Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is Corporate Philanthropy Used as Environmental Misconduct Dressing? Evidence from Chinese Family-Owned Firms

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, I examine the hidden connection between corporate philanthropic giving and corporate environmental misconduct. Using survey data from Chinese family-owned firms, I provide strong and consistent evidence to show that corporate environmental misconduct is significantly positively associated with corporate philanthropic giving, suggesting that some Chinese family-owned firms act philanthropically to divert public attention from their environmentally unfriendly behavior. Moreover, the positive association between corporate environmental misconduct and corporate philanthropic giving is less pronounced for politically connected family-owned firms than for their counterparts. The above results are robust to various sensitivity tests. My findings suggest that environmental misconduct dressing may be an additional motivation for corporate philanthropic giving and that different dimensions of corporate social responsibility may be inherently inconsistent in the given institutional setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to one referee’s valuable suggestion, I differentiate two types of “what is involved in environmental wrongdoers’ attempts to generate goodwill through corporate philanthropy.” Specifically, I focus on the first case, in which environmental wrongdoers try to generate goodwill in the eyes of the general public through corporate philanthropy, to develop Hypothesis 1. Moreover, environmental wrongdoers seek to “buy off” officials and regulators with a view to making them more lenient through corporate philanthropy, and thus I develop Hypothesis 2.

  2. I focus on the context of Chinese family-owned firms and provide empirical support to Brammer et al. (2009), who find associations between CSR and the characteristics of the countries where companies operate.

  3. Previous literature (e.g., Heugens et al. 2004; Meznar and Nigh 1995) addresses how firms buffer against stakeholder pressures (Brammer et al. 2009).

  4. Some Chinese family-owned firms are successful because they pay extremely low wages rather than having highly technological products. Also, they are often in arrears of staff salaries. At the end of each year, migrant workers commonly appeal for unpaid wages.

  5. Politically connected firms show worse post-IPO performance (Fan et al. 2007), more bank debt but lower rates (Khwaja and Mian 2005), lower effective tax rates (Adhikari et al. 2006), and more government assistance and financial subsidies (Faccio et al. 2006).

  6. Two examples demonstrate the problem more directly. British Petroleum was fined $7.8 billion for an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 (Financial Times 2011a, b). One year later, ConocoPhillips and Cnooc damaged China’s Bohai Bay, but the Chinese regulator fined them $26.9 million although their damage was even more severe (Xinhua 2012). Why was the cost of illegality so low? The reason is complicated. Chinese environmental laws often lack effective enforcement provisions (Wang 2006). China’s court system remains weak; judges are poorly trained; and local governments with financial interest in the polluting enterprises regularly intervene (Van Rooij and Lo 2010; Wang 2006). More important, the CEO of Cnooc is a government official and thus Cnooc is a politically connected firm, so that ConocoPhillips and Cnooc paid a nominal fine far below the fine in the case of British Petroleum. The media subsequently reported that ConocoPhillips and Cnooc were donating philanthropically.

  7. In this study, Chinese family-owned firms are private and do not publicize their financial statements (including earnings), and thus they do not provide information about financial statements restatement. Thus, I cannot follow Koehn and Ueng (2010) to include a control variable related with financial statements restatement into Eq. (1).

  8. Results are not qualitatively changed by deleting the top and bottom 1 % of the sample, by no deletion, or by no winsorization.

  9. China’s economy is growing rapidly, but Chinese enterprises are still forming their business ethics and codes of ethics (Du 2012), and firms universally lack CSR consciousness. As a result, corporate philanthropy and environmental responsibility are poorly realized. Although firms are spending a relatively small percentage on philanthropy on average, the average amount of corporate philanthropy is significantly larger for Chinese family-owned firms with environmental misconduct (mean value = 199,794.87 and maximum value = 50,000,000; Unit: RMB) than for their counterparts (mean value = 96,511.62 and maximum value = 2,600,000; Unit: RMB).

