DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS AND RESEARCH FINDING

 4.0 DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS AND RESEARCH FINDING

4.1 Introduction of Data Analysis

The chapter presents the research finding from the study about the effect of corporate social accountability and investment effectiveness in china. This research objective that directed this study research was to determine the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR)and efficiency in China’s investment model.

From the years back the Corporate social responsibility score provides by the China Economic Database (CED) has been wide use of the academic literature and help the research to understand more about CSR, examples of the are Mattingly and Berman 2006, Godfrey, Hansen and Merrill, 2009, Wad dock and Graves 1994 this fact contributes towards the high profiler of Corporate Social responsibility. The use of China Economic Database stats product provides CSR scores report annually for many years that make excellent data report resources for the CSR research questions. Researchers from CED do reviews from the company public document and include the company website’s annual report.

4.2 Descriptive Statistics

This section presents the sample that combines several databases; I collected corporate social responsibility scores from China Economic Database (CED) to the liker scaled questions used in this study. The results are presented in tables and charts as suitable.

The use of descriptive statistics used for the continuous variable in this study is about 38 % of the sample size of 6756 represent the study on the overinvestment scenario. The number presents the Chinese lists firm, which was less liable to suffer from the investment challenge. The results sample was available data for all variables from the periods of 2009 to 2018.

Table 4.1: The descriptive statistics of the corporate social responsibility and investment efficiency

Table 4.1 above shows the Absolute or the exact residual value, as seen from the Biddle et (2009) model as states on the study, which multiplied -1. Overinvestments are a positive residual from the firm, and underinvestment is the negative value or the negative residual from the firm. Corporate social reporting this dummy variable, which was the equal/same to 1 if the Firm issues a corporate social responsibility report as seen in the prior years. The Age of the Firm is the logarithms of the listing time of the firm. Fixed Asset (TANG) is seen to be calculated as the rations of a fixed asset to that of total, slack is the measurement of ratio of cash to a fixed assets of the firm.  The ratio of the total asset (LEV) of the total assets and the Return of assets (ROA) can be defined as the ratio of the income the firm earns before the extraordinary and discontinuous operation of total assets.

 Table 4.2 Analysis of the relationship between CSR disclosure and investment efficiency of the firms in China.

Table 4.2 above shows the report result from estimating the model represented by the Equations for the complete samples and sub-sample of the overinvestment and underinvestment of the different samples measured by ROA. The coefficients on the corporate social responsibility reports indicate that the full samples are 0.462 for the China Models.

4.3. The relationships between the (CSR) disclosures and investments efficiencies on the impact of financial reporting

The test of Hypothesis 3, the sample is dividing to the subsample of the firm with high and low fixed rate Quantization,

Table 4.3 the relationships between CSR disclosures and the investment efficiencies on the impact of financial reporting.

Table 4.3 above shows the result of the given analysis conducted of the impacts the FRQ on the relationship between the Corporate Social Responsibility revelation and efficiency in investment; I categorize a company into the large FRQ group if FRQ measure is greater then the median level of the sample.

From the results of the 3378 firm years of the observation on each group from table 4.3, the result shows the full sample and the coefficient of the  CSR reporting in High Fixed Rate Quantization of the group is 0.201 are not statically significant to the report. The co-efficient on the Corporate Social Responsibility report in the high Fixed Rate Quantization group is 0.701 and the sign at the 1% level from the result above.

But there is different between the mentioned two groups which is seen to be -0.463 and the sign at the level of 10%, from the same procedure of the sub-sample of the overinvestments companies, and the result are shown in Colum 3 and 4 which are much identical to the ones that are collected in the full sample results. From this sample, the coefficients of the corporate social responsibilities are 0.385, representing the high and low Fixed Rate Quantization groups.

4.4 The propensity score matching approach from the study

Table 4.4 the propensity score matching approach from the study.

Table 4.4 gives the results obtained by use of the propensity score and that of the match samples, the information presented on the logic model from stage one of the matching approach from the panel. They are both seen to be full samples all and the overinvestment subsample. The results show that the Corporate Social Responsibility reporting company diverge from the non-reporting firm in size (Size), the so-called time listing which is also referred to the (Age), the Capital Structure of the Firm a the (LEV) and return of Assets (ROA), and the coefficient on the variable of Corporate social responsibility is 0.467 for the whole sample and the significant of 1% level and o.934 from the subsample with only the overinvestment company.

