Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Opening the “black box” between corporate social responsibility and

financial performance: From a critical review on moderators and mediators
to an integrated framework
Meng Ye a, Hongdi Wang b, *, Weisheng Lu c
a
School of Economics and Management, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610031, PR China
b
School of Public Administration, Zhejiang University of Finance &Economics, Hangzhou, 310018, PR China
c
Department of Real Estate and Construction, Faculty of Architecture, Knowles Building, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling editor; Prof. Jiri Jaromir Klemeš The link between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate financial performance (CFP) has been
debated for several decades, resulting in a research shift from the CSR-CFP relationship to the mechanism of how
Keywords: to turn CSR into CFP. Nevertheless, such mechanism often appears as a “black box”, we only know that some
Corporate social responsibility moderators and mediators are at play in it. This research presented in the paper provides an in-depth review of
Corporate financial performance
the moderators and mediators in empirical research on the CSR-CFP link. We collected a total of 270 journal
CSR-CFP link
articles on the CSR-CFP link, 77 of which engaged moderators and mediators. Their moderating and mediating
Moderator
Mediator effects as well as the applied theories, are summarized and elaborated. Then, an integrated framework to bridge
CSR and CFP by moderators and mediators is developed with a view to develop robust strategies to translate CSR
programmes to the true value. It is found from the research that a mediator could be a process or outcome in­
dicator to translate CSR into CFP, and a moderator could play a role from both the external and internal sides of a
firm. The suitable indicators underpinning the moderating effects can be categorized at the macro-, meso-, or
micro- level, while those underpinning mediating effects are mainly at the meso level. This research contributes
theoretically to the mechanical analysis of utilizing CSR to ensure firms’ long-term development, and it sheds
lights on the practical implications of how to develop strategic CSR programmes to fulfil a firm’s commitment to
social, economic, and environmental sustainability.

