2015年，根據GRI資料庫，台灣遵循GRI標準的企業社會責任報告書數量來到世界之冠，重要原因之一為2014年金管會宣布強制特定上市櫃公司強制編制企業社會責任報告書。2011年~2014年間，台灣社會陸續發生嚴重的企業醜聞，食安問題與公安意外的爆發，帶起沸騰民怨，社會氛圍讓主管機關不得不祭出解方。強制編制報告書的條文裡，要求報告書需遵循GRI準則，在國際趨勢下，強制揭露已逐漸普遍，但許多證交所會依照GRI指標修改或縮減揭露要項，唯台灣是直接移植這項標準。
本研究目的在於回答當時證交所考量直接採用GRI的原因，解釋除接軌國際之外，社會氛圍與其他組織推廣、採用的影響。重視企業社會責任不會只是特定組織的倡議，而是社會現象的產物，由私部門的先行採用到公部門的強制揭露，將GRI準則提升至更高的層次，最後討論GRI準則透過公、私部門之間的移植驅動力。

In 2015, Taiwan published the most CSR reports by GRI standard in the world, surprised the Global Reporting Initiative. The reason why boost companies to compile CSR reports is that, September 2014, Taiwan Financial Supervisory Commission announced “Taiwan Stock Exchange Corporation Rules Governing the Preparation and Filing of Corporate Social Responsibility Reports by TWSE/ TPEx Listed Companies’’, requested four categories of the listed companies to prepare CSR reports. Around 2011~2014, continuous corporate scandals burst out resulted people trepidation and rage, and further expected the authorities could reform the management mechanism more vigorously. From the supervision perspective, mandatorily force the listed companies is mean to manage the most resource and influence of the society.
But most Stock Exchanges apply GRI standard by simplification and fusion, the only one case induced GRI framework directly without adjustment and transplant by a public channel, Taiwan Stock Exchange, there must be driving forces definitely. The purpose of this study is to explore the reason of critical decision making by TWSE and TPEx, and understand the phenomenon of non-financial information disclosing in Taiwan. On the whole, five major stakeholder affect position of the GRI standard, and by interaction and cooperation transplanted the framework in a private and finally a public way.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 8
2. Theoretical framework and empirical context 10
2.1 The Expanding Meaning of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 10
2.2 Corporate Social Disclosure 11
2.3 Mandatory Regulation of CSR 12
2.4 CSR Development Path in Taiwan 14
2.5 Private Governance and Rule Transplant 17
3. Research Method 20
3.1 Data Collection 20
3.1.1 Semi-structured interviews 20
3.1.2 Documental data 23
3.1.3 Participant observation 23
3.2 Data Analysis 24
4. Discussion 25
4.1 The familiarity of GRI G4 : request from markets 27
4.2 Pushing-forward by NGOs 29
4.3 Widely accepted by international 32
4.4 Corporate scandals and Rule making 33
5. Conclusion 36
References 38

References

[1] Asongu, J. J. (2007). Innovation as an argument for corporate social responsibility. Journal of business and Public Policy, 1(3), 1-21.

[2] Azgad-Tromer, S. (2016). The Virtuous Corporation: On Corporate Social Motivation and Law.

[3] Arevalo, J. A., & Aravind, D. Strategic Outcomes in Voluntary CSR: Reporting Economic and Reputational Benefits in Principles-Based Initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-17.

[4] Bolton, S. C., Kim, R. C. H., & O’Gorman, K. D. (2011). Corporate social responsibility as a dynamic internal organizational process: A case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(1), 61-74.

[5] Bolton, S. C., Kim, R. C. H., & O’Gorman, K. D. (2011). Corporate social responsibility as a dynamic internal organizational process: A case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(1), 61-74.

[6] Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-economic review, 10(1), 3-28.

[7] Berliner, D., & Prakash, A. (2012). From norms to programs: The United Nations Global Compact and global governance. Regulation & Governance, 6(2), 149-166.

[8] Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent.

[9] Chiu, T. K., & Wang, Y. H. (2015). Determinants of social disclosure quality in Taiwan: an application of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(2), 379-398.

[10] Chan, M. C., Watson, J., & Woodliff, D. (2014). Corporate governance quality and CSR disclosures. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(1), 59-73.

[11] Distelhorst, G., Locke, R. M., Pal, T., & Samel, H. (2015). Production goes global, compliance stays local: Private regulation in the global electronics industry. Regulation & Governance, 9(3), 224-242.

[12] Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14(4), 532-550.

[13] Ernst & Young, G. (2012). Six growing trends in corporate sustainability.

[14] Fernandez-Feijoo, B., Romero, S., & Ruiz, S. (2014). Effect of stakeholders’ pressure on transparency of sustainability reports within the GRI framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(1), 53-63.