  10. Referring to Shapiro and Wilk (1965), Shapiro and Francia (1972), and D’Agostino et al. (1990), I conducted three tests to examine whether corporate philanthropic giving in the sample obeys the normal distribution, respectively. The non-tabulated results show that the null hypothesis that “corporate philanthropic giving obeys standard normal distribution” is rejected at the 1 % level regardless of test approaches used. The non-tabulated results are available from the author on request (similarly hereafter).

  11. A referee provides insightful conjecture motivating me to use empirical data to address this problem in future research.

  12. However, the direction of causality or endogeneity in this study is not a major threat for two reasons: First, corporate philanthropic giving can be viewed as a defensive countermeasure with insurance (Godfrey 2005) and a fire-suppressing tactic to mitigate the negative influence of wrongdoing (Koehn and Ueng 2010). Second, if a firm is philanthropic just because of environmental wrongdoing, the public will inevitably detect the ulterior motives behind the corporate philanthropy and will expect that the firm’s CEO has an ulterior motive. A backfire effect will then occur, permanently fracturing the reputation and suddenly erasing the positive image. In the backfire effect, found in consumer responses to products, individuals hold their original position even more strongly when confronted with evidence conflicting with their beliefs (Brown and Dacin 1997; Gao et al. 2012; Yoon et al. 2003).

  13. The two-stage regression procedure greatly depends on using good instruments. Following Larcker and Rusticus (2010) and Du et al. (2013), I conducted diagnostic tests to show that ENV_INV is suitable as the instrument variable. First, ENV_INV significantly affects environmental misconduct but is less likely to be correlated with residuals from Eq. (1). Non-tabulated results show that ENV_MIS and ENV_INV are highly correlated and significant at the 1 % level. Second, over-identification tests can not reject the appropriateness of the instrument variable of ENV_INV. Finally, non-tabulated Hausman test rejects the null hypothesis of no endogeneity for measure of environmental misconduct.

  14. Environmental misconduct (ENV_MIS) is the inverse proxy for corporate environmental responsibility.

  15. I acknowledge an astute referee who reminded me of this limitation.

References

  • Adams, M., & Hardwick, P. (1998). An analysis of corporate donations: United Kingdom evidence. Journal of Management Studies, 35(5), 641–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Taschian, A., & Shore, T. (1996). Ethics in family and nonfamily owned firms: An exploratory study. Family Business Review, 9(2), 157–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adhikari, A., Derashid, C., & Zhang, H. (2006). Public policy, political connections, and effective tax rates: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 25(5), 574–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amato, L. H., & Amato, C. H. (2007). The effects of firm size and industry on corporate giving. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(3), 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amato, L. H., & Amato, C. H. (2012). Retail philanthropy: Firm size, industry, and business cycle. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(4), 435–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. R., Li, J. H., Harrison, R. T., & Robson, P. J. (2003). The increasing role of small business in the Chinese economy. Journal of Small Business Management, 41(3), 310–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, L., & Galaskiewicz, J. (1988). Stock ownership and company contributions to charity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(1), 82–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avi-Yonah, R. S. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and strategic tax behavior. In W. Schön (Ed.), Tax and corporate governance. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banfield, E. C. (1958). Moral basis of a backward society. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskin, J. (2006). Corporate responsibility in emerging markets. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 24, 29–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, J. B., Dyer, W. G, Jr, Smith, I., & Adams, G. L. (2011). A stakeholder identity orientation approach to corporate social performance in family firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(4), 565–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2004). The development of corporate charitable contributions in the UK: A stakeholder analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 41(8), 1411–1434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2005). Corporate reputation and philanthropy: An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(1), 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2006). Firm size, organizational visibility and corporate philanthropy: An empirical analysis. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(1), 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2008). Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(12), 1325–1343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., Pavelin, S., & Porter, L. A. (2009). Corporate charitable giving, multinational companies and countries of concern. Journal of Management Studies, 46(4), 575–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and product: Corporate associations and consumer product response. Journal of Marketing, 61, 68–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L., Gulas, C. S., & Gruca, T. S. (1999). Corporate giving behavior and decision-maker social consciousness. Journal of Business Ethics, 19(4), 375–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., Moore, G., & Metzger, M. (2002). Corporate philanthropy in the UK 1985–2000: Some empirical findings. Journal of Business Ethics, 39(1), 29–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., & Slack, R. (2006). Public visibility as a determinant of the rate of corporate charitable donations. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(1), 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caullin, S. (2002, April 7). Good thinking, bad practice. The observer.

