在當前氣候劇烈變化和能源資源減少的雙重挑戰下，全球各國政府、相關機構及企業逐漸意識到氣候變遷對人類生存的嚴重威脅，並逐步加強碳排放及能源的管理。同時，他們也越來越重視ESG永續發展議題，採取有效措施以實現減排目標，促進社會和經濟的永續發展。
本研究以台灣上市公司為主要研究對象，各公司的財務績效數據及ESG評分取自台灣經濟新報（Taiwan Economic Journal）資料庫，並結合台灣證券交易所（Taiwan Stock Exchange）的公司評鑑資料，以2016年至2022年區間的追蹤資料（Panel Data），最終選取759家公司，共計5,313個樣本觀察值。
本研究採用複迴歸模型分析，並使用Hausman檢定測試模型適配性。結果顯示，總碳排放量、直接及間接碳排放量取自然對數後與企業財務績效的複迴歸模型（ROA、ROE、TOBIN’S Q、EPS）及ESG在碳排放量與企業財務績效間的調節複迴歸模型均以固定效應模型較為適配。
在固定效應模型下之實證結果發現：（1）總碳排放量與環境保護構面（E）對企業財務績效皆呈現正相關，但並未達顯著水準；社會責任構面（S）對ROA、ROE和EPS呈負相關，對TOBIN’S Q呈正相關，但均未達顯著水準；公司治理構面（G）對TOBIN’S Q呈顯著正相關，對ROA、EPS呈正相關，對ROE呈負相關，但均未達顯著水準。（2）直接碳排放量與企業財務績效呈負相關，間接碳排放量則呈正相關，但均未達顯著水準；環境保護構面（E）對ROE有顯著正向影響；社會責任構面（S）和公司治理構面（G）對TOBIN’S Q有顯著正向影響。（3）透過Sobel檢定計算結果發現ESG在總碳排放量、直接及間接碳排放量與企業財務績效（ROA、ROE、TOBIN’S Q、EPS）間無顯著中介效果。（4）環境保護構面（E）在總碳排量對EPS間具有正向調節效果，在直接碳排量對ROA、ROE、EPS間也具有正向調節效果；社會責任構面（S）在直接碳排放量對ROA和EPS間具有負向調節效果。

Amid the dual challenges of dramatic climate change and dwindling energy resources, governments, institutions, and enterprises worldwide are increasingly recognizing the severe threat that climate change poses to human survival. Consequently, there has been a concerted effort to enhance the management of carbon emissions and energy usage. Simultaneously, there is growing attention towards the issue of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) sustainability, with effective measures being adopted to achieve emission reduction targets and promote sustainable social and economic development.
This study focuses on publicly listed companies in Taiwan, with financial performance data and ESG scores sourced from the Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ) database, supplemented by company evaluation data from the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TSE). The study utilizes panel data from 2016 to 2022, ultimately selecting 759 companies, comprising a total of 5,313 sample observations.
A multiple regression model analysis was employed, with the Hausman test used to assess model suitability. The results indicated that for the multiple regression models of total carbon emissions, direct carbon emissions, and indirect carbon emissions (log-transformed) on corporate financial performance (ROA, ROE, TOBIN’S Q, EPS), and for the moderation regression models of ESG in the relationship between carbon emissions and corporate financial performance, a fixed-effects model was more appropriate.
The empirical results under the fixed-effects model revealed the following: (1) Total carbon emissions and the environmental dimension (E) showed a positive correlation with corporate financial performance, though not reaching statistical significance. The social dimension (S) had a negative correlation with ROA, ROE, and EPS, and a positive correlation with TOBIN’S Q, but none were statistically significant. The governance dimension (G) had a significantly positive correlation with TOBIN’S Q, a positive correlation with ROA and EPS, and a negative correlation with ROE, but none were statistically significant. (2) Direct carbon emissions were negatively correlated with corporate financial performance, while indirect carbon emissions were positively correlated, though neither was statistically significant. The environmental dimension (E) had a significant positive impact on ROE. The social (S) and governance (G) dimensions had significant positive impacts on TOBIN’S Q. (3) The Sobel test results indicated that ESG did not have a significant mediating effect in the relationship between total carbon emissions, direct and indirect carbon emissions, and corporate financial performance (ROA, ROE, TOBIN’S Q, EPS). (4) The environmental dimension (E) had a positive moderating effect on the relationship between total carbon emissions and EPS, as well as on the relationship between direct carbon emissions and ROA, ROE, and EPS. The social dimension (S) had a negative moderating effect on the relationship between direct carbon emissions and ROA and EPS.