1. Introduction hereafter. More recently, environmental, social and governance (ESG)

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has gained great momentum in
academia and industries over the past decades. After dozens of CSR
definitions were discussed by Dahlsrud (2008), where some common
themes have been widely recognized by scholars, such as emphasizing
stakeholder management (Freudenreich et al., 2020) and meeting the
need for social, economic, and environmental sustainability in line with
United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Mio et al.,
2020), although there are some differences in emphasis (Murray and
Dainty, 2008). Another concept is corporate social performance (CSP),
which is considered as the outcome of CSR. However, CSR usually refers
to the principles and responsibilities behind socially responsible actions,
activities, or strategies of the firms (Wang et al., 2016a,b). For
simplicity, the two terms CSR and CSP are used interchangeably
has been widely used (ESG indices in particular) to narrow down CSR to
the three specific domains (e.g. Hasan et al., 2018; Garcia and Orsato,
2020). CSR and the relevant concepts can be understood as “doing good”
for firms.
“Whether ‘doing good’ can be transferred to ‘doing well’” has
become one of the dominant themes of CSR and sustainability domains.
The question is a figurative way to represent the nexus between CSR and
its material implications for firms, such as corporate financial perfor­
mance (CFP), profitability (Ekatah et al., 2011; Khan et al., 2017), and
competitiveness (Battaglia et al., 2014; Du et al., 2011; Marin et al.,
2012), or the like. We use CFP to represent the financial material im­
plications of CSR. Studies that explore this relationship have reported
mixed results: mostly positive (e.g. Simpson and Kohers, 2002; Van Der
Laan et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2016a,b), but with some negative (e.g.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mengye@swjtu.edu.cn (M. Ye), hdwang@zufe.edu.cn (H. Wang), wilsonlu@hku.hk (W. Lu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127919
Received 29 September 2020; Received in revised form 24 May 2021; Accepted 11 June 2021
Available online 16 June 2021
0959-6526/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Ye et al.
Soana, 2011; Tuppura et al., 2016), curvilinear (e.g. Barnett and Salo­
mon, 2012), virtuous cycle nexus (e.g. Rivera et al., 2017; Xiong et al.,
2016) or paradoxical nexuses reported (e.g. Lu et al., 2018).
Being dissatisfied with the vaguely-stated possibilities of direct CSR-
CFP links, researchers started probing into what is perceived as the
“black box” containing CSR and CFP by exploring the mediators and
moderators. They critiqued that merely testing the direct CSR-CFP link
will obscure many influential factors making the final findings unreli­
able (Park, 2017; Saeidi et al., 2015; Wang and Sarkis, 2017). Instead, by
examining the mediators and moderators, more nuanced insights
beyond the direct CSR-CFP relationship can be derived. An increasing
number of empirical studies now report mediators and moderators in the
CSR-CFP link, as it makes more sense to shift the focus from whether to
how and when “doing good” can be transferred to “doing well”. However,
the existing research provides analyses of the mechanism of turning CSR
to CFP mainly through one or two intermediate variables, which could
only cast one piece of the whole “black box”. It calls for an integrated
analysis framework to systematically examine the dynamics of utilizing
CSR towards better CFP. Moreover, there lacks an in-depth review
reflecting the increasing knowledge, articulating the underlying logics
and outlining future research avenues regarding mediators and moder­
ators in the CSR-CFP link, despite one review paper provided by Gre­
watsch and Kleindienst (2017).
The aim of the research is thus to conduct a systematic review of the
mediators- how CSR can be transferred to CFP and moderators- when CSR
can be transferred to CFP in prevailing empirical studies on the CSR-CFP
links. We focus on mediators and moderators, the contingencies
affecting the CSR-CFP relationships, extending the previous reviews of
meta-analyzing empirical studies on the direct CSR-CFP relationships (e.
g. Busch and Friede, 2018; Orlitzky et al., 2003) and beyond the liter­
ature review focusing mainly on the measurements of variables
appeared in the relationships (Wang et al., 2016a,b). We also distinguish
our review from Grewatsch and Kleindienst’s (2017) work by examining
mediators and moderators in empirical studies with abundant empirical
data and evidence and providing clear logics for exploring mediating
and moderating effects. Furthermore, the increasing number of empir­
ical studies on indicators to mediate and moderate CSR-CFP relation­
ships in recent years also call for a refreshed review.
The paper is structured as follows. Subsequent to this introductory
section is a method part in Section 2, explaining how articles were
collected as well as the review protocols. Sections 3 and 4 review me­
diators and moderators, respectively, where the mediating and moder­
ating effects as well as the applied theories are summarized and
explained. Based on the review, Section 5 presents a developed inte­
grated framework that elaborates the logics underlying the mediating
and moderating effects. We conclude the paper by reiterating the find­
ings, presenting contributions of this study and suggestions for further
studies.
2. Method
2.1. Literature search and filtering
Relevant studies on the CSR-CFP relationship published after the
year 2000 were selected from databases ISI Web of Knowledge and
Scopus by searching keywords. Keywords included both keywords for
CSR, represented by corporate social respons* (CSR), social respons* (SR),
corporate social performance (CSP), or environmental, social and gover­
nance (ESG), as well as keywords for CFP, represented by competi*,
financial performance (FP), corporate financial performance (CFP), or
profit*. Keywords combining CSR and CFP, namely, social and financial,
CSR-CFP, CSP-CFP, CSR-FP, CSP-FP and doing good and doing well were
exploited to find more relevant studies. A total of 304 journal articles
published between 2000 and 2020 (August) were retrieved from the
databases. Titles and abstracts were then manually scanned. Articles
without emphasizing the relationship between CSR and CFP were
2
Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919
removed from the list. The resulting list of 197 relevant journal articles
was established.
Furthermore, the same searching criteria were applied for specific
CSR/sustainability-related journals to ensure as much as the relevant
articles were collected. The CSR/sustainability-related journals included
Business & Society, Business and Society Review, Business Ethics: A Euro­
pean Review, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business Strategy and the Environ­
ment, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,
Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Journal of Management, Journal of Management Studies, Social
Responsibility Journal, and Strategic Management Journal. A total of 133
journal articles published between 2000 and 2020 were added to the
previous resulting list.
By eliminating duplicated ones, there were 270 relevant journal ar­
ticles regarding the relationship between CSR and CFP. Preliminary
analyses were conducted to determine descriptive information for each
paper, comprising types of paper (review, theoretical, empirical), re­
sults, methods applied, contexts (country and industry), control vari­
ables, and most importantly, mediators and moderators. These
descriptive results helped in grouping the articles for a detailed analysis.
The collected articles are summarized in Table 1. Among the 270 rele­
vant journal articles, 77 articles explore the indirect CSR-CFP relation­
ship by adopting mediators or moderators, among which 63 articles are
empirical studies. Shown in Fig. 1, empirical studies on the CSR-CFP link
gradually increased after 2010, mainly due to the increasing awareness
of CSR and sustainability evidenced by the increasing number of CSR or
sustainability reports from industries, and availability of CSR data­
bases.1 Fig. 1 also illustrates the increasing number of empirical studies
on the indirect CSR-CFP relationship involving mediators and modera­
tors each year since 2012.
2.2. Coding
Table 2 provides a summary of the conditional, methodical, and
explanatory differences of mediators and moderators. Based on which,
we extracted the information for each empirical study from the collected
63 empirical ones, including theoretical foundation, CSR variable, CFP
variable, control variable, mediator, moderator, the statistical model
adopted, sample size, statistical results, and the findings. The informa­
tion was coded independently by the authors, and then converged and
validated. Eventually, it was documented in an Excel file for further
analysis.
2.3. Reviewing and analysis
The articles were manually reviewed by the authors to investigate
the meditating and moderating effects and theoretical underpinnings of
these effects, respectively. In particular, the key concern in this process
Table 1
Summary of the collected articles.
Type of Number of articles Number of articles exploring moderators
articles collected and mediators for CSR-CFP link
Empirical 239 63
Review/ 31 14
theoretical
Total 270 77
1
For example, in 2000, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) launched its
guidelines, providing the first global framework for disclosure by firms of
sustainability or CSR reports. Bloomberg has made available its environmental,
social and governance (ESG) data for firms since 2007. Hexun, a Chinese
financial website, has made its CSR database available since 2010.
M. Ye et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919

Fig. 1. Number of empirical studies on CSR-CFP relationship and indirect CSR-CFP relationship.

Table 2
Summary of differences between the moderator and mediator.
Items Mediator Moderator

Condition 1. Significant correlation between X and Y. 1. Significant correlation between X and Y.

2. Significant correlation between M and X (or Y) 3. Insignificant correlation between M and X.
Statistical model

Validation Bootstrap, ANOVA interaction test,

Sobel method Hierarchical regression analysis,
Group regression analysis
Explanation Mediating effect Moderating effect

is when and why a moderator was adopted instead of a mediator, or vice
versa. Based on the reviewing process and the coded information in the
Excel file, the selection of mediators and moderators, the statistical re­
sults of their effects are compared and summarized. Furthermore, an
integrated framework of systematically bridging CSR and CFP by me­
diators and moderators was established and validated.
3. Mediators: how doing good can be transferred to doing well
Mediating effects refer to the transmission of the effect of the crite­
rion on the predictor through one or more other variables, referred to as
mediators. Mediators explain how external physical events take on in­
ternal psychological significance and speak to how or why such effects
occur (Baron and Kenny, 1986). Among all the collected articles, 24
empirical articles consider mediating effects. Mediating effects are
summarized in Table 3.
The mediators for the relationship between CSR and CFP can be
explored as outcome indicators, indicating a direct outcome of CSR,
including reputation/corporate image, customer satisfaction, and
competitive advantage; and the process indicators, indicating a process
affected by CSR, including firm strategy, firm operation, social intel­
lectual capital, and others.
3.1. Outcome indicators
As an outcome indicator, reputation, also known as corporate

Table 3
Summary of mediating effects on CSR-CFP.
Aspect Mediators Appearance CSR-M effect M-CFP effect

Outcome Reputation/corporate Reputation, corporate image, brand 9 Positive sig. Positive sig. (8) Mixed
image (1)
Customer satisfaction Customer satisfaction 5 Positive sig. Positive sig. (4) Non
(1)
Competitive advantage Competitive advantage 4 Positive sig. Positive sig.
Process Firm strategy Firm strategy, innovation, investment, resource integration 5 Positive sig.(4) Mixed Positive sig.(4) Mixed
(1) (1)
Firm operation Productivity, risk management, organizational commitment, 5 Positive sig.(4) Positive sig.
organizational governance Non (1)
Social/Intellectual Social capital, human capital, intellectual capital, citizenship 5 Positive sig. Positive sig.(4) Non
Capital (1)
Others CSP, CSR advertisement, Environmental legitimacy 4 Positive sig.(3) Non Positive sig.(3) Non
(1) (1)

3
M. Ye et al.
image, is the most applied mediator in the CSR-CFP link (e.g. Galbreath
and Shum, 2012; Park, 2017; Wang and Berens, 2014). Peloza and
Papania (2008) refer to reputation as stakeholder identification. In this
view, through CSR practices, a firm can meet stakeholders’ expectations,
gain legitimacy, and thus enhance its reputation or corporate image
based on the stakeholder theory and legitimacy theory. The enhanced
reputation/corporate image can be honest signals (signaling theory) or
strategic resources (resource-based view) reducing transaction cost on
the one hand and attracting more supportive behavior or investment
from financial stakeholders on the other, thus leading to better financial
performance. Reputation and brand are valuable intangible resources,
which can help firms gain competitiveness in the market (Malik and
Kanwal, 2016; Mohtsham Saeed and Arshad, 2012).
Customer satisfaction in most situations determines the financial
results of a business, and it serves as a substantial and positive mediator
in the CSR-CFP link. The customer-related CSR activities mainly include
ethical treatment of customers, improvement of product quality and
qualified after-sale service. Galbreath and Shum (2012) report that the
demonstration of equity to customers increases customers’ satisfaction
level and their willingness to purchase. Meanwhile, undertaking CSR
practices can be an important component in enhancing customer loyalty
and repeatedly attracting customers (Saeidi et al., 2015; Xie et al.,
2017). Enhanced customer satisfaction, decreased customer defection,
and customers loyalty can directly contribute to achieving better
financial results.
Competitive advantage is another outcome indicator of mediators
for the CSR-CFP link. It is a consensus in all the empirical studies that
CSR helps a firm to enhance and sustain its competitive advantage in the
market, and thus contributes to achieving better financial performance
(Saeidi et al., 2015). There is one of CSR principles that a firm shall have
a prompt response to the expectations from stakeholders, particularly
employees and customers. Through continuous effective CSR practices,
a firm can shape its competitive edge in terms of attracting human
resource and increasing customer satisfaction, and thus can consistently
enhance its profitability level (Jain et al., 2016).
3.2. Process indicators
While the status of outcome indicators is usually easy to measure, the
evaluation of process indicators requires more objective efforts by the
methods like questionnaire surveys and content analyses. Firm strategy
can be strengthened by incorporating CSR considerations and mediate
the CSR-CFP link. Adopting Porter’s generic strategies, Rais and Goe­
degebuure (2009) try to explore the mediating effects of low-cost and
differentiation strategy by applying the relational assets theory, but they
reject firm strategy as a mediating variable. Hadj (2019) on the other
hand, examines the role of responsible innovation, one differentiation
strategy to increase the market share. Firm strategies, such as differen­
tiation, integration, R&D, and responsible innovation, calls for the col­
lective efforts of a wide range of stakeholders, arousing further
exploration on the mediating effects.
CSR has brought new ingredients to firm operation towards dy­
namic capabilities, such as organizational learning, resource integration
and innovation (Zhao et al., 2019) and is indirectly related to CFP
through the mediating effect of firm operation. Taking risk management
as an example, CSR can assist a firm in mitigating risks by eradicating
information asymmetry of stakeholders (Devie et al., 2018). CSR can
also help create moral capital (Tran et al., 2019), increase productivity
(Hasan et al., 2018), and increase transparency to the markets (Hossain
et al., 2016). Effective firm operation through CSR reduces the risks of
intelligent employment and market shock that businesses can face,
thereby reducing operating costs and improving financial performance.
Social and intellectual capital is reported to be positively medi­
ating the relationship between CSR and CFP. Chuang and Huang (2018)
argue that firms with a higher CSR level tend to adopt green IT tech­
nology and to hire green IT talents, and the investment on intellectual
4
Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919
capital turns to be beneficial to the firms’ competitive advantage. Jain
et al. (2016) investigate the CSR motivation in small-and-median en­
terprises (SMEs), and find that CSR principles are conducive for SMEs to
sustain close connections with upstream and downstream suppliers, and
the intellectual capital plays an important role in the short-run and
long-run performance of SMEs. Some other process indicators, catego­
rized as others in Table 3, are reportedly to have significant mediating
effects for the CSR-CFP link, like corporate social performance and
environmental legitimacy. However, unless the correlation between
these indicators and CSR can be clearly clarified, it is suggested not to
use them as mediators for the CSR-CFP link.
3.3. Theories applied in mediating effects
As shown in Table 4, there are totally nine theories included in the
empirical studies to elaborate on the effects of mediators on the CSR-CFP
relationship. The most widely used theories are the resource-based
theory, the stakeholder theory, the social/intellectual capital theory,
and the institutional theory. The resource-based theory is used in 8 ar­
ticles, which elaborates that CSR activities can help with firm strategy
and can be contributable to corporate image, innovation, and social and
intellectual capital, which would provide resources and capabilities
distinguished from other firms to create value and sustain competitive
advantage. The stakeholder theory is adopted in 7 articles. The basic
idea behind is that stakeholders can be well addressed via CSR activities
so that firms can have a better strategy with productivity improvement
within a firm, or earn better corporate image by market recognition and
customer satisfaction beyond the firm, and hence are contributable to
better financial performance. The social/intellectual capital theory and
the institutional theory are employed in 4 articles, respectively. In
general, there appears to be no clear relationship between the theoret­
ical underpinning and the selection of mediators on the CSR-CFP links.
4. Moderators: when doing good can be transferred to doing well
Moderating effects reflect the effects of a third variable on the as­
sociation between two variables (Dawson, 2014). The third variable is
referred to as a moderator and specifies when certain effects will hold
(Baron and Kenny, 1986). Among the collected empirical studies, 41
studies involve moderators. In general, the moderating effects emerge
both externally and internally, although moderators vary according to
researchers’ theoretical backgrounds. The selection of moderators and
the moderating effects are summarized, as shown in Table 5.
4.1. External indicators
The relationship between CSR and CFP is influenced by a firm’s
external environment, including economic, institutional/legal, social/
culture and industry level indicators. Economic indicators may have a
direct effect on financial performance, and its moderating effect on the
CSR-CFP relationship appears to be inconclusive. Lee et al. (2013)
proposes two dimensions of CSR to illustrate the moderating effects of
economic conditions: non-operation-related and operation-related CSR.
They argue that the former could be considered as a costly burden
during economic downturns while the latter has a positive role in the
firm’s operational efficiency, especially during periods of recession. In
an extreme period of recession, Esteban-Sanchez et al. (2017) indicate
that corporate governance mechanisms may fail, but firms with a higher
reputation in the community are less prone to suffer in the crisis. CSR
investment could be regarded as an insurance in dealing with the eco­
nomic disturbance, but how to make strategic CSR investment in terms
of low cost and high protection remains to be unclear.
Institutional/legal environment has a positive moderating effect
on the CSR-CFP relationship. Xie et al. (2017) argue that in the context
of a well-established institutional environment, firms that actively
conduct CSR could avoid accrual of costs and thus improve CFP. Good
M. Ye et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919

Table 4
The theoretical underpinning for mediators on the CSR-CFP link.
Theory No. of Outcome Process
articles
Reputation/corporate Customer Competitive Firm Firm Social/Intellectual Others
image Satisfaction advantage strategy Operation Capital

Resource based view 8 1 1 2 4

(RBV)
Stakeholder theory
Social/intellectual
capital theory
Institutional theory
Signalling theory
Dynamic Capability
theory
Agency theory
Equity theory
Relational asset theory
7 3 1 1 1 1
4 1 1 1 1
4 1 1 2
3 3
2 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1

Table 5
Summary of moderating effects on CSR-CFP.
Aspect Moderators Appearance Effect

External Economic indicators Economic conditions/financial crisis 2 Positive sig. (1) Mixed (1)
Institutional/legal Institutional environment/legal system 3 Positive sig. (2) Non(1)
environment
Social/Culture Cultural differences/media coverage 4 Positive sig.(1) Negative sig.(1)
indicators Mixed(1) Non(1)
Industry Industry type/industry munificence/dynamism/complexity 10 Positive sig. (4) Negative sig.(1)
Non(5)
Internal CSR engagement Consistency/transparency/CSR disclosure/CSP trajectory/CSR strategy 7 Positive sig. (5) Mixed(2)
Firm strategy Proactive and reactive strategies/low cost strategy/cost leadership/differentiation/ 18 Positive sig. (10) Negative sig.
integration/Public relations/R&D/Political activity/investment (1) Non(7)
Firm governance Managerial efficiency/operational productivity/earning management/responsible 17 Positive sig.(14) Negative sig.
leadership/board independence (3)
Firm characteristics Firm size/assets/sales/financial slack/Ownership 13 Positive sig.(6) Negative sig.(2)
Non(5)

institutional environment can positively strengthen the impact of a
firm’s CSR efforts on customer satisfaction, leading to better financial
performance (Xie et al., 2017). The firms in two countries with signifi­
cant institutional differences, e.g. a western country and an eastern
country, can both benefit from the institutional standardization of CSR
activities. Garcia-Sanchez and Martinez-Ferrero (2019) argue that in an
institutional environment with high managerial discretion, the mana­
gerial ability of firm managers matters a lot, because it relies on the
proper socially responsible investment to benefit shareholders by alle­
viating moral hazard. The external and internal factors often intertwine
with each other to impact the CSR-CFP link.
Social/culture indicators have an inclusive moderating effect on
the CSR-CFP relationship. Sun et al. (2018) builds on the instrumental
stakeholder theory to discuss the moderating effect of culture. In their
view, individuals from countries characterized by indulgence, i.e. hav­
ing fun and enjoying life, may be less likely to follow strict norms or
disciplines to transform CSR activities into specific processes that
generate financial returns. Media coverage and societal culture orien­
tation can perform a moderating effect on the CSR-CFP link, but the
effect requires more research efforts (Hou, 2019). Chih and Chih (2014)
argue that media coverage performs as significant moderating effect on
the CSR-CFP link, but positive news released by the firm itself triggers a
different impact on CFP from that released by the media. The ways of
acquiring the social/culture indicators may lead to widely divergent
effects, and more research efforts are desired to explore the moderating
effect of social/culture indicators.
Another important external moderator is at the industry level. Due
to industry disparities, the logical links between CSR and CFP cannot be
all the same in different industries. In the majority of empirical studies
examining CSR-CFP links, the industry indicator is used as a control
variable. Others go beyond one specific industry, and explore the
moderating effects of the industry indicator on the CSR-CFP link, such as
competitive contingencies shaped by industry munificence, dynamism,
and complexity (Gras and Krause, 2018), credibility of firms emerging
from customer-employee interactions (Marin et al., 2012), and social
orientation or media attention in various industries (Gras and Krause,
2018). The moderating effects of industry indicators on CSR-CFP links
are reported to be inconclusive in the reviewed articles, and more efforts
to streamline and standardize these industry indicators shall be at a high
priority.
4.2. Internal indicators
Moderating effects also emerge from internal aspects of a firm, such
as CSR engagement, competitiveness, and governance. CSR engage­
ment indicators mainly have a positive moderating effect on the CSR-
CFP relationship. Transparency and visibility of CSR disclosure can
substantially and positively moderate the correlation between CSR and
corporate reputation, and positively moderate the CSR-CFP link (Park,
2017). CSR engagement has a long-term financial impact, and the ability
to deliver consistent social performance can positively moderate the
CSR-CFP link (Wang and Choi, 2013).
The moderating effects of competitive strategy indicators on the
CSR-CFP link are diverse. Stakeholder theory and resource-based theory
are widely used to illustrate the logic of utilizing competitive resources
and strategies, such as operational productivity or earning management
(Jacobs et al., 2016; Suteja et al., 2016) and human resources utilization
(Chang et al., 2013), to transform CSR activities into financial perfor­
mance. Product differentiation, cost leadership and outside investment
are reported to positively moderate the CSR-CFP link in some studies
(Chen et al., 2018; Lee and Jung, 2016), while on contrary, differenti­
ation strategy, integration strategy, and cost reduction effort are

5
M. Ye et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919

Table 6
The theoretical underpinning for moderators on the CSR-CFP link.
Theories No. of External Internal
articles
Social/Culture Economic Institutional/legal Industry CSR Competitive Corporate Firm
indicators indicators environment engagement Strategy Governance characteristics

Stakeholder 12 1 1 3 2 2 1 2
theory
Resource-based 10 4 4 2
theory
Institutional 7 2 1 1 3
theory
Agency theory 4 3 1
Signaling theory 4 4
Contingency 3 1 2
theory
Channel 3 3
competition
theory
Good 2 2
management
theory
Resource 2 1 1
dependence
theory
Upper echelon 2 2
theory
Attention theory 2 2
Dynamic 1 1
Capability
theory
Imperfect 1 1
competition
theory

reported to have no significant moderating effects (Danso et al., 2019;
Lin et al., 2019). Kim et al. (2018) decompose CSR activities into two
kinds, one being beneficial to the diverse stakeholders and the other
being harmful to identifiable stakeholders’ legitimate claim, and find
that the competitive-action level has different moderating effects on the
CSR-CFP link for these two kinds of CSR. More direct moderating effects
derive from how firms engage in CSR practices, i.e. the relatedness, path,
and consistency (both temporal and interdomain) of CSR engagement
strategy (Tang et al., 2012; Wang and Choi, 2013).
Firm governance is reported to moderate the CSR-CFP link posi­
tively in most articles. Based on the upper echelons theory, managerial
characteristics such as the managerial efficiency (Cho and Lee, 2017),
responsible leadership (Javed et al., 2020) and CEO ability (Garcia-­
Sanchez and Martinez-Ferrero, 2019) can significantly affect the quality
of firm operations, thus affecting the CSR-CFP link. Peng and Yang
(2013) argue that the divergence between control rights and the cash
flow rights negatively moderates the CSR-CFP link, and appropriate
arrangements shall be made to deal with the agency problems caused by
owner concentration. Suteja et al. (2016) found that earnings manage­
ment had a negative moderating effect on the CSR-CFP link, because a
strict earnings control would limit the CSR investment in a defensive
manner.
The fourth internal indicator is firm characteristics, such as firm
size, sales, financial slack, and ownership, which are often used as
control variables in other CSR related empirical studies. Its moderating
effect on the CSR-CFP link is reported to be very diverse. For example,
foreign ownership can reduce information asymmetry and create pres­
sures on managers to perform better, while, a larger board may better
address the concerns of different stakeholders and strengthen the im­
pacts of CSR on CFP (Kabir and Thai, 2017). It remains to be contro­
versial to select suitable indicators regarding firm characteristics as
moderators.
4.3. Theories applied in moderating effects
There are totally 13 theories or perspectives are included in those 41
articles to elaborate on the effects of moderators on the CSR-CFP rela­
tionship, as shown in Table 6. The most popular theories included are
stakeholder theory, resource-based theory, contingency theory, and
agency theory. Stakeholder theory is widely used in 12 articles to
elaborate on the effect of a moderator on the CSR-CFP link, and it is
applied to all the internal indicators. It is commonly recognized to
harvest the collective efforts of stakeholders inside and beyond a firm.
The resource-based theory is adopted in 10 articles, at top 2 among all
the theories. Corporate resources are believed to significantly moderate
the CSR-CFP links, including internal resources, such as capital, human
resource, technology, and creative culture, and external resources in a
broad sense, such as financing channel, strategic alliancing, and industry
connections. Contingency theory and agency theory are mainly
employed to elaborate the corporate governance indicators and firm
characteristics indicators in moderating the CSR-CFP link.
5. An integrated framework
The empirical studies provide two angles to examine the bridge be­
tween CSR and CFP. One angle is how (by which means) a firm manages
its CSR to finally influence its financial performance- the mediators; the
other is when (on which conditions) a firm can transfer its practices on
CSR to better financial performance- the moderators. These two angles
shall be integrated in a systematic way to establish an integrated
framework. In this framework, the relationship between CSR and CFP is
mediated by the process and outcome indicators, and is moderated by
external and internal indicators, as shown in Fig. 2.
5.1. Logics for mediating effects

In discussing the unidirectional CSR-CFP link, CSR is usually regar­

ded as a process with some related inputs and CFP is referred to as an

6
M. Ye et al.
Fig. 2. Integrated framework for bridging CSR and CFP by moderators and mediators.
outcome. To describe or explain how (the means), there are two basic
logics: process-process-outcome and process-outcome-outcome. The first
logic (process-process-outcome) tries to find out a process indicator,
which has significant relationships with both CSR and CFP. This logic
argues that involving CSR ideas or inputs can help with the process to
develop a more effective firm strategy, to increase the operating pro­
ductivity, or better manage social and intellectual capital, in turn
resulting in better financial performance. The logic accords with the
theoretic derivation of the resource-based theory, the social/intellectual
capital theory, and the dynamic capability theory. For instance, CSR can
become a source for creating valuable resources or capabilities (Chuang
and Huang, 2018; Marin et al., 2017) and effectively integrating and
reconstructing resources in changing environments (Zhao et al., 2019).
Resources, dynamic capabilities, and knowledge are closely interlinked
(Barney et al., 2001) and the exploration of mediators in the CSR-CFP
link through the logic of process-process-outcome needs to compre­
hensively consider the interconnections among indicators of firm strat­
egy, firm operation, and social/intellectual capital.
The other logic (process-outcome-outcome) endeavors to find out the
intermediate outcome caused by CSR and further to link to the outcome
of financial performance. Such an intermediate outcome can be repu­
tation or corporate image, customer satisfaction and competitive
advantage. This logic is often explained based on the theoretical un­
derpinnings of the stakeholder theory and the signaling theory. While
the former focuses on the link between CSR and its intermediate
outcome, the latter further explains how the intermediate indicators are
linked with financial performance. CSR itself is closely related to the
basic idea in the stakeholder theory, although this theory is criticized as
not having a strong theoretical base (Wang et al., 2020). In this logic,
CSR can be employed as a means of stakeholder management (Park,
2017), so that a firm can gain legitimacy, decent reputation, or good
customer satisfaction from the stakeholders. The reputation and
7
Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919
corporate image are linked to the financial performance by using the
explanation of signaling theory (Galbreath and Shum, 2012; Wang and
Berens, 2014) that a high reputation of a firm signals a firm’s quality in
general compared to their peers and also the intention and capability of
a firm to serve the interest of its stakeholders. In addition, some studies
following the logic of process-outcome-outcome also employ the
resource-based theory for the explanation. In this view, the intermediate
outcome, such as corporate image and customer satisfaction can be one
kind of resources for firms to pursue better financial performance (Ali
et al., 2020).
5.2. Logics for moderating effects
The integrated framework illustrates moderators for the relationship
between CSR and CFP to express when (the conditions) the CSR can be
transferred to financial performance. In this sense, CSR has a direct
impact on financial performance, but this impact would be enhanced or
neutralized due to either external or internal indicators. External in­
dicators describe a context or a condition for the manifestation of CSR-
CFP links, such as economic indicators, institutional or legal environ­
ment, social or culture indicators, and the industry. The logic of selecting
proper external moderators is to establish connections between corpo­
rate activities and outside environment, with the theoretical supports
obtained from the institutional theory, the resource dependence theory,
and the attention theory. For example, Xie et al. (2017) argued that good
institutional environments could provide well-developed institutional
contexts with greater transparency and less information asymmetry,
wherein firms that actively fulfil CSR could harvest better firm perfor­
mance by avoiding the accrual of individual, organizational, and social
costs. Similarly, drawn from the resource dependence theory, the
external context where the firms operate exerts a powerful influence on
their behavior and decision-making process (Garcia-Sanchez and
M. Ye et al.
Martinez-Ferrero, 2019). Interestingly, stakeholder theory is also
applied to extending their application in the direct CSR-CFP debates to
explain the moderating effects of industry munificence, industry dyna­
mism, and industry complexity (Gras and Krause, 2018). However, this
application of stakeholder theory seems week due to its poor theoretical
base.
Internal moderators, in a sense, are drawn within a firm, including
firm strategies, corporate governance and the managerial ability or ef­
ficiency. They appear to be somehow similar to the process indicators in
mediating effects, but they are quite different. The moderators shall
have no significant correlation or no direct causal relationship with CSR,
while the moderators must have the assumption of significant correla­
tions with CSR and CFP. For example, some competitive strategies, e.g.
low-cost strategy and R&D merely have a relationship with CSR and
perform a significant moderating effect on the CSR-CFP link (Danso
et al., 2019; Lee and Jung, 2016; Tang et al., 2012) from the strategic
view. Moreover, agency theory and upper echelon theory are employed
from the micro perspective to examine the moderating effects of board
characteristics, and managerial ability and efficiency (Cho and Lee,
2017; Kabir and Thai, 2017).
5.3. Multi-level view on indicators
As shown in the integrated framework in Fig. 2, the applications of
suitable indicators underpinning moderating effects can be categorized
at the macro-, meso-, or micro- level, while those underpinning medi­
ating effects are mainly at the meso-level. Macro-level indicators
describe the external context for a firm, such as the institutional envi­
ronment, industry and economic conditions; meso-level indicators
describe the conditions, processes, or status at the corporate level, such
as firm strategy, firm characteristics and corporate image; while micro-