  • Chaney, P. K., Faccio, M., & Parsley. D. (2009). The quality of accounting information in politically connected firms. Working paper. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=966379.

  • Chen, M. J. (2001). Inside Chinese business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J. C., Patten, D. M., & Roberts, R. W. (2008). Corporate charitable contributions: A corporate social performance or legitimacy strategy? Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 131–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. P. (1999). Who controls East Asian corporations? World Bank Working Paper, Washington, DC: World Bank.

  • Claessens, S., Feijen, E., & Laeven, L. (2008). Political connections and preferential access to finance: The role of campaign contributions. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(3), 554–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, B. S., & Wang, J. (1998). Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(14), 1595–1603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowton, C. J. (1987). Corporate philanthropy in the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(7), 553–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crampton, W., & Patten, D. (2008). Social responsiveness, profitability and catastrophic events: Evidence on the corporate philanthropic response to 9/11. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 863–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Agostino, R. B., Belanger, A. J., & D’Agostino, R. B, Jr. (1990). A suggestion for using powerful and informative tests of normality. American Statistician, 44, 316–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Déniz, M. D. L. C. D., & Suárez, M. K. C. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and family business in Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 56(1), 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deshpande, S. P. (1997). Managers’ perception of proper ethical conduct: The effect of sex, age, and level of education. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 79–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y., Zhang, H., & Zhang, J. (2008). The financial and operating performance of Chinese family owned listed firms. Management International Review, 48(3), 297–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, X. (2012). Does religion matter to owner–manager agency costs? Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1569-y.

  • Du, X., Jian, W., Du, Y., Feng, W., & Zeng, Q. (2013). Religion, the nature of ultimate owner, and corporate philanthropic giving: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1804-1.

  • Dyer, W. G., & Whetten, D. A. (2006). Family firms and social responsibility: Preliminary evidence from the S&P 500. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 785–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faccio, M., Masulis, R. W., & McConnell, J. J. (2006). Political connections and corporate bailouts. Journal of Finance, 61(6), 2597–2635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, J. P. H., Wong, T. J., & Zhang, T. (2007). Politically connected CEOs, corporate governance, and post-IPO performance Of China’s newly partially privatized firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 84, 330–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Financial Times. (2011). BP in $7.8bn settlement of spill claims. Retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/1420778a-64e6-11e1-9aa1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2SowPNk31.

  • Financial Times. (2011). China issues $269m fine for oil spill. Retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2725c51c-906d-11e1-8adc-00144feab49a.html#ixzz2SOqzdDil.

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galaskiewicz, J. (1997). An urban grants economy revisited: Corporate charitable contributions in the twin cities, 1979–1981, 1987–1989. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 445–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, Y. (2009). Corporate social performance in China: Evidence from large companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(1), 23–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, Y., Chen, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Red scarf or blue scarf? An investigation of the philanthropic motive of family-owned firms. Management World (in Chinese), 28(8), 106–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, H., Ryan, C., Li, B., & Gao, W. (2013). Political connections, guanxi and adoption of CSR policies in the Chinese hotel industry: Is there a link? Tourism Management, 34, 231–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haley, U. C. V. (1991). Corporate contributions as managerial masques: Reframing corporate contributions as strategies to influence society. Journal of Management Studies, 28(5), 485–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, D., Rogovsky, N., & Dunfee, T. W. (2002). The next wave of corporate community involvement: Corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 44(2), 110–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heugens, P. P. M. A., Kaptein, R. M., & Van Osterhout, J. (2008). Contracts to communities: A processual model of organizational virtue. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 100–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., van Riel, C. B. M., & van den Bosch, F. A. J. (2004). Reputation management capabilities as decision rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 1349–1377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunton, J. E., Hoitash, R., & Thibodeau, J. C. (2011). The relationship between perceived tone at the top and earnings quality. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(4), 1190–1224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, F., Jiang, Z., Kim, K. A., & Zhang, M. (2013). Family firm risk-taking: Does religion matter? Working paper. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from http://www.lingnan.sysu.edu.cn/UploadFiles/xsbg/2013/6/201306141143193727.pdf.