一、英文部份
1.Ahmad, N., Mobarek, A., & Roni, N. N. （2021）. Revisiting the impact of ESG on financial performance of FTSE350 UK firms: Static and dynamic panel data analysis. Cogent Business & Management, 8（1）, 1900500.
2.Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
3.Bowen, H. R. （2013）. Social responsibilities of the businessman. University of Iowa Press.
4.Busch, T., & Lewandowski, S. （2018）. Corporate carbon and financial performance: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 22（4）, 745-759.
5.Chapple, L., Clarkson, P. M., & Gold, D. L. （2013）. The cost of carbon: Capital market effects of the proposed emission trading scheme （ETS）. Abacus, 49（1）, 1-33.
6.Clark, G. L., Feiner, A., & Viehs, M. （2015）. From the stockholder to the stakeholder: How sustainability can drive financial outperformance. Available at SSRN 2508281.
7.Cormier, D., Magnan, M., & Van Velthoven, B. （2005）. Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions?. European accounting review, 14（1）, 3-39.
8.Dang, C., Li, Z. F., & Yang, C. (2018). Measuring firm size in empirical corporate finance. Journal of banking & finance, 86, 159-176.
9.Drempetic, S., Klein, C., & Zwergel, B. (2020). The influence of firm size on the ESG score: Corporate sustainability ratings under review. Journal of business ethics, 167(2), 333-360.
10.Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management science, 60(11), 2835-2857.
11.Elkington, J. （1997）. The triple bottom line. Environmental management: Readings and cases, 2, 49-66.
12.Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. （2015）. ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of sustainable finance & investment, 5（4）, 210-233.
13.Ganda, F., & Milondzo, K. S. （2018）. The impact of carbon emissions on corporate financial performance: Evidence from the South African firms. Sustainability, 10（7）, 2398.
14.He, Y. （2023）. ESG Ratings and Corporate Value. In SHS Web of Conferences （Vol. 169, p. 01058）. EDP Sciences.
15.Jacobs, B. W., Singhal, V. R., & Subramanian, R. （2010）. An empirical investigation of environmental performance and the market value of the firm. Journal of Operations Management, 28（5）, 430-441.
16.Kristin Chang （2023）, On the Path to Net-Zero: Will Taiwan Reach Its Goal? , Global Taiwan Brief, 8（16）
17.Kumar, A., Singh, P., Raizada, P., & Hussain, C. M. （2022）. Impact of COVID-19 on greenhouse gases emissions: A critical review. Science of the total environment, 806, 150349.
18.La Torre, M., Sabelfeld, S., Blomkvist, M., & Dumay, J. (2020). Rebuilding trust: sustainability and non-financial reporting and the European Union regulation. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), 701-725.
19.Lee, K. H., & Min, B. （2015）. Green R&D for eco-innovation and its impact on carbon emissions and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 534-542.
20.Lewandowski, S. （2015）. Carbon emissions and corporate financial performance: A systematic literature review and options for methodological enhancements. Corporate carbon and climate accounting, 193-215.
21.Lewandowski, S. （2017）. Corporate carbon and financial performance: The role of emission reductions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26（8）, 1196-1211.
22.Lins, K. V., Servaes, H., & Tamayo, A. (2017). Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis. the Journal of Finance, 72(4), 1785-1824.
