TY - JOUR
T1 - Institutional ownership and corporate greenhouse gas emissions
T2 - The evidence from China
AU - Ren, Xingzi
AU - Dong, Yizhe
AU - Guo, Jie Michael
AU - Liu, Yaodong
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Rober Faff (Editor-in-Chief), Xiaoping Cao (Associate Editor), anonymous referees and participants at 32nd Chinese Economic Association Annual Conference for their valuable comments. Dong acknowledges financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (Grant Number: 71873103 and 72071142 ).
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - This paper examines the impact of corporate ownership structure on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in China, with a focus on the role of institutional investors. Using data on Chinese listed companies, we find that institutional ownership has a significant negative effect on corporate GHG emissions. We also observe that pressure-resistant institutional investors and qualified foreign institutional investors have a more substantial impact on reducing emissions. Our results suggest that institutional investors act as active monitors, influencing corporate behavior through both “exit and selection” and “voice” mechanisms. Furthermore, we find that institutional investors are more concerned with policy uncertainty risk than physical risk. These findings have implications for policymakers and investors seeking to promote sustainable development and address climate change.
AB - This paper examines the impact of corporate ownership structure on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in China, with a focus on the role of institutional investors. Using data on Chinese listed companies, we find that institutional ownership has a significant negative effect on corporate GHG emissions. We also observe that pressure-resistant institutional investors and qualified foreign institutional investors have a more substantial impact on reducing emissions. Our results suggest that institutional investors act as active monitors, influencing corporate behavior through both “exit and selection” and “voice” mechanisms. Furthermore, we find that institutional investors are more concerned with policy uncertainty risk than physical risk. These findings have implications for policymakers and investors seeking to promote sustainable development and address climate change.
KW - greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
KW - institutional ownership
KW - QFIIs
KW - policy uncertainty
U2 - 10.1016/j.pacfin.2023.102135
DO - 10.1016/j.pacfin.2023.102135
M3 - Article
SN - 0927-538X
VL - 82
SP - 1
EP - 17
JO - Pacific-Basin Finance Journal
JF - Pacific-Basin Finance Journal
M1 - 102135
ER -