level indicators focus on the individual or collective actions within a
firm, such as personnel productivity and managerial ability. The process
and outcome indicators regarded as mediators are almost all meso-level
indicators to establish the “process-process-outcome” or “process-
outcome-outcome” logic. For moderators, while external indicators are
all the macro-level indicators, internal indicators can be meso-level or
micro-level indicators. This presents an idea to decide intuitively
whether an indicator has a moderating or mediating effect on the CSR-
CFP link: if an indicator has effects on the CSR-CFP link at the macro- or
micro-level, it is suggested not to use it as a mediator; when an indicator
is at meso-level, it can be either mediator or moderator. It is worth
noting that it should be independent of the explanatory factor, i.e. CSR
to test the moderating effect; otherwise, it could lead to endogeneity
issues.
5.4. Underlying theories
The integrated framework concludes mediators and moderators in a
systematic way, and meanwhile creates opportunities to compare and
reconcile the underlying CSR related theories. Theories underlying the
integrated framework are found to be multiple, even for one category of
indicators, particularly moderators. For example, for the category of
internal indicator- firm governance, upper echelon theory is used for
managerial ability and efficiency (Cho and Lee, 2017; Garcia-Sanchez
and Martinez-Ferrero, 2019). Agency theory is employed for ownership
concentration and board size (Kabir and Thai, 2017; Peng and Yang,
2014). Good management theory is applied for good corporate gover­
nance, and operational productivity (Jacobs et al., 2016) and a contin­
gency theory is applied for responsible leadership and high-performance
work practices (Chang et al., 2013; Javed et al., 2020). Each indicator
has its own approach to impact on the CSR-CFP link. Categorizing in­
dicators into macro-, meso-, or micro- levels can be a good way to
analyze the impacts and fit suitable theories. More research emphasis
shall be placed on the conditions and mechanisms of transferring spe­
cific socially responsible and sustainable practice into financial
8
Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919
performance, and the underlying theory or theories shall be corre­
spondingly developed and examined. Furthermore, the integrated
framework will be able to stimulate the development of CSR related
theories towards theoretical unification or pluralism.
6. Concluding remarks
This study provides a review on moderators and mediators for
bridging the CSR-CFP links, which presents several issues to be criti­
cized: (1) Some articles are revealed a lack of theoretical lenses. CSR-
CFP links can be investigated from multiple lenses, but some theories
applied are not enough to provide an explanation for the effect of spe­
cific moderators and mediators. For example, the stakeholder theory is
widely employed in these articles; however, it lacks a strong theoretical
base for the explanations. (2) In line with lack of theoretical basis,
novelty is missing in the application of indicators. For instance, some
indicators which are usually employed as control variables, such as firm
size, leverage, or industry type, are also used as moderators in some
articles. However, as mentioned, moderators should be independent of
the explanatory factor, i.e. CSR; otherwise, it could lead to endogeneity
issues. A systematic analytical framework is thus needed for logical
choices of moderators and mediators. (3) There are some assumptions
for testing moderating and mediating effects; for example, there should
be no significant correlation between moderators and explanatory fac­
tors. However, many articles ignore these assumptions and lack strictly
moderating or mediating tests. This may result in unreliability in their
testing results.
To address some issues identified within the reviewed literature, we
have developed an integrated framework to provide logics and oppor­
tunities to define indicators and explore underlying theories. A mediator
is found to be a process or outcome indicator to bridge CSR and CFP, and
a moderator could play a role from the external and internal of a firm.
The indicators can be categorized into three levels, i.e. the macro, meso,
and micro level, to analyze the moderating and mediating effects, as well
as identify suitable theoretical underpinnings. For moderating effects,
the indicators can be categorized at the macro-, meso-, or micro- level,
while those underpinning mediating effects are mainly at the meso-
level.
The findings of this study make several contributions to the domain
of CSR and sustainability, especially with regards to the associated
concerns over whether firms “do well by doing good” as well as how and
when “doing good” can be transferred to “doing well”. First, the study
offers a new insight to go further on the CSR-CFP link by providing a
comprehensive examination of mediators- how CSR can be transferred to
CFP (logics or means) and moderators- when CSR can be transferred to
CFP (conditions). Many previous studies endeavored to prove that firms
can do well by doing good to seek a rationale for CSR practices. This
study extends the idea to explore when and how CSR can be transferred
to CFP. If CSR is regarded as a strategy like any other investment, there
must be costs to implement it; whether these costs can be covered by the
benefits of CSR implementation is determined by the approaches of how
to define and engage CSR practices. This review can offer the opportu­
nities to explore such approaches and further to better involve CSR and
sustainability view in operation and production of a firm.
Second, this study provides an integrated framework for explorations
of mediating and moderating effects on the CSR-CFP link. Two logics are
found to explore mediating effects: process-process-outcome and
process-outcome-outcome. The former argues that involving CSR ideas
or inputs can help with the process to achieve better financial perfor­
mance; and the latter endeavors to find out the intermediate outcome
caused by CSR and this outcome can be directly linked to financial
performance. Moderating effects are also drawn from two aspects,
external and internal. The external aspect explores the role of macro
contexts, while the internal aspect reflects the conditions or actions
within a firm at the meso- or micro-level.