23.Liu, Y., Zhou, X., Yang, J., & Hoepner, A. G. （2017）. Corporate carbon emissions and financial performance: Does carbon disclosure mediate the relationship in the UK?. Available at SSRN 2941123.
24.Liu, Z., Liu, W., Guo, Y., & Wang, L. （2017）. The impacts of carbon emissions and carbon disclosure on financial performance: Empirical evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 3465-3477.
25.Matsumura, E. M., Prakash, R., & Vera-Muñoz, S. C. （2014）. Firm-value effects of carbon emissions and carbon disclosures. The accounting review, 89（2）, 695-724.
26.Naimy, V., El Khoury, R., & Iskandar, S. （2021）. ESG versus corporate financial performance: Evidence from East Asian Firms in the industrials sector. Studies of Applied Economics, 39（3）.
27.Ngwakwe, C. C., & Msweli, P. （2013）. On carbon emission reduction and firm performance: example from 3M Company. Environmental economics, （4, Iss. 2）, 54-61.
28.Saka, C., & Oshika, T. （2014）. Disclosure effects, carbon emissions and corporate value. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 5（1）, 22-45.
29.Van Emous, R., Krušinskas, R., & Westerman, W. （2021）. Carbon emissions reduction and corporate financial performance: the influence of country-level characteristics. Energies, 14（19）, 6029.
30.Wang, Y., Lu, T., & Qiao, Y. （2021）. The effect of air pollution on corporate social responsibility performance in high energy-consumption industry: Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, 124345.
31.Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of consumer research, 37(2), 197-206.
32.Zhou, G., Liu, L., & Luo, S. （2022）. Sustainable development, ESG performance and company market value: Mediating effect of financial performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31（7）, 3371-3387.

二、中文部份
1.石秉弘（2023）, 台灣上市櫃電子業碳排放量與公司績效關聯性, 國立雲林科技大學財務金融系碩士論文
2.何宗航（2022）, 企業永續發展（ESG）,碳排放與公司績效之關聯, 國立台中科技大學商學院財務金融研究所碩士論文
3.何海琪. （2017）. 碳排放, 綠化投資策略與公司經營績效之關聯性-以台灣的金融控股公司為例. 國立臺灣大學經濟學系學位論文
4.李州章（2023）, 碳排放效率對台灣金融控股公司財務績效之影響, 國立台北大學國際財務金融碩士在職專班（IEMBA）碩士論文
5.袁競（2023）, 企業ESG 評分與經營績效之影響分析-以台灣上市公司為例, 義守大學管理學院管理碩士論文
6.張育琳. （2016）. 碳排放量, 綠化投資策略與公司續效. 管理與系統, 23（2）, 197-222.
7.彭文琦（2023）, 碳排放量與公司價值之關聯：以公司治理為調節變數, 國立彰化師範大學會計系碩士論文
8.鄭芷芬（2023）, ISO管理認證、碳排放量與企業財務績效之間的關聯性研究-以台灣上市公司為例, 國立台北教育大學東南亞區域管理碩士學位學程碩士論文

三、網路資料
1.2050淨零排放政策路徑藍圖, 行政院國家永續發展委員會（National Sustainable Development Awards） , https://ncsd.ndc.gov.tw/Fore/nsdn/about0/2050Path
2.A new survey of European business leaders shows sustainable corporate governance as key to long-term value over short-term pressures.,
安永2021長期價值與公司治理調查報告（EN）, https://www.ey.com/en_tw/long-term-value/sustainable-corporate-governance
3.CO2 Emissions in 2023, IEA國際能源署（The International Energy Agency，IEA）, https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2023/executive-summary
4.Corporate Governance 3.0 -Sustainable Development Roadmap, https://www.sfb.gov.tw/en/home.jsp?id=271&parentpath=0,117,118,120
5.During a year of extremes, carbon dioxide levels surge faster than ever. The two-year increase in Keeling Curve peak is the largest on record, 美國國家海洋和大氣管理局（National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA）, June 16, 2024
https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/during-year-of-extremes-carbon-dioxide-levels-surge-faster-than-ever
6.Environmental, Social & Governance Law Taiwan 2024, https://iclg.com/practice-areas/environmental-social-and-governance-law/taiwan
7.ESG InfoHub, https://esg.twse.com.tw/ESG/front/tw/#/main/home
8.GHG emissions of all world countries 2023 report , EDGAR全球大氣研究碳排放資料庫（The Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research4, EDGAR）
https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2023
9.No sign of greenhouse gases increases slowing in 2023, GML美國全球監測實驗室（Global Monitoring Laboratory，GML）, https://research.noaa.gov/2024/04/05/no-sign-of-greenhouse-gases-increases-slowing-in-2023/#:~:text=Levels%20of%20the%20three%20most,2023%2C%20according%20to%20NOAA%20scientists.
