Nature of Ultimate Property, Degree of Marketization and Corporate Social Responsibility of Cultural Enterprises
DOI: 10.23977/acccm.2022.040208 | Downloads: 4 | Views: 145
Chunyan Shao 1
1 School of Accountancy, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan, Shandong, China
Corresponding AuthorChunyan Shao
This paper studies the influence of the degree of marketization in the region on the fulfillment of social responsibility of cultural enterprises and the effect of ultimate property right on the relationship between marketization degree and social responsibility of cultural enterprises through empirical methods. The research shows that compared with the state-owned cultural enterprises, the social responsibility implementation level of private cultural enterprises is higher; the higher the degree of marketization in the area where cultural enterprises are located, the higher the level of corporate social responsibility fulfillment; compared with the state-owned cultural enterprises, the degree of marketization has a more significant role in promoting the social responsibility implementation of private cultural enterprises. Therefore, we should speed up the process of marketization in our country and guide cultural enterprises to improve their performance level of social responsibility according to the nature of ultimate property rights.
KEYWORDSNature of ultimate property, Degree of marketization, Cultural enterprises, Corporate social responsibility
CITE THIS PAPER
Chunyan Shao, Nature of Ultimate Property, Degree of Marketization and Corporate Social Responsibility of Cultural Enterprises. Accounting and Corporate Management (2022) Vol. 4: 58-64. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/acccm.2022.040208.
 Oliver Sheldon, The Philosophy of Management, London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons Ltd., 1924.
 Archie B. Carroll, A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance, The Academy of Management Review, Oct., 1979. Vol.4, No.4, pp.497-505.
 Dodd EM. For whom are corporate managers trustees. Harvard Law Rev.1932, 45: 1145-1163.
 Yu Peng, Hongqiang Chen. Internal Control, Marketization Process and Corporate Social Responsibility [J]. Modern Finance and Economics (Journal of Tianjin University of Finance and Economics), 2015, 35 (06): 43-54.
 Zhongzhi Yang, Yinhu Qiao. Research on Relation among Competitive Attribute of Industry, Corporate Characteristics and Social Responsibility——Based on the Empirical Analysis of Listed Companies [J]. Scientific Research Management, 2013, 34(3): 58-67.
 Welford R. Corporate social responsibility in Europe and Asia: Critical elements and best practice [J]. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2004 (13): 31.
 Zhibin Li. Internal Control, the Nature of Actual Controller and Social Responsibility Performance—— Empirical Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies [J]. Economic Survey, 2014, 31(05): 109-114.
 Yu Peng, Kaifang Zheng, Xiaobo Wei. Marketization Process, Ultimate Controller and Environmental Information Disclosure [J]. Modern Finance and Economics (Journal of Tianjin University of Finance and Economics), 2014, 34 (06): 78-88.
 Kaifang Zheng. Marketization process, ultimate controller and environmental information disclosure [D]. Southwest University, 2014.
 Fengpeng Yi, Erming Xu. Political Correlation of Executives and Corporate Social Responsibility——An Empirical Analysis Based on Chinese Listed Companies [J]. Economics and Management Research, 2014(05): 5-13.
 Deng Zhou. Government Control, Marketization Process and Corporate Social Responsibility [D]. Central South University, 2011.
 Zhi Chen, Guangcheng Xu. Research on the Influencing Factors of Corporate Social Responsibility in China——An Empirical Analysis Based on the Perspective of Corporate Governance [J]. Soft Science, 2011, 25(04): 106-111+116.
 Xiumei Cui, Jing Liu. Marketization Process, the Nature of Ultimate Controller and Corporate Social Responsibility——Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies in Shanghai Stock Exchange [J]. Soft Science, 2009, 22(01): 30-38.
 Gelb D S, Strawser J A. Corporate social responsibility and financial disclosures: An alternative explanation for increased disclosure [J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2001, 33(1): 1-13.