  • Kao, J. (1993). The worldwide web of Chinese business. Harvard Business Review, 71(2), 24–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khwaja, A. I., & Mian, A. (2005). Do lenders favor politically connected firms? Rent provision in an emerging financial market. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(4), 1371–1411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimber, D., & Lipton, P. (2005). Corporate governance and business ethics in the Asia-Pacific region. Business and Society, 44(2), 178–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, D., & Ueng, J. (2010). Is philanthropy used by corporate wrongdoer to buy good will? Journal of Management and Governance, 14, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larcker, D. F., & Rusticus, T. O. (2010). On the use of instrumental variables in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49(3), 186–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, W., & Zhang, R. (2010). Corporate social responsibility, ownership structure, and political interference: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 631–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, L. W. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in China: Window dressing or structural change. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 28(1), 64–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, R. (2004, August 26). Survey confirms China’s reliance on private companies to fuel growth, Financial Times.

  • McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification. Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meznar, M., & Nigh, D. (1995). Buffer or bridge? Environmental and organizational determinants of public affairs in American firms. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 975–996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morck, R., & Yeung, B. (2004). Family control and the rent-seeking society. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 391–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller, A., & Whiteman, G. (2009). Exploring the geography of corporate philanthropic disaster response: A study of Fortune global 500 firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(4), 589–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Commission of Fraudulent Financial Reporting (NCFFR) (Treadway Commission). (1987). The Report on the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting.

  • Neiheisel, S. R. (1994). Corporate strategy and the politics of goodwill. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • NYTIMES. (2007). China overtakes U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/20/business/worldbusiness/20iht-emit.1.6227564.html.

  • OOSKA news. (2013). China Fines 88 Businesses for Groundwater Pollution. Retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://www.ooskanews.com/daily-water-briefing/china-fines-88-businesses-groundwater-pollution_27505.

  • Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does firm size confound the relationship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peloza, J. (2006). Using corporate social responsibility as insurance for financial performance. California Management Review, 48(2), 52–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, G., & Lanis, R. (2007). Determinants of the variability in corporate effective tax rates and tax reform: Evidence from Australia. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 26(6), 689–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saiia, D. H., Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2003). Philanthropy as strategy when corporate charity “begins at home”. Business and Society, 42(2), 169–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez, C. M. (2000). Motives for corporate philanthropy in El Salvador: Altruism and political legitimacy. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(4), 363–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, B., Morris, S. A., & Bartkus, B. R. (2003). Comparing big givers and small givers: Financial correlates of corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(3), 195–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, S. S., & Francia, R. S. (1972). An approximate analysis of variance test for normality. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 67, 215–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. M., Gedajlovic, E., & Erdener, C. (2003). The Chinese family firm as a multinational enterprise. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(2), 05–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52, 591–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman, M. P., & Fernando, C. S. (2008). Environmental risk management and the cost of capital. Strategic Management Journal, 29(6), 569–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, B., & Post, F. R. (1993). A moral basis for corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(10), 745–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A. (2004). Does competition destroy ethical behavior? (No. w10269). National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Smith, G., & Stodghill, R. (1994, March 21). Are good causes good marketing? Business Week.

