Metin Borak, Hatice Doğukanlı

159

Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk ve Firma Riski: Borsa İstanbul’da Bir Uygulama

Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk (KSS) faaliyetlerinin firma riskini azaltması beklenmekte- dir. Çünkü KSS faaliyetlerinin özsermaye ve borç maliyetini, bilgi asimetrisini azaltırken finansal performans ve firma itibarını artırdığı bilinmektedir. Bu çalışma, KSS’nin firma riski (toplam risk, sistematik risk ve sistematik olmayan risk) üzerindeki etkisini ince- lemektedir. Çalışmanın örneklemi, 2009-2020 yıllar arasında Borsa İstanbul’da faaliyet gösteren ve kurumsal yönetim derecelendirmesi yaptıran firmaları kapsamaktadır. Sonuç olarak çalışmanın örneklemi 37 firma ve 339 gözlemden oluşmaktadır. Elde edilen bul- gular, KSS’nin toplam, sistematik ve sistematik olmayan risk üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkisi olmadığını göstermektedir. Elde edilen bu sonuçlar, açıklayıcı değişken- lerin bir yıl gecikmeli değerlerinin kullanılması durumunda da değişmemektedir.

Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Risk: Evidence from Borsa Istanbul Stock Exchange

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities are expected to reduce firm risk. Be- cause it is known that CSR activities increase financial performance and firm reputation while reducing the cost of equity and debt, and information asymmetry. This study examines the impact of corporate social responsibility on firm risk (total risk, systematic risk and unsystematic risk). The sample of the study includes companies that are traded in Borsa Istanbul and have corporate governance ratings over the period 2009–2020. Finally, the sample of the study consists of 37 companies and 339 observations. The findings show that CSR has no statistically significant effect on total, systematic and unsystematic risk. These results do not change even when one year lagged values of the explanatory variables are used.
PDF