4.5 Other alternative which is used to measure the Investment efficiency of CSR.

From the McNichol’s and Stubbed’s (2008) study and the research conducted by Li and Liao (2014), the recalculation of the independent variable involves the replacement of the revenue growth with that of the company asset growth. Still, it is noted that from the model of Biddle et al. (2009), as it delineated in equation 2, and re-estimation the model represents by comparison 1. From the results shown in table 4.5, the subsamples of underinvestment and overinvestment the coefficients on the variable corporate social responsibilities reporting are all positive at the level of 1% of the significance.

4.5 The Alternative Explanation presented by learning from other analysts.

This alternative explanation of the findings presented by other analysts learns to evaluate Corporate social responsibility ratings to better understand how CSR and investment efficiency contribute towards value creation and risk mitigation. In case the conducted analysts would be relatively optimistic about the situation about the profitability of the future of the company together with that company that has a high CSR score during the early period of the firms. This is shown from the CSR score of the future during the early periods of the analysis, as shown in the conducted sample above.

From this study, the underlying key discussion may keenly outline the pattern of the observation in the results without any need that can account for the potential shift on the predominant institutional logic. For example, from both empirical and theoretical articles, Lon and Main, 2006 and Clement and Tso 2005 model analysis using Analyst Forecast Error.

The idea is to learn how to excellently can one assess a focal CSR policy over within the given time of the prediction and on how one can accurately get the CSR scores and how vital the associated forecast can be.

4.6 Some components of Corporate Social Responsibilities and the investment inefficiency

The investment inefficiencies are measured by the residuals of a simple investment, which will forecast the investment level based on the growth of the opportunity (Biddle et al., 2009). The noticed shift from this used model has reflected the error terms in the investment model that hence is used to represent the inefficiency in the investment

Investment (i,t) = β0 +β1 growth of sales i,t-1+z 1,t

Investment (i,t) is the total firm’s investment (i )in year( t) that referred as the net increase intangible assets and that scaled by the lagged total assets. Sales growth (i,t-1) is the rate of the change in sales from the year t-2 to year t-1 of the firm i. the model estimation is made cross-sectionally for each year an industry firm. The proxy for the investment equals the sum of yearly growth in the property, plants, equipment, and growth of the inventory, plus Rand d expenditure, deflated by the lagged book value of assets by Chen et al (2014).

From hypothesis II, I extend the analysis that has been used is to assess the link between the efficiency in the investment and various dimensions of corporate social achievement in the firm. The literature review suggests that the aggregating aspects of Corporate Social Responsibilities may hide founding the impacts among the individual magnitude of social responsibilities. From the study, the dimensions of Corporate social responsibilities, increasing a firm’s investments matter most. The analysis results provide strong support from earlier findings. This also consists of the expectation of the second hypothesis. Corporate social responsibilities significantly increase investment efficiency, as stated from four to six individual components: product characteristics, Employee relations, environment, and diversity.

Corporate Social Responsibility from the firm shareholder are much relevant and can hence contribute to the more efficiency in the investment of the company, CSR dimension which is not direct to the firm primary shareholders which don’t matter for investments effectiveness and other investment efficiency proxy are not significantly affected.

4.7 using the Robustness Testing model

This is the quality assurance me between the Corporate Social Responsibility and investment efficiency, from the evaluation the sensitivity of the outcome to another other measure of CSR, from the different choice measures of the effectiveness of the investments the standard errors and alternative estimations, several approaches that address in the study.

By using this model we analyze the effect of other measures of Corporate Social responsibilities on efficiency in investments by decomposing into the positive and negative aspect of strength and concern, from this components, the company is like to operate both responsibly and irresponsibly, from the study its relevant to distinguish between this two-component. Therefore the Corporate Social Responsibility’s strengths increase investment efficiency while Corporate social responsibilities concerns reduce investment efficiency.

The Alternative estimation methods

By using the robustness to verify the result using alternative from economic specification and standard error in this study. The alternative estimation methods make sure that my significant inference doesn’t suffer from serial dependence or the cross-sectional.  The regression results from the investment inefficiency from the overall Corporate Social responsibilities control and score variable by using the right procedure to correct the standard errors from the model.

The general model is linear for the estimation and regression of the quantile procedure, using the techniques using the random resamples of the 6,756 firm-year observations noted in our original sample. From the estimated coefficient of the study on Corporate Social Responsibilities loads significantly of the negatively on the inefficiency in investment from all regressions of the study, by using the regression the fact on the positive relationship between the Corporate social responsibilities and efficiency in finance is unaffected by different use estimation method.

4.8 The crisis period to the CSR and investment inefficiency

From the study done by Benlemlih and Girerd- potion (2014), the frameworks by the findings by investigating the relationships between CSR and investment efficiencies during the Financial Crisis in the company. The environmental and social weaknesses were observed strictly by the market instability in finance and emphasize the Corporate Social responsibilities and investment efficiencies relationship. From the high Corporate social responsibilities firm to enjoy the high loyalty from their shareholder, it attracts employees who offer high quality that will benefit highly from the excellent relationship with the reputation and the superb image market. Corporate Social responsibilities and investment efficiency are in the higher possibility of helping from the financial distress risks because there is a good flow of the currency. The company has a high liquid ratio.

Table 4.7 The crisis period to the CSR and investment inefficiency

4.6 The extreme cases the impact the Corporate Social Responsibilities and investment inefficiency

Our empirical part of this research investigated the association between efficiency and CSR of the investment from various cases of the study. From the over-investment argument, I expect a deficient and very high Corporate Social Responsibilities companies are more like to don’t be associated with investment efficiency

Low Corporate responsibilities will not meet the requirements of the environment with the needs of the societal the environmental, and social requirements of it are the complexity and the consequences this will lead to a firmer efficiency.  In case a high level of CSR is experienced, this can be the result of the firm’s managers being much efficient in the overinvestment on the Corporate Social Responsibilities that will rank them as being much socially responsible. The high levels of CSR would be anticipated to have little or no impact on the efficiency of the investment. Analysis from table 4.5 provides strong support for this research. From the first two models, a low Corporate Social Responsibilities Company and a great CSR company are decided by the last 1% of the distribution, from this study shows that CSR doesn’t affect the efficiency in investment highly. Further, when the CSR level is seen to be between 1% to 5%, it will continue to find the high increase in investment efficiency.

Conclusion

From the study attempt to assess the impact between corporate social responsibilities and the investments efficiencies using the sample of more than 6756 films and observations from the 2009-3018 period of the study significant evidence that Corporate Social responsibilities is positively related to investments efficiencies. From the results, it believes the fact is mainly caused by the declined level of the information symmetry that is enjoyed by high firms as well as good management using of an alternative measure of Corporate Social Responsibilities, an alternative measure of investments efficiencies, alternatives estimation and several approaches to address the objective of the study.

From the data analysis, the process of the evaluation of the company with high Corporate Social responsibility scores by investment efficiency in China between the period of 2009 to 2018. I state that the empirical fact that will improve the agency logic and predominant logic and the that emergences of the shareholder that focus and lead to a beginning unfavorable and a succeeding, which are the pleasing assessment of firms with high CSR scores by efficiency in investment.

The study extends to streams of research presenting by the fact concerning the effects of CSR disclosures on the level of the firm of the efficiency in investment, their various financial reporting quality levels in the data analysis. For the sample listed firms in China and during the post-compulsory disclosure period in China model, the empirical analysis shows that there is a significant positive relationship between CSR disclosure and the efficiency in investment. The relationship in CSR and investments efficiency is more articulated for the subsample of firms the overinvestment, and we notice that the relationship is stronger for the company with lower quality of financial reporting that indicating CSR disclosures serve the important complementary task in reducing the information asymmetry and promote investment efficiency in the firm.

This research study bestows the understanding of the critical implications of economic effects on CSR revelation and has a significant impact on regulation for firms and investors. The findings give the arguments for the regulatory entities to enforce CSR disclosure. Companies’ ant, the investors, should consider the impacts of CSR on the information asymmetry and its effect on the cost of capital of the firm. Corporate Social responsibility was collective as translated as the agility that generates managerial returns or satisfied managerial aspirations to the detriment of the corporate profitability that undertake company logic. CSR is a set of corporate policies relevant to the corporate that does not penalize its financial performance and generate commercial value in the long-run. Corporate social responsibility scores suggest the company may adopt CSR without being at risk of punished by other financial markets.

The relationship between Corporate Social Responsibilities and investment efficiency from the study states that the high CSR will commit to helping to increase efficiency in investment. However, excellent investment efficiency is widely associated with better financial performance, resulting in more resources that would be ready for the prosecution of CSR objectives. The study cannot confirm a causal relationship between efficiency in investment and CSR from the regression analysis.

