Skip to main content
Log in

Corporate Philanthropic Disaster Response and Ownership Type: Evidence from Chinese Firms’ Response to the Sichuan Earthquake

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

Abstract

This article examines whether the charitable giving amount and likelihood of firm response to catastrophic events relate to firms’ ownership type using a unique dataset of listed firms in China, where state ownership is still prevalent. Based on the data of Chinese firms’ response to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, we find that the extent of corporate contributions for state-owned firms following this disaster is less than that for private firms. State-owned firms are also less likely to respond in␣this disaster compared to private firms. The results also␣reveal that firm size, profitability, geography, cash resource available, and leverage affect firms’ philanthropic disaster response behavior in China.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, M., & Hardwick, P. (1998). An Analysis of Corporate Donations: United Kingdom Evidence. Journal of Management Studies, 35(5), 641–654. doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amato, L., & Amato, C. (2007). The Effects of Firm Size and Industry on Corporate Giving. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(3), 229–241. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9167-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., Estrin, S., & Maw, J. (2005). Why Did Transition Economies Choose Mass Privatization? Journal of the European Economic Association, 3(2/3), 567–575.

    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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00480.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2005). Profit Maximisation vs Agency: An Analysis of Charitable Giving by UK Firms. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29(4), 517–534. doi:10.1093/cje/bei036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2006). ‹Firm Size, Organizational Visibility and Corporate Philanthropy: An Empirical Analysis’, Business Ethics. European Review Chichester, England, 15(1), 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Pavelin, S. (2006). ‹Is Philanthropy Strategic? An Analysis of the Management of Charitable Giving in Large UK Companies’, Business Ethics European Review Chichester, England, 15(3), 234–245.

    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. doi:10.1023/A:1016371731732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295. doi:10.1177/000765039903800303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L.H.P. (2000). The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1-2), 81–112. doi:10.1016/S0304-405X(00)00067-2.

    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. doi:10.1023/A:1005748230228.

    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. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9553-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, S.M., & McGuckin, R.H. (2008). The Effects of Federalism on Productivity in Chinese Firms. Management and Organization Review, 4(1), 39–61. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2007.00091.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emanuel, K.: 2005, ‹Increasing Destructiveness of Tropical Cyclones Over the Past 30 Years’, Nature. doi:10.1038/nature03906. Accessed 5 Jan 2005

  • Estrin, S., & Perotin, V. (1991). Does Ownership Always Matter? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 9(1), 55–72. doi:10.1016/0167-7187(91)90005-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faccio, M., & Lang, L.H.P. (2002). The Ultimate Ownership of Western European corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 65(3), 365–395. doi:10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00146-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frye, T., & Shleifer, A. (1997). The Invisible Hand and the Grabbing Hand. The American Economic Review, 87(2), 354–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galaskiewicz, J. (1997). An Urban Grants Economy Revisited: Corporate Charitable Contributions in the Twin Cities, 1979-81, 1987-89. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 445–471. doi:10.2307/2393734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ge, L., & Thomas, S. (2008). A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Deliberative Reasoning of Canadian and Chinese Accounting Students. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 189–211. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9571-5.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J.: 2008, ‹Toll Rises in China Quake’, New York Times, May 26

  • Megginson, W.L., & Netter, J.M. (2001). From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization. Journal of Economic Literature, 39(2), 321–389.

    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. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9710-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does Firm Size Comfound the Relationship between Corporate Social Performance and Firm Financial Performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 167–180. doi:10.1023/A:1017516826427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten, D. (2008). Does the Market Value Corporate Philanthropy? Evidence from the Response to the 2004 Tsunami Relief Effort. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(3), 599–607. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9534-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saiia, D.H. (2002). Philanthropy and Corporate Citizenship: Strategic Philanthropy is Good Corporate Citizenship. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 1(2), 57–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saiia, D.H., Carroll, A.B., & Buchholtz, A.K. (2003). Philanthropy as Strategy When Corporate Charity “Begins at Home”. Business & Society, 42(2), 169–201. doi:10.1177/0007650303042002002.

    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. doi:10.1023/A:1006169005234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens, B., & Dam, L. (2007). Cultural Values and International Differences in Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(3), 273–284. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9252-9.

    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. doi:10.1023/A:1024199411807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, W., Fukukawa, K., & Lee, G. (2007). Values and the Perceived Importance of Ethics and Social Responsibility: The US versus China. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(3), 265–284. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9110-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R.1998, The Grabbing Hand: Government Pathologies and Their Cures (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. (1994). The New Corporate Philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 72(3), 105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J. (2002). Impact of Ownership Type on Environment-Strategy Linkage and Performance: Evidence from a Transitional Economy. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3), 333–354. doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian, L., & Estrin, S. (2008). Retained State Shareholding in Chinese PLCs: Does Government Ownership Always Reduce Corporate Value? Journal of Comparative Economics, 36(1), 74–89. doi:10.1016/j.jce.2007.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Useem, M. (1988). Market and Institutional Factors in Corporate Contributions. California Management Review, 30(2), 77–88.

    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. doi:10.1111/0045-3609.00069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., & Coffey, B.S. (1992). Board Composition and Corporate Philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(10), 771–778. doi:10.1007/BF00872309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, P., Holland, G., Curry, J., & Chang, H.R. (2005). Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity in a Warming Environment. Science, 309, 1844–1846. doi:10.1126/science.1116448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitcomb, L.L., Erdener, C.B., & Li, C. (1998). Business Ethical Values in China and the US. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(8), 839–852. doi:10.1023/A:1005793424492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ran Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, R., Rezaee, Z. & Zhu, J. Corporate Philanthropic Disaster Response and Ownership Type: Evidence from Chinese Firms’ Response to the Sichuan Earthquake. J Bus Ethics 91, 51–63 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0067-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0067-3

Keywords

Navigation