  • Su, J., & He, J. (2010). Does giving lead to getting? Evidence from Chinese private enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(1), 73–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tateisi, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility leads to sustainable economic growth in China-observations from the leader of the CBCC dialogue mission on CSR in the People’s Republic of China. Retrieved August 5, 2013 from http://www.keidanren.or.jp/CBBCC/english/report/2004.

  • The World Bank (2012). Doing business 2012: Doing business in a more transparent world. Retrieved August 5, 2013 http://www.doingbusiness.org/Rankings?ajax=1&excel=1&regionID=0&tercile=0&incomeID=0.

  • Turban, D. B., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Firm reputation and applicant pool characteristics. Journal of Organization behavior, 24, 733–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Useem, M. (1988). Market and institutional factors in corporate contributions. California Management Review, 30(2), 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooij, B., & LO, C. W. H. (2010). Fragile convergence: Understanding variation in the enforcement of China’s industrial pollution law. Law & Policy, 32(1), 14–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidaver-Cohen, D., & Altman, B. W. (2000). Corporate citizenship in the new millennium: Foundation for an architecture of excellence. Business and Society Review, 105(1), 145–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, A. (2006). Role of law in environmental protection in China: Recent developments. The Vermont Journal of Environmental Law., 8, 195–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., & Coffey, B. S. (1992). Board composition and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(10), 771–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidenbaum, M. L. (1996). The bamboo network: How expatriate Chinese entrepreneurs are creating a new economic superpower in Asia. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D. F. (2007). Developing the concept of tax governance. London: KPMG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xinhua News. (2012). Bohai oil spills worth $264m. Retrieved November 15, 2013 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-06/25/c_131673629.htm.

  • YiCai. (2010). Two top managers were fined by 11.5 thousand Yuan and Zijin Ming Co. donated 50 million Yuan. Retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://www.iceo.com.cn/shangye/36/2010/1228/206150.shtml.

  • Yoon, Y., Gurhan-Ganli, Z., & Zhu, C. (2003). Drowing inferences about others on the basis of corporate association. Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 167–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, S. X., Liu, H. C., Tam, C. M., & Shao, Y. K. (2008). Cluster analysis for studying industrial sustainability: An empirical study in Shanghai. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(10), 1090–1097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, S. X., Xu, X. D., Yin, H. T., & Tam, C. M. (2012). Factors that drive Chinese listed companies in voluntary disclosure of environmental Information. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(3), 309–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, R., Zhu, J., Yue, H., & Zhu, C. (2010). Corporate philanthropic giving, advertising intensity, and industry competition level. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am especially grateful to the editor (Professor Laura Jane Spence) and two anonymous reviewers for their many insightful suggestions and constructive comments. I also appreciate constructive comments from Di Cai, Yingying Chang, Yingjie Du, Wentao Feng, Wei Jian, Shaojuan Lai, Feng Liu, Jun Lu, Hongmei Pei, Quan Zeng, and participants of my presentations at Xiamen University, Anhui University, Anhui University of Technology, Ocean University of China, Shandong University, and Shanghai University. Especially, I must acknowledge my great thanks to Professor Di Cai for his generous providing the survey data and Quan Zeng for his excellent research assistance for this study, respectively. I acknowledge financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (approval number: 71072053), the Key Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Science in Ministry of Education (approval number: 13JJD790027), the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (approval number: 20120121110007), and Xiamen University’s Prosperity Plan Project of Philosophy and Social Sciences (subproject for Center for Accounting Studies and School of Management).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Accounting Studies and Accounting Department, School of Management, Xiamen University, No. 422, Siming South Road, Xiamen, 361005, Fujian, China

    Xingqiang Du

Authors
  1. Xingqiang Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xingqiang Du.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 9.

Table 9 Variable definitions
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Du, X. Is Corporate Philanthropy Used as Environmental Misconduct Dressing? Evidence from Chinese Family-Owned Firms. J Bus Ethics 129, 341–361 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2163-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2163-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation