隨著永續觀念的發展與演進，企業不再只是追求實質上的短期獲利，而是越來越關注其在社會和環境方面的影響力，並將永續的目標納入經營決策中。透過各界不斷的努力，臺灣企業逐漸在永續領域有所成果，政府與民間機構也發展出一系列永續獎項，旨在鼓勵企業落實社會責任。

過去許多文獻以得獎企業做為基準進行研究，探討獲得永續獎項之企業與非得獎企業在財務績效面的差異，進而證實企業落實社會責任會對企業財務績效帶來正向影響，然而，多數獎項採取報名制，意味著難免有遺珠或是企業未參與競賽之情事發生，因此，本研究以臺灣經濟新報(TEJ)所建構之永續資料庫(TESG 永續資料庫)做為基準，從公正第三方的角度探討企業善盡社會責任與其財務績效的關聯，並將TEJ獨家發展出的分數評級納為變數，以驗證該資料庫是否有助於投資者及金融機構做為參考。

本研究以臺灣上市電子業為樣本，首先將探討永續報告書的編制與驗證是否對財務績效有顯著影響，其次探討TESG分數對財務績效是否具有顯著影響，實證結果為企業發行永續報告書且經過第三方驗證對資產報酬率(ROA)有正向顯著相關，對股東權益報酬率(ROE)雖為正向相關，但並無顯著關聯性；而TESG之
分數與資產報酬率(ROA)為正相關，與股東權益報酬率(ROE)為負相關，不過皆並不具有顯著水準，表示 TESG分數的高低並不能代表該企業是否落實企業社會責任，進而影響企業的財務績效。

With the development and evolution of sustainability concepts, companies not only
have to focus on making profits but are also concerned about their impact on society and the environment, therefore, they have to integrate sustainability goals into their business policies. As many companies gradually achieved accomplishment in the field of sustainability, the government and private organizations have also established a series of sustainability awards to encourage companies to fulfill their social responsibilities.

Previous studies have used award-winning companies as a benchmark to explore the differences in financial performance between award-winning and non-award-winning companies, thereby confirming the positive impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance. However, most awards have an application-based system, which inevitably leads to the possibility of overlooking certain companies or companies not participating in the competition. Therefore, this study utilizes the TESG Database developed by Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ) to investigate the relationship between companies' social responsibilities and financial performance.

The study focuses on the Taiwanese-listed electronics industry as the sample. First,
it explores whether the publication and certification of CSR report significantly impact financial performance. Second, it examines whether TESG scores have a significant influence on financial performance. The empirical results show that companies that issued CSR reports and certificated by third-party certification had better performance on Return on Assets (ROA), however, although the issuance and certificate of CSR reports has a positive correlation with Return on Equity (ROE), the correlation is not statistically significant. As for TESG scores, they are positively correlated with ROA but negatively correlated with ROE, but both correlations are not statistically significant.

Argenti, P. A., & Druckenmiller, B. (2004). Reputation and the corporate brand.Corporate reputation review, 6, 368-374.
Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability.Academy of management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.
Berle, A., & Means, G. (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property.Harcourt.Brace and World, New York, NY.
Brammer, S., Brooks, C., & Pavelin, S. (2006).Corporate social performance and stock returns: UK evidence from disaggregate measures. Financial management, 35(3),97-116.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business horizons, 34(4), 39-48.
Chatterjee, S., & Wernerfelt, B. (1991). The link between resources and type of diversification: Theory and evidence. Strategic management journal, 12(1), 33-48.
Friedman, M. (1970). A Friedman doctrine: The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 13(1970), 32-33.
Initiative, G. R. (2023). GRI Standards.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior,agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360.
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic management journal,21(5), 603-609.
Preston, L. E., & O'bannon, D. P. (1997). The corporate social-financial performance relationship: A typology and analysis. Business & Society, 36(4), 419-429.
Schuler, D. A., & Cording, M. (2006). A corporate social performance–corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of management Review, 31(3), 540-558.
Standards, S. (2023). SASB Standards.
Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: An empirical examination. Journal of business ethics, 17(2), 195-204.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic management journal, 18(4), 303-319.
王曉雯, 王泰昌, 吳明政. (2008). 企業經營型態與研發活動績效. 管理學報, 25(2),173-193.
池祥萱, 繆文娟, 莊瀅臻. (2014). 企業社會責任對於公司財務績效之影響是雙面刃嗎? 來自全球 500 大公司的證據. Journal of Management, 31, 1-19.
池祥麟. (2015). 企業社會責任與財務績效的關聯. 社區發展季刊 152 期, 19-34.
行政院環境保護署事業溫室氣體排放量資訊平台. (2023). 合格查驗機構.
李秀英, 劉俊儒, & 楊筱翎. (2011). 企業社會責任與公司績效之關聯性.東海管理評論, 13(1), 77-111.
李宗原. (2017). 企業社會責任與名譽效果 國立高雄第一科技大學.
沈中華, 張元. (2008). 企業的社會責任為可以改善財務績效嗎?-以英國 FTSE 社會責任指數為例. 經濟論文, 36(3), 339-385.
林文玲, 傅鍾仁. (2011). 企業社會責任之揭露對會計資訊價值攸關性-以台灣資訊電子業上市公司為例. 商管科技季刊, 12(2), 209-229.
林怡君. (2007). 企業社會績效與企業財務績效關聯性之分析—以道瓊 STOXX 永續性指數為例 國立臺北大學.
林品妤. (2010). 台灣企業社會責任與財務績效表現之關係 國立中正大學.
邱昰芳. (2004). 企業未來成長價值影響因素之研究 國立中山大學.
金融監督管理委員會. (2020). 「公司治理 3.0-永續發展藍圖」.
侯啟娉, 蔡玉琴, 倪伯煌, 李子文. (2017). 財務績效, 公司稅與企業社會責任揭露.商管科技季刊, 18(1), 75-100.
洪雪卿, 陳薇如, 傅雁鈴. (2013). 影響企業社會責任績效之重要因素為何? 商管科技季刊, 14(4), 405-441.
氣候相關財務揭露建議(TCFD)正體中文版, (2019).
陳威膨. (2019). 探討企業社會責任對企業經營績效之影響 -以企業規模、負債比率、資產週轉率為調節變項 朝陽科技大學.
游尹璧. (2012). 研發強度、企業價值與經營績效之關聯性研究 中國文化大學.
甄友薇. (2015). 企業社會責任報告書揭露品質之決定因素及其與公司績效之關聯性 國立臺灣大學.
上市公司編製與申報永續報告書作業辦法, (2022).
臺灣證券櫃檯買賣中心. (2023). 永續報告書規範對象與應加強揭露項目.
劉美纓, 丁碧慧, 朱奐聿. (2014). 企業社會責任與公司治理, 公司績效之關連性研究. 科際整合管理研討會, 17-30.
劉謹全. (2014). 強化企業社會責任報告書的公信力，透過獨立公正的第三方查證.
櫛構科技股份有限公司. (2023). 「確證」、「查證」、「保證」、「確信」：到底哪個是哪個?（ISAE3000 vs AA1000）.
薛淵心. (2009). 企業社會責任、企業形象與顧客忠誠度之跨層次研究－以台灣地區銀行業為例 輔仁大學