[15] Fransen, L., & Conzelmann, T. (2015). Fragmented or cohesive transnational private regulation of sustainability standards? A comparative study. Regulation & Governance, 9(3), 259-275.

[16] Gjølberg, M. (2010). Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the “Nordic Model”. Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 203-229.

[17] Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2004). Overlapping public and private governance: Can forest certification fill the gaps in the global forest regime?. Global Environmental Politics, 4(2), 75-99.

[18] Hahn, R., & Lülfs, R. (2014). Legitimizing negative aspects in GRI-oriented sustainability reporting: A qualitative analysis of corporate disclosure strategies. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 401-420.

[19] Ip, P. K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and crony capitalism in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 79(1-2), 167-177.

[20] Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2016). The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting: evidence from four countries.

[21] KPMG, (2015). Currents of change: The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2015

[22] KPMG, (2016). Carrots & Sticks: Global trends in sustainability reporting regulation and policy

[23] Lin-Hi, N., & Müller, K. (2013). The CSR bottom line: Preventing corporate social irresponsibility. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1928-1936.

[24] Lin, L. W. (2009). Legal transplants through private contracting: codes of vendor conduct in global supply chains as an example. American Journal of Comparative Law, 57(3), 711-744.

[25] Lapan, S. D. (Ed.). (2003). Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences. Routledge.

[26] Meidinger, E. (2006). The administrative law of global private-public regulation: the case of forestry. European Journal of International Law, 17(1), 47-87.

[27] Mallin, C., Michelon, G., & Raggi, D. (2013). Monitoring intensity and stakeholders’ orientation: how does governance affect social and environmental disclosure?. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1), 29-43.

[28] Noronha, C., Tou, S., Cynthia, M. I., & Guan, J. J. (2013). Corporate social responsibility reporting in China: An overview and comparison with major trends. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20(1), 29-42.

[29] Nadvi, K., & Raj‐Reichert, G. (2015). Governing health and safety at lower tiers of the computer industry global value chain. Regulation & Governance, 9(3), 243-258.

[30] Pattberg, P. (2005). What role for private rule-making in global environmental governance? Analysing the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 5(2), 175-189.

[31] Pope, S., & Wæraas, A. (2016). CSR-washing is rare: A conceptual framework, literature review, and critique. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(1), 173-193.

[32] Sethi, S. P., Martell, T. F., & Demir, M. (2015). Enhancing the role and effectiveness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports: The missing element of content verification and integrity assurance. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-24.

[33] Schooley, D. K., & English, D. M. (2015). SASB: A pathway to sustainability reporting in the United States. The CPA Journal.

[34] Sarfaty, G. A. (2011). Regulating through numbers: A case study of corporate sustainability reporting.

[35] Toffel, M. W., Short, J. L., & Ouellet, M. (2015). Codes in context: How states, markets, and civil society shape adherence to global labor standards. Regulation & Governance, 9(3), 205-223.

[36] Tsai, C. H., Wu, Y. N. (2016). What Conflict Minerals Rules Tell Us about the Legal Transplantation of Corporate Social Responsibility Standards without the State: From the United Nations to the United States to Taiwan.

[37] Vigneau, L., Humphreys, M., & Moon, J. (2015). How do firms comply with international sustainability standards? Processes and consequences of adopting the global reporting initiative. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 469-486.

[38] Wright, C., & Rwabizambuga, A. (2006). Institutional pressures, corporate reputation, and voluntary codes of conduct: An examination of the equator principles. Business and Society Review, 111(1), 89-117.

[39] Williams, Cynthia A., "Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance" (2016). Articles & Book Chapters. 1784.

[40] Wang, H., Tong, L., Takeuchi, R., & George, G. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility: An Overview and New Research Directions Thematic Issue on Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 534-544.

[41] Yeh, S. L., Chen, Y. S., Kao, Y. H., & Wu, S. S. (2014). Obstacle factors of corporate social responsibility implementation: Empirical evidence from listed companies in Taiwan. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 28, 313-326.

[42] Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods. Applied social research methods series, 5. Biography, Sage Publications, London.

[43] 吳妍儂. (2015). 供應鍊中的跨國法規範移植── 以衝突礦產揭露規範對我國產業影響為例. 清華大學科技法律研究所學位論文, 1-120.

[44] 簡又新. (2015)，企業永續-綠色經濟之舵，臺北：台灣永續能源研究基金會

[45] 朱竹元. (2016)，企業社會責任與永續發展策略：企業的全球通行證，資誠教育基金會

[46] 台灣證券交易所公司治理中心. (2016)，台灣公司治理

[47] 張明輝. (2015)，公司治理策略地圖: 提升公司治理評鑑之必備步驟
，資誠教育基金會