碳密集型企业碳风险认知对企业投资效率的影响——基于外部融资与内部治理的双维驱动机制

The Impact of Carbon Risk Awareness on Investment Efficiency in Carbon-intensive Enterprises: A Dual-driven Mechanism Based on External Financing and Internal Governance

张晨,王融睿,王雅晴,张超

2026 第 28 卷 第 05 期 页码 62-78

DOI: 10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2026.05.005

PDF全文下载 HTML全文

摘要

全国碳市场强制扩围重塑碳密集型企业的经营环境,规制性、规范性、认知性三类制度压力共同构成企业面临的外部约束。在此背景下,强化碳风险认知成为企业降低碳合规成本、优化战略配置、提升绿色投资回报的关键。文章以2012—2024年沪深A股碳密集型行业上市公司为样本,运用文本分析技术,从监管、声誉、竞争三个维度出发,统计碳风险认知词频,采用TF-IDF权重方法量化认知水平并开展实证检验。研究发现,碳风险认知能够通过缓解外部融资约束、提高内部治理水平来提升企业投资效率,其中,碳监管风险认知与碳声誉风险认知的提升作用更显著。异质性分析表明,在无环保背景高管、绿色转型水平高、过度投资的企业中,碳风险认知对投资效率的提升作用更显著。基于制度理论,文章突破了既有研究侧重企业内部单维度动因的局限,揭示了碳风险认知通过“外部融资—内部治理”双维驱动机制提升碳密集型企业投资效率的内在机理,拓展了企业绿色转型情境下制度压力响应与资源配置的理论探索,丰富了相关经验证据。

The mandatory expansion of the national carbon market and the implementation of dual carbon control policies have brought high-energy-consuming industries such as power generation and steel into the regulatory scope. These rigid constraints have reshaped the business environment of carbon-intensive enterprises, where regulative, normative, and cognitive institutional pressures jointly form the external constraint system for enterprises. Against this backdrop, carbon risk awareness serves as a critical measure for enterprises to cut carbon compliance costs, coordinate strategic resources, and increase returns on green investment. Based on institutional theory, this paper constructs a dual-driven path of external financing and internal governance to clarify the internal mechanism through which carbon risk awareness improves corporate investment efficiency. In this paper, A-share listed companies in carbon-intensive industries from 2012 to 2024 are selected as research samples. Based on the texts of corporate social responsibility reports, textual analysis is adopted to divide carbon risk awareness into three dimensions: supervision, reputation, and competition. After extracting relevant keywords and calculating word frequency, the TF-IDF weighting method is used to quantify the level of carbon risk awareness. The results show that carbon risk awareness significantly boosts corporate investment efficiency via two mediating paths. First, it effectively alleviates external financing constraints by reducing information asymmetry and expanding green financing channels. Second, it drives enterprises to restructure internal governance systems and optimize control procedures for green investment in order to strengthen internal governance efficiency. Sub-dimensional regression results demonstrate that carbon supervision risk awareness and carbon reputation risk awareness exert significant positive effects, while carbon competition risk awareness shows no obvious impact. Heterogeneity analysis verifies that this effect is more prominent in enterprises without senior executives with environmental backgrounds, those with a high degree of green transformation, and those suffering from over-investment. From the perspectives of institutional pressure and corporate strategic response, this paper fully reveals the underlying logic of capital allocation optimization driven by carbon risk awareness in carbon-intensive enterprises, expands the micro empirical system of institutional theory under the low-carbon transition context, and provides theoretical basis and empirical support for the optimization of carbon market policies and the rational green investment of high-carbon enterprises.

参考文献

1 卜国琴, 张玮琳, 熊艳. 气候风险感知对企业人工智能创新的影响研究[J]. 工业技术经济, 2024, (8). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-910X.2024.08.003
2 迟远英, 秦翰林, 陈亚会. 碳信息披露水平对企业融资约束的影响研究[J]. 经济与管理评论, 2023, (6).
3 代昀昊, 孔东民. 高管海外经历是否能提升企业投资效率[J]. 世界经济, 2017, (1).
4 董启琛, 肖土盛, 阳杰. 竞争政策、统一大市场与资源配置效率[J]. 财经科学, 2024, (11). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1000-8306.2024.11.006
5 韩金红, 余珍. 碳信息披露与企业投资效率——基于2011~2015年CDP中国报告的实证研究[J]. 工业技术经济, 2017, (8).
6 何开刚, 刘莹阁, 王勇. CEO与CFO间社会关系与企业投资效率[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2021, (5). DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2021.05.003
7 贺雪霞, 王宇. 内部控制与公司投资效率[J]. 会计之友, 2020, (5). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-5937.2020.05.007
8 何瑛, 韩梦婷. 学者型CEO与上市公司股价崩盘风险[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2021, (4). DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2021.04.009
9 胡美琴, 倪文洁, 张雯. 制度压力、战略反应对企业绩效的影响机制研究[J]. 工业技术经济, 2016, (12). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-910X.2016.12.008
10 胡芊芊, 马新啸, 栗宇丹, 等. 企业集团的资本要素异地配置与投资效率优化研究——基于全国统一大市场建设的新时代情境[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2022, (6). DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2022.06.002
11 黄恒, 齐保垒. 碳风险视角下的企业环境、社会及治理责任履行[J]. 国际商务(对外经济贸易大学学报), 2024, (3).
12 李宏贵, 曹迎迎, 杜运周. 动态制度环境下企业创新的战略反应[J]. 管理学报, 2018, (6). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2018.06.008
13 李文启, 牛健敏. 知行是否合一: 气候风险认知与企业碳全要素生产率[J]. 南方金融, 2024, (11). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-9041.2024.11.005
14 李文文, 黄世忠. 关系股东与融资约束——基于系族集团的经验证据[J]. 会计研究, 2020, (2). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2020.02.006
15 李小荣, 韩琳, 马海涛. 内部控制与劳动力投资效率[J]. 财贸经济, 2021, (1).
16 李泽浩, 杨振, 陈传龙. ESG信息披露提升了企业投资效率吗?——非财务信息披露的财务作用[J]. 审计与经济研究, 2024, (4). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-4833.2024.04.008
17 梁彤缨, 陈昌杰. 管理者过度自信与企业创新投资: 融资约束和股权激励的作用[J]. 工业技术经济, 2020, (1). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-910X.2020.01.003
18 刘杰军. 碳信息披露水平差异下企业投资效率的分化与优化路径[J]. 现代营销, 2025, (8).
19 刘学敏, 张生玲. 中国企业绿色转型: 目标模式、面临障碍与对策[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015, (6). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2015.06.001
20 柳学信, 吴鑫玉, 孔晓旭. 企业碳信息披露理论进展与价值共创路径研究[J]. 中国环境管理, 2024, (4). DOI:10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2024.04.026
21 罗喜英, 毛颖, 张媛. 碳强度、ETS和企业碳风险披露研究[J]. 软科学, 2018, (10). DOI:10.13956/j.ss.1001-8409.2018.10.21
22 罗勇根, 饶品贵, 陈灿. 高管宏观认知与管理层预测——基于MD&A文本信息的经验证据[J]. 南开管理评论, 2024, (2).
23 潘越, 汤旭东, 宁博, 等. 连锁股东与企业投资效率: 治理协同还是竞争合谋[J]. 中国工业经济, 2020, (2).
24 曲国华, 张潇丹, 曲卫华. 考虑可信度和优先级的对偶犹豫模糊多属性决策在绿色审计中的应用研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2022, (10). DOI:10.12005/orms.2022.0332
25 饶品贵, 岳衡, 姜国华. 经济政策不确定性与企业投资行为研究[J]. 世界经济, 2017, (2).
26 宋子龙, 陈思晗, 李伟平, 等. 平衡之道: 碳减排压力如何推动企业重构债务融资渠道[J]. 会计研究, 2025, (3). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2025.03.009
27 孙海波, 曹迪, 刘忠璐. 气候政策不确定性、数字化转型与企业投资效率[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2024, (6). DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2024.06.005
28 万攀兵, 杨冕, 陈林. 环境技术标准何以影响中国制造业绿色转型——基于技术改造的视角[J]. 中国工业经济, 2021, (9). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2021.09.007
29 王克敏, 刘静, 李晓溪. 产业政策、政府支持与公司投资效率研究[J]. 管理世界, 2017, (3). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2017.03.008
30 王守杰, 崔也光. 自愿型环境规制与企业投资效率——基于“绿色工厂”认定的实证检验[J]. 财会月刊, 2025, (14). DOI:10.19641/j.cnki.42-1290/f.2025.14.009
31 王晓亮, 王进. 董事会断裂带与企业投资效率[J]. 华东经济管理, 2021, (8).
32 王艳丽, 类晓东, 龙如银. 绿色信贷政策提高了企业的投资效率吗?——基于重污染企业金融资源配置的视角[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2021, (1). DOI:10.12062/cpre.20200629
33 温磊. 高管环保背景对企业气候风险信息披露的影响研究[J]. 中国注册会计师, 2024, (11). DOI:10.16292/j.cnki.issn1009-6345.2024.11.008
34 温忠麟, 叶宝娟. 中介效应分析: 方法和模型发展[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, (5). DOI:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.00731
35 吴波, 陈盈, 郭昊男, 等. 制度压力的组织响应机制实证研究: 离散身份的调节效应[J]. 南开管理评论, 2021, (4). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2021.04.010
36 吴裕晴, 黄思洁. 绿色金融政策、制度压力与企业ESG表现[J]. 统计与决策, 2025, (13). DOI:10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2025.13.025
37 谢海娟, 朱倩云, 孙佳佳, 等. 高管环保认知与企业“漂绿”倾向[J]. 华东经济管理, 2024, (12). DOI:10.19629/j.cnki.34-1014/f.240324017
38 徐辉, 付月, 李艺. 碳信息披露的绿色创新效应研究[J]. 华东经济管理, 2024, (7). DOI:10.19629/j.cnki.34-1014/f.231212015
39 徐建中, 贯君, 林艳. 制度压力、高管环保意识与企业绿色创新实践——基于新制度主义理论和高阶理论视角[J]. 管理评论, 2017, (9).
40 耀友福, 李锦. 碳中和表现能改善企业投资效率吗?[J]. 审计与经济研究, 2024, (5). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-4833.2024.05.011
41 尤明青, 李姗蔓. 元治理视角下“双碳”转型与现代环境治理体系协同化的法治因应[J]. 河南社会科学, 2023, (2). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-905X.2023.02.007
42 张增田, 姚振玖, 卢琦, 等. 高管海外经历能促进企业绿色创新吗?[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2023, (8). DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20221219.401
43 郑红, 海玉珍, 喻懋, 等. 短贷长投、内部控制与企业绩效[J]. 上海金融, 2021, (2). DOI:10.13910/j.cnki.shjr.2021.02.007
44 周宏, 周畅, 林晚发, 等. 公司治理与企业债券信用利差——基于中国公司债券2008-2016年的经验证据[J]. 会计研究, 2018, (5). DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2886.2018.05.008
45 Biddle G C, Hilary G, Verdi R S. How does financial reporting quality relate to investment efficiency? [J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2009, 48(2-3): 112–131. DOI:10.1016/j.jacceco.2009.09.001
46 Chen S M, Sun Z, Tang S, et al. Government intervention and investment efficiency: Evidence from China [J]. Journal of Corporate Finance, 2011, 17(2): 259–271. DOI:10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2010.08.004
47 Daddi T, Bleischwitz R, Todaro N M, et al. The influence of institutional pressures on climate mitigation and adaptation strategies [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 244: 118879. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118879
48 Deng W Y Y, Zhang Z L, Guo B R. Firm-level carbon risk awareness and green transformation: A research on the motivation and consequences from government regulation and regional development perspective [J]. International Review of Financial Analysis, 2024, 91: 103026. DOI:10.1016/j.irfa.2023.103026
49 Elijido-Ten E O, Clarkson P. Going beyond climate change risk management: Insights from the world’s largest most sustainable corporations [J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2019, 157(4): 1067–1089. DOI:10.1007/s10551-017-3611-6
50 Guo B R, Yang Z M. Firm-level carbon risk perception and ESG performance [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2024, 31(8): 12543–12560. DOI:10.1007/s11356-024-31863-8
51 Joseph J, Wilson A J. The growth of the firm: An attention-based view [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2018, 39(6): 1779–1800. DOI:10.1002/smj.2715
52 Jung J, Herbohn K, Clarkson P. Carbon risk, carbon risk awareness and the cost of debt financing [J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, 150(4): 1151–1171. DOI:10.1007/s10551-016-3207-6
53 Konchitchki Y, Patatoukas P N. Taking the pulse of the real economy using financial statement analysis: Implications for macro forecasting and stock valuation [J]. The Accounting Review, 2014, 89(2): 669–694. DOI:10.2308/accr-50632
54 Krueger P, Sautner Z, Starks L T. The importance of climate risks for institutional investors [J]. The Review of Financial Studies, 2020, 33(3): 1067–1111. DOI:10.1093/rfs/hhz137
55 Ma Y R, Liu Z H, Ma D D, et al. A news-based climate policy uncertainty index for China [J]. Scientific Data, 2023, 10(1): 881. DOI:10.1038/s41597-023-02817-5
56 Wijethilake C, Munir R, Appuhami R. Strategic responses to institutional pressures for sustainability: The role of management control systems [J]. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2017, 30(8): 1677−1710.
57 Zhang C J, Zhang S H, Yang Y, et al. The impact of carbon risk on corporate greenwashing behavior: Inhibition or promotion? [J]. Sustainability, 2025, 17(22): 10188. DOI:10.3390/su172210188
58 Zhang D Y. Are firms motivated to greenwash by financial constraints? Evidence from global firms’ data [J]. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 2022, 33(3): 459–479. DOI:10.1111/jifm.12153