7066 |
Pseudo R2 | 0.180 | 0.180 | 0.180 |
LR chi2 | 455.20 *** | 455.20 *** | 455.20 *** |
Log likelihood | −1037.2208 | −1037.2208 | −1037.2208 |
Industry dummies | yes | yes | yes |
Province dummies | yes | yes | yes |
Variables | DV: Philanthropic Donation | ||
---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
Firm size | 0.130 *** | 0.130 *** | 0.130 *** |
(0.029) | (0.029) | (0.029) | |
Firm age | −0.037 *** | −0.037 *** | −0.037 *** |
(0.006) | (0.006) | (0.006) | |
Debt ratio | −2.084 *** | −2.084 *** | −2.084 *** |
(0.190) | (0.190) | (0.190) | |
Subsidy income | −0.014 ** | −0.014 ** | −0.014 ** |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | |
State ownership | −0.346 * | −0.346 * | −0.346 * |
(0.170) | (0.170) | (0.170) | |
Political connection | 0.425 *** | 0.425 *** | 0.425 *** |
(0.073) | (0.073) | (0.073) | |
Regional economic development | −0.687 *** | −0.687 *** | −0.687 *** |
(0.145) | (0.145) | (0.145) | |
Regional Bud | −4.196 *** | ||
(1.111) | |||
Regional Tao | 1.440 *** | ||
(0.381) | |||
Constant | 8.289 *** | 26.35 *** | 3.836 * |
(1.681) | (5.355) | (1.866) | |
Observations | 6757 | 6757 | 6757 |
Wald chi2 | 928.61 *** | 928.61 *** | 928.61 *** |
Industry dummies | yes | yes | yes |
Province dummies | yes | yes | yes |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 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
Shao, J.; Zhang, T.; Lee, Y.-C.; Xu, Y. Does a Religious Atmosphere Impact Corporate Social Responsibility? A Comparative Study between Taoist and Buddhist Dominated Atmospheres. Religions 2023, 14, 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010113
Shao J, Zhang T, Lee Y-C, Xu Y. Does a Religious Atmosphere Impact Corporate Social Responsibility? A Comparative Study between Taoist and Buddhist Dominated Atmospheres. Religions. 2023; 14(1):113. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010113
Chicago/Turabian StyleShao, Jing, Tianzi Zhang, Young-Chan Lee, and Yingbo Xu. 2023. "Does a Religious Atmosphere Impact Corporate Social Responsibility? A Comparative Study between Taoist and Buddhist Dominated Atmospheres" Religions 14, no. 1: 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010113