European Parliament in 2014 the plenary adopted one guideline on the extra-financial information that will concern the large firms and groups. The company will have the task of disclosing the information on risks, policies, and outcomes regarding the environment. The company with more than 500 employees will apply this new financial information to disclosure rules in the employee-related aspects, respect of anti-corruption, human rights, diversity, and bribery issues and their board of directors.

Other studies provide the same outcomes regarding the negative effect of Corporate Social Responsibilities on the information and management of earnings. Kacperczyk and Hong (2009) give the similar findings by analyzing the company, Cohen (2011) show the investors that expressed an interest in increasing their use of the non-financial information in the future, Dhaliwal et al. (2012) states that the befits that associated with high CSR disclosure that exceeds the decrease of the information symmetry and generates a reduction of the equity cost.

From a literature review show the alternatives method for creating a singles CSR score from the study by Cai el al (2015) calculated a CSR index by divide the net of the concerns and the strength. We calculate the overall CSR score using this different approach from unreported results and my main analysis result. The finding confirms the first result and suggests that the result is not driven by the CSR measure’s choice from the firms. Benlemlih and Girerd Potin (2014), by considering the defines of the national bureau of economic research which define efficiency as a significant decline the economic activity for more than a few months and that is visible in various macroeconomics variables in the Corporate Social responsibilities.

From the previous study by that dominant in the CSR that I indicate here to appear that have been taking place in china from 2009 to 2018. The avenue of future research could be to investigate how investment efficiency affects the speed of the interactions of the impact of the C0rporate Social responsibilities in the institutions. For example, countries such as South Africa, Canada, and the UK have instituted more progressive policies that favor the adoption of CSR by the firm’s potential accelerating the institution logic shift. Future studies may seek to understand the institution process and characteristics that will affect the speed of the evaluation change for the Corporate Social Responsibility in the context in particular and broadly. From the study, the research has positive but will relatively in a small association between investment efficiency and CSR strengths in some years. The review keeps in mind the lack of technical advice concerning the relative weight of the significance of the CSR Dimension on this original empirical research.

Lastly, as the discussion of the hypotheses development section of the factors led to the weakening of the company logic, including the voluntary and mandatory reporting CSR activity, the academic research increased awareness of consumer proactive corporate and socially responsible investments.

Limitations of the Study

This research has contributed in many ways but is not without its limitations i.e.

1. The first point describes the changing of the nature of the liable policies that was captured by this study of CSR measures, the policies are changing and noted in sideways of the investment efficiency, the recommendations will be partly contributed to the change rather than the institutional logic, but the CSR measures from our study remains stable over time.
2. The second relates discussion the changing of the characteristics to the investment efficiency exhibit the fundamentally various individual components over time, the few of these changes attributes and could partially describe the changing assessment of CSR score from the findings. However, Cohen et al. (2010) state that the prior work that has explored does not appear to argue for such shifts over the profession analyst

‘s period.

The ideal of the empirical test would have been to use the investment endorsements from the analysts who would be able to follow between the years 2009 to 2018 and would issue the same recommendations of the firm. The further issue for my sample, I produced the specification of table 4.5 use of the five KLD categories rather than a composite of CSR as the independent variables and doesn’t detect from any different learning by research across issue areas.

From both theoretically and empirically, more should be needed to do in the future to understand more mechanism work regarding CSR policies and categories that are evaluated and perceived by the research within the public equity marketers. Delmas and Montes- Sancho (2011) because of the association between corporate social responsibility perception and efficiency in investment and the financial market, but this threshold has not yet materialized by their argument.

REFERENCES

Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., and Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. The Academy of Management Journal 28(2), 446–463.

Hong, H., and Kacperczyk, M. (2009). The price of sin: The effects of social norms on markets. Journal of Financial Economics 93(1), 15–36.

Kytle, B., and Ruggie, J. G. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as risk management: A model for multinationals. Corporate social responsibility initiates working paper No. 10, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Slater DJ, Dixon-Fowler HR. 2009. CEO international assignment experience and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 89(3): 473-489.

Westphal JD, Zajac EJ. 1994. Substance and Symbolism in CEOs’ Long-Term Incentive Plans.Administrative Science Quarterly 39(3): 367-390.