___

  • 1. Agudelo, M. A. L., Jóhannsdóttir, L., ve Davídsdóttir, B. (2019). A Literature Review of the History and Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 4(1): 1-23.
  • 2. Albuquerque, R., Koskinen, Y., ve Zhang, C. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Risk: Theory and Empirical Evidence. Management Science, 65(10): 4451-4469.
  • 3. Baltagi, B. H. (2013). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
  • 4. Benlemlih, M., Shaukat, A., Qiu, Y., ve Trojanowski, G. (2018). Environmental and Social Disclosures and Firm Risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3): 613- 626.
  • 5. Bouslah, K., Kryzanowski, L., ve M’Zali, B. (2013). The Impact of the Dimensions of Social Performance on Firm Risk. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(4): 1258-1273.
  • 6. Bouslah, K., Kryzanowski, L., ve M’Zali, B. (2018). Social Performance and Firm Risk: Impact of the Financial Crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(3): 643-669.
  • 7. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A Three-dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4): 497-505.
  • 8. Carroll, A. B. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4): 39-48.
  • 9. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society, 38(3): 268-295.
  • 10. Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s Pyramid of CSR: Taking Another Look. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 1(1): 1-8.
  • 11. Chen, H., ve Wang, X. (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Financial Performance in China: An Empirical Research from Chinese Firms. Corporate Governance, 11 (4): 361-370.
  • 12. Commission of the European Communities. (2001). Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. https://www.unido. org/our-focus/advancing-economic-competitiveness/competitive-trade- capacities-and-corporate-responsibility/corporate-social responsibility-market- integration/what-csr.
  • 13. Cui, J., Jo, H., ve Na, H. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility, Religion, and Firm Risk. Asia-Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 46(2): 305-340.
  • 14. Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: An Analysis of 37 Definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1): 1-13.
  • 15. Davis, K., ve Blomstrom, R. L. (1966). Business and its Environment. McGraw- Hill.
  • 16. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C., ve Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect the Cost of Capital?. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9): 2388-2406.
  • 17. Finnet Elektronik Yayıncılık Data İletişim Ticaret ve Sanayi Ltd. Şti. https:// www.finnet.com.tr/.
  • 18. Freeman, I., ve Hasnaoui, A. (2011). The Meaning of Corporate Social Responsibility: The Vision of Four Nations. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3): 419-443.
  • 19. Galant, A., & Cadez, S. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance Relationship: A Review of Measurement Approaches. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 30(1): 676-693.
  • 20. Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The Relationship Between Corporate Philanthropy and Shareholder Wealth: A Risk Management Perspective. Academy of management review, 30(4): 777-798.
  • 21. Gujarati, D. N., ve Porter, D. C. (2012). Temel Ekonometri. İstanbul: Literatür Yayınları.
  • 22. Humphrey, J. E., Lee, D. D., ve Shen, Y. (2012). Does it Cost to be Sustainable?. Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(3): 626-639.
  • 23. Jo, H., ve Na, H. (2012). Does CSR Reduce Firm Risk? Evidence from Controversial Industry Sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4): 441-456.
  • 24. Jones, T. M. (1980). Corporate Social Responsibility Revisited, Redefined. California Management Review, 22(3): 59-67. 25.
  • 26. Lee, D. D., ve Faff, R. W. (2009). Corporate Sustainability Performance and Idiosyncratic Risk: A Global Perspective. Financial Review, 44(2): 213-237.
  • 27. Liu, M., ve Lu, W. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility, Firm Performance, and Firm Risk: The Role of Firm Reputation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, 1-21.
  • 28. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., ve Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1): 1-18.
  • 29. Mishra, S., ve Modi, S. B. (2013). Positive and Negative Corporate Social Responsibility, Financial Leverage, and Idiosyncratic Risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(2): 431-448.
  • 30. Nguyen, P., ve Nguyen, A. (2015). The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Risk. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(2): 324-339.
  • 31. Porter, M. E. ve Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12): 78–92.
  • 32. Reverte, C. (2012). The Impact of Better Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure on the Cost of Equity Capital. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19(5): 253-272.
  • 33. Salama, A., Anderson, K., ve Toms, J. S. (2011). Does Community and Environmental Responsibility Affect Firm Risk? Evidence from UK Panel Data 1994–2006. Business Ethics: A European Review, 20(2): 192-204.
  • 34. Sermaye Piyasası Kurulu (2014). Kurumsal Yönetim Tebliği. https://mevzuat. spk.gov.tr/991ad84e-15b4-428d-8acb-d48c60d75034.
  • 35. Sethi, S. P. (1975). Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytical Framework. California Management Review, 17(3): 58-64.
  • 36. Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4): 503-530.
  • 37. Tataoğlu, F. Y. (2016). Panel Veri Ekonometrisi. İstanbul: Beta.
  • 38. Thomson Reuters (2018). Thomson Reuters ESG Scores. http://zeerovery.nl/ blogfiles/esg-scores-methodology.pdf.
  • 39. Türkiye Kurumsal Yönetim Derneği.www.tkyd.org.
  • 40. Waddock, S. A., ve Graves, S. B. (1997). The Corporate Social Performance– Financial Performance Link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4): 303-319.
  • 41. Yeh, C. C., Lin, F., Wang, T. S., ve Wu, C. M. (2020). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Cost of Capital in China?. Asia Pacific Management Review, 25(1): 1-12
BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 1307-5705
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yıllık
  • Başlangıç: 2007
  • Yayıncı: Bankacılık Düzenleme ve Denetleme Kurumu
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Türkiye’de Mevduatların Krediye Dönüşümünün Büyümeye Etkileri: Tüketim Çekişli mi? Yatırım İtişli mi?

Nesibe Demir Bingöl, Murat Bingöl, Ömer Selçuk Emsen

BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi

Cemal İbiş, Celal Öztürk

Likidite Riski Yönetiminde Vadesiz ve Vadeli Mevduatların Davranışsal Modellenmesi

Celal ÖZTÜRK, Cemal İBİŞ

Türkiye’de Hanehalkı Nakit Kullanımını Belirleyen Faktörler

Saygın Çevik, Mehmet Doğrukök

Yükselen Piyasa Ekonomilerinde Finansal Gelişme ve Gelir Eşitsizliği İlişkisi: Yatay Kesit Bağımlılığı Altında Kurumların Moderatör Etkisi Üzerine Heterojen Panel Veri Analizi

Fatma Ünlü

Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk ve Firma Riski: Borsa İstanbul’da Bir Uygulama

Metin Borak, Hatice Doğukanlı