10.Taiwan’s Pathway to Net-Zero Emissions in 2050, 國家發展委員會, https://www.ndc.gov.tw/en/Content_List.aspx?n=B154724D802DC488
11.United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 簡稱UNFCCC, https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf
12.公司治理3.0-永續發展藍圖, 行政院證期會2020.08.25新聞稿https://www.sfb.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=992&parentpath=0,8,882,884
13.巴黎協定Paris Agreement Report（2015）, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf
14.日本氣候轉型融資基本方針與產業轉型融資路徑圖file:///C:/Users/sammi/Downloads/fa9901d584d64514824f9db80ab97839.pdf
15.台灣經濟新報資料庫, https://www.tejwin.com/
16.台灣證券交易所公司治理中心https://cgc.twse.com.tw/
17.企業永續轉型之鑰：解析ESG評鑑（上）（下）, ESG TIMES ESG專欄, https://esgtimes.com.tw/1599-2/; https://esgtimes.com.tw/1605-2/
18.安永台灣2023長期價值與公司治理調查報告, https://www.ey.com/zh_tw/climate-change-sustainability-services/strengthened-governance-accelerates-sustainability
19.行政院通過法案, 「溫室氣體減量及管理法」名稱修正為「氣候變遷因應法」, https://www.ly.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=33324&pid=226867
20.行政院環境部氣候變遷署事業溫室氣體排放量資訊平台https://ghgregistry.moenv.gov.tw/epa_ghg/GuideAndCalculation/GuideAndCalculation.aspx
21.京都議定書Kyoto Protocol Report（1997）, https://unfccc.int/documents/2409
22.金管會永續融網, https://esg.fsc.gov.tw/
23.金管會發布「上市櫃公司永續發展行動方案(2023年)」, https://www.sfb.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=95&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202303280001&dtable=News%E3%80%80
24.美國全球監測實驗室（Global Monitoring Laboratory，簡稱GML） https://research.noaa.gov/
25.格拉斯哥氣候公約Glasgow Climate Pact（2021）, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2021_10_add1_adv.pdf
26.第28屆聯合國氣候變遷大會COP28會議報告, https://unfccc.int/decisions
27.黃啟瑞（2024）, ESG永續、永續金融之發展與策略, ESG TIMES ESG專欄, https://esgtimes.com.tw/4532-2/
28.經理人用戶成長中心https://www.managertoday.com.tw/articles/view/62727??utm_source=copyshare
29.臺灣證券交易所公開資訊觀測站, https://mops.twse.com.tw/mops/web/index
30.聯合國永續發展目標United Nations Sustainability Goals, https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/
31.聯合國發佈17項永續發展目標Global Sustainable Development Report, 2015 edition,
https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/publications/global-sustainable-development-report-2015-edition.html
32.聯合國開發計畫署與 VCMI 合作實現氣候目標UNDP partners with VCMI to achieve climate goals, https://vcmintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/VCMI-VCM-Access-Strategy-Toolkit-ENGLISH_extra.pdf
33.聯合國環境規劃署UNEP 年報酬2023, https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/44777/UNEP_Annual_Report_2023.pdf?sequence=19