近年來，氣候變遷為全球關注的重要ESG 議題。美國永續、責任、影響力投資趨勢報告中指出( USSIF 2016 )，許多其他利益相關人和機構投資者會開始要求企業揭露相關且重要的ESG 資訊，以分析ESG 因素給企業未來帶來的機會與風險，這相關且重要之ESG 資訊概念即為重大性(Material)。而金融監督管理委員會於2020 年8 月25 日發布「公司治理3.0－永續發展藍圖」，以「強化董事會職能，提升企業永續價值」等五大主題為推動重點，時至2022 年3 月金管會為因應氣候變遷衝擊及回應國際間對永續議題關注，發布上市(櫃)公司永續發展路徑圖，配合政府減碳計畫遵循減碳目標以利企業永續發展。本研究主要目的在探討企業董事會性別多元化結構對於負面ESG 之影響，研究樣本為2015-2020 年間，使用台灣上市(櫃)公司，共1,764 家公司，有效樣本數共10,168 筆。迴歸分析結果顯示，董事會性別多元化與負面環境、社會責任分數之間的關聯呈負向影響，顯示出董事會性別多化有助於提升企業ESG 表現，降低負面ESG 的發生。

Climate change has become a vital ESG issue of global concern in recent years. According to the US SIF 2016 Trends Report, many other stakeholder organizations are beginning to require companies to disclose relevant and essential ESG information to evaluate the opportunities and risks that ESG factors present to companies in the future, which relevant and crucial concept of ESG information is called materiality. The Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) released the "Corporate Governance 3.0 - Blueprint for Sustainable Development", which focuses on five major themes, including "Strengthening Board Functions and Enhancing Corporate Sustainable Value," on August 25, 2020.
In response to the impact of climate change and international concern over sustainability issues in March 2022, the FSC released a sustainable development pathway for listed companies, in line with the government's carbon reduction plan to follow carbon reduction targets for sustainable corporate development. The primary purpose of this study is to discuss the impact of the gender diversity structure of corporate boards on ESG. The research sample is from 2015 to 2020, using Taiwan listed (cabinet) companies, a total of 1,764 companies, and 10,168 valid samples.
The regression analysis results show that the correlation between hostile environment, social responsibility scores, and gender diversity of the board of
directors has a negative impact, showing that the gender diversity of the board of directors can help enhance the ESG performance of enterprises and reduce the occurrence of negative ESG.

1. 洪雪卿、陳薇如及傅雁鈴，「影響企業社會責任績效之重要因素為何？」，商管科技季刊，第4 期，2013
2. 戚靜玟、詹秋碧、張瑞晃及李馨蘋，「家族持股與董事會結構對企業社會責任之影響」，東吳經濟商學學報，第97 期，2018
3. 廖秀梅、李建然及吳祥華，「董事會結構特性與公司績效關係之研究
－兼論台灣家族企業因素的影響」，東吳經濟商學學報，第54 期，2016
4. 陳振遠、王健聰及洪世偉，「公司治理對於企業社會責任、公司價值之影響」，中山管理評論，25 卷 1 期，pp.135-176，2017
5. 邱慈觀及黃啟瑞，「治理結構對企業社會責任的影響」，中山管理評論，27 卷 3期，pp.511-550，2019
6. 陳育成、許峰睿及黃聖雯，「企業社會責任與經營績效之關聯性研究」，評價學報，6 期，2013
7. 張元及王筱瑩，「董事會及高階管理階層的性別多樣性與企業社會責任的關聯」，亞太經濟管理評論，20 卷 1 期， 2016
8. 蔡明宏、 翁培師、王子綾及張航，「家族企業與集團企業中董事會性別組成對公司的影響：績效、研發投資以及現金持有」，管理學報 ， 37 卷1 期，2020
9. 王婉茹，「 公司治理、企業社會責任對信用評等之影響－以台灣上市櫃公司為例」，崇越論文大賞， 2015
10.高惠松及鄭品卉，「集團企業特性、公司治理與社會責任績效」，中華管理評論國際學報， 15 卷3 期，2012
11.梁瑋芸，「董事會性別多樣化與公司績效:投資者偏見的影響」，國立中央大學，2019
12.宋易儒，「家族企業董事會結構與社責任之關聯性」，國立中央大學，2020
13.陳怡婷，「董事會結構、股權結構與環境污染資訊揭露關聯性之研究」，淡江大學，2008
14.陳可欣，「環境資訊揭露與利害關係人關聯性之研究」，淡江大學，2005
15. 陳有序，「公司治理評鑑結果、董事會特性與公司績效關聯性之探討」，國立政治大學，2019
16. 黃郁文，「負面企業社會責任事件與公司價值之關係：考量機構投資人之影響效果」，東吳大學，2015
17.胡庭嘉，「公司治理 3.0 之獨立董事與公司營運績效的關聯性-以 ESG 概念股為樣本」，國立成功大學，2021

18. Dawei Jin,Liuling Liu,Jun Ma,Haizhi Wang,“ How Have Green Companies Fared in Transactions with Banks? ”A Stakeholder-Management Perspective, Journal of APPLIED CORPORATE FINANCE,30(4),pp.89-107 (2018)
19. Stuart L. Gillan , Andrew Koch , Laura T. Starks ,“ Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance ”, Journal of Corporate
Finance,66,2015
20. John R.Nofsinger,JohanSulaeman,AbhishekVarma,“ Institutional investors and corporate social responsibility ”,58, pp.700-725 (2019)
21. Tao Chen , Hui Dong b , Chen Lin, “ Institutional shareholders and corporate social responsibility ”, Journal of Financial Economics, 135, pp.483-504 (2020)
22. Dominic Hu Khie Yeen and Azlan Ali, “ Women Directors and Cost of Debt ”, Borneo Journal of Social Science and Humanities,(2020)
23. Juan Manuel García Lara, Beatriz Garcia Osma, Araceli Mora, Mariano Scapin, “ The monitoring role of female directors over accounting quality ”, Journal of Corporate Finance,45,(2017)
24. Belal Ghaleb, Sumaia Qaderi, Ahmad Almashaqbeh,Ameen Qasem, “ Corporate social responsibility ”, board gender diversity and real earnings management: The case of Jordan, Cogent Business & Management,8(1),2021
25. Leonardo Becchetti , Rocco Ciciretti , Iftekhar Hasan , Nada Kobeissi,“ Corporate social responsibility and shareholder's value ”, Journal of Business Research,65,
pp.1628-1635 (2012)
26. Roland Benabou, Jean Tirole, “ Individual and Corporate Social Responsibility ”, Economica,77(305),(2010)
27. Peter Iliev, Lukas Roth,“ Do Directors Drive Corporate Sustainability? ”, SSRN Electronic Journal,(2020)
28. HabibaAl-Shaera,MahbubZamanb, “ BOARD GENDER DIVERSITY AND SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING QUALITY ”, Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics,12(3), pp.210-222 (2016)
29. Amama Shaukat, Joy Qiu, Grzegorz Trojanowski,“ Board Attributes, Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy,and Corporate Environmental and Social Performance ”, Journal of Business Ethics,135(3),(2015)
30. Guoli Chen, Craig Crossland, Sterling Huang,“ Female Board Representation and Corporate Acquisition Intensity ”, Strategic Management Journal,37(2),(2014)
31. Peter Iliev, Lukas Roth,“ Directors And Corporate Sustainability ”,SSRN,(2021)
32. Abagail Mcwilliams, Donald S. Siegel, Patrick Wright, “ Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications “, Journal of Management Studies,43(1), pp. 1-18,(2006)
33. Leonardo Becchetti, Rocco Ciciretti ,Iftekhar Hasan, “Corporate social responsibility and shareholder's value: an empirical analysis ”, Research Papers in Economics,(2009)
34. Dan R. Dalton, Catherine M. Daily, Jonathan L. Johnson , Alan E. Ellstrand., “ NUMBER OF DIRECTORS AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS ”, The Academy of Management Journal,42(6), pp.674-686,(1999)
35. Jean B. McGuire,Alison Sundgren ,“ Thomas Schneeweis, Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance “, The Academy of Management Journal,31(4), pp. 854-872,(1988)
36. Alison Mackey, Tyson B. Mackey and Jay B. Barney,“ Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performance: Investor Preferences and Corporate Strategies ” , The Academy of Management Review,32(3),pp. 817-835,(2007)
37. Amir Barnea,Amir Rubin,“ Corporate Social Responsibility as a Conflict Between Shareholders ”, Journal of Business Ethics,97(1), pp. 71-86,(2010)
38. Fernando Lefort, Francisco Urzúa, “ Board independence, firm performance and ownership concentration: Evidence from Chile ”, Journal of Business Research, 61(6), pp. 615-622,(2008)
39. J. Emil Morhardt, “ Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting on the Internet, Business Strategy and the Environment ”, 19(7), pp. 436 – 452,(2009)
40. Mohammad HassanShakil,“ Environmental, social and governance performance and financial risk: Moderating role of ESG controversies and board gender diversity ”,Resources Policy,72,(2021)
41. Isaiah Oino,Jonathan Liu,“ Do Female Board Members Influence Corporate Social Responsibility Performance? ”, SAGE journal,(2022)
42. Richard A. Bernardi,Veronica H. Threadgill,“ Women Directors and Corporate Social Responsibility ”, 15(2), pp. 15-21, (2010)
43. Omar Al Farooque,Khaled M. Dahawy,Nermeen F. Shehata,Mark T. Soliman,“ESG Disclosure, Board Diversity and Ownership: Did the Revolution Make a Difference in Egypt? ”, Corporate Ownership & Control, 19(2), pp.67–80, (2022)
44. AlexanderDyck,Karl V.Lins,LukasRoth,Hannes F.Wagnerd,“ Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence”, Journal of Financial Economics,131(3), pp.693-714,(2019)
45. Sabina Nielsen, Morten Huse, “The Contribution of Women on Boards of Directors: Going beyond the Surface”, Corporate Governance: An International Review,18(2),pp.136–148,(2010)