China Policy Journal Volume 1, Number 1, Fall 2018 | Page 128

Environmental Performance Rating and Disclosure: An Empirical Investigation in Jiangsu, China
significant, the overall significance level
was somewhat lower than for pollution
intensities. Across both tables, the
red-rated firms exhibited stronger responses
than the black-rated firms.
Table 5. Estimation Results for Pollution Intensity Increases: Rated Versus Unrated Firms
Waste
Water
Water Pollution
Air Pollution
TSS COD SO 2
Gas
Waste
Dust and
Smoke
PRD −−41.62 −15.47** −18.23 −0.05 −11.06 −0.02
(29.35) (7.82) (21.85) (0.06) (12.96) (0.03)
Lagged pollution −0.56* −0.94*** −1.01*** −1.00*** −0.75*** −0.80***
intensity (0.31) (0.15) (0.17) 0.00 (0.27) (0.16)
City dummies (base = Wuxi)
Huanan −277.03*** −11.29*** −25.94 −0.02 −6.27* 0.03***
(26.99) (3.79) (23.11) (0.01) (3.24) (0.01)
Yangzhou −259.84*** −6.37 −24.28 −0.09*** −14.56* −0.02***
(24.50) (8.66) (42.11) (0.02) (7.48) (0.01)
Zhengjiang −287.32*** 0.07 −6.66 −0.07*** −11.41* 0.00
Firm size (base = small)
(36.43) (5.31) (37.96) (0.01) (6.51) (0.01)
Large 16.31** −14.18 −29.13 −0.07*** −6.53*** −0.02
(7.20) (10.29) (37.82) (0.02) (1.50) (0.02)
Medium 30.02 −14.73** −22.42 −0.02 −0.01 −0.01
Ownership structure (base = private)
(30.30) (6.01) (25.97) (0.03) (6.48) (0.02)
State-owned −114.86** 14.66* 23.14 (0.03) (9.15) (0.02)
(52.68) (8.27) (19.18) (0.09) (6.44) (0.05)
Collectively −113.49* 12.91*** 1.66 −0.06 −16.09** −0.02
owned (61.29) (3.53) (19.67) (0.08) (6.73) (0.05)
HK, Macao, and −169.5 46.81*** −10.71 −0.04 −13.75* −0.04
Taiwan investor (158.32) (17.24) (19.96) (0.08) (7.60) (0.04)
Foreign investor −17.23 9.4 −2.85 −0.06 −21.77*** 0.01
(46.86) (12.93) (5.59) (0.07) (8.24) (0.05)
Companies with −113.59* 23.82* 51.00 (0.06) −17.30*** (0.03)
limited shares (62.37) (13.86) (45.32) (0.07) (6.11) (0.04)
Others −110.31*** 7.27 2.67 (0.08) −19.37** (0.04)
(33.46) (7.43) (7.98) (0.07) (9.22) (0.04)
125