Third, this study categorizes the indicators at the macro-, meso-, or
M. Ye et al.
micro- levels. By doing so, it presents a clear mind for the intuitive
choice for the indicators to be a moderator or mediator. While a medi­
ator can mostly be chosen at the meso-level, indicators at the macro- and
micro- levels shall be moderators. As for an indicator at the meso-level, it
can only be a moderator when it is independent from the explanatory
factor, i.e. CSR. Distinguishing the indicators at different levels can also
help with the applications of suitable theories.
This study emphasizes the CSR-CFP link found in moderating and
mediating effects and the theoretical basis behind these effects and
therefore conducts its review qualitatively. Future empirical studies are
suggested to address the mentioned issues, such as the application of
theories, the novel choice of indicators and the strict testing on
moderating or mediating effects. A meta-analysis is suggested to be used
in the future studies to achieve a more-comprehensive review, although
it is hard to be applied to reviews on moderators and mediators. Future
empirical studies are also suggested to go beyond the explorations of the
direct relationship between CSR and CFP to focus further on the
implementations of CSR no matter it is morally suggested or legislatively
required to be done.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation
of China (Grant no. 71802178) and Sichuan Federation of Social Science
Associations (Grant no. SC20C045).
References
Note: References marked with an asterisk (*) indicate empirical studies on the CSR-CFP
link with moderators or mediators included.
* Ali, H.Y., Danish, R.Q., Asrar-ul-Haq, M., 2020. How corporate social responsibility
boosts firm financial performance: the mediating role of corporate image and
customer satisfaction. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 27 (1), 166–177.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1781.
Barnett, M.L., Salomon, R.M., 2012. Does it pay to be really good? addressing the shape
of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strat. Manag. J. 33
(11), 1304–1320. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1980.
Barney, J., Wright, M., Ketchen, D.J., 2001. The resource-based view of the firm: ten
years after 1991. J. Manag. 27 (6), 625–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/
014920630102700601.
Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers.
Soc. Psychol. 51 (6), 1173.
Battaglia, M., Testa, F., Bianchi, L., Iraldo, F., Frey, M., 2014. Corporate social
responsibility and competitiveness within SMEs of the fashion industry: evidence
from Italy and France. Sustainability 6 (2), 872–893. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su6020872.
Busch, T., Friede, G., 2018. The robustness of the corporate social and financial
performance relation: a second-order meta-analysis. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ.
Manag. 25 (4), 583–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1480.
Chang, Y.K., Oh, W.Y., Messersmith, J.G., 2013. Translating corporate social
performance into financial performance: exploring the moderating role of high-
performance work practices. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 24 (19), 3738–3756.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.778312.
* Chen, C.J., Guo, R.S., Hsiao, Y.C., Chen, K.L., 2018. How business strategy in
non-financial firms moderates the curvilinear effects of corporate social
responsibility and irresponsibility on corporate financial performance. J. Bus. Res.
92, 154–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.030.
* Cho, S.Y., Lee, C., 2017. Managerial efficiency, corporate social performance, and
corporate financial performance. J. Bus. Ethics 1–20. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10551-017-3760-7.
* Chuang, S.P., Huang, S.J., 2018. The effect of environmental corporate social
responsibility on environmental performance and business competitiveness: the
mediation of green information technology capital. J. Bus. Ethics 150 (4), 991–1009.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3167-x.
Dahlsrud, A., 2008. How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37
definitions. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 15 (1), 1–13.
* Danso, A., Adomako, S., Amankwah-Amoah, J., Owusu-Agyei, S., Konadu, R., 2019.
Environmental sustainability orientation, competitive strategy and financial
9
Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919
performance. Bus. Strat. Environ. 28 (5), 885–895. https://doi.
org/10.1002/bse.2291.
Dawson, J.F., 2014. Moderation in management research: what, why, when, and how.
J. Bus. Psychol. 29 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9308-7.
* Devie, D., Liman, L.P., Tarigan, J., Jie, F., 2018. Corporate social responsibility,
financial performance and risk in Indonesian natural resources industry. Soc.
Responsib. J. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-06-2018-0155.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., 2011. Corporate social responsibility and competitive
advantage: overcoming the trust barrier. Manag. Sci. 57 (9), 1528–1545. https://doi.
org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1403.
Ekatah, I., Samy, M., Bampton, R., Halabi, A., 2011. The relationship between corporate
social responsibility and profitability: the case of royal Dutch shell plc. Corp. Reput.
Rev. 14 (4), 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2011.22.
* Esteban-Sanchez, P., de la Cuesta-Gonzalez, M., Paredes-Gazquez, J.D., 2017.
Corporate social performance and its relation with corporate financial performance:
international evidence in the banking industry. J. Clean. Prod. 162, 1102–1110.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.127.
Freudenreich, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F., Schaltegger, S., 2020. A stakeholder theory
perspective on business models: value creation for sustainability. J. Bus. Ethics 166
(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04112-z.
* Galbreath, J., Shum, P., 2012. Do customer satisfaction and reputation mediate the
CSR-FP link? Evidence from Australia. Aust. J. Manag. 37 (2), 211–229. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0312896211432941.
* Garcia-Sanchez, I.M., Martinez-Ferrero, J., 2019. Chief executive officer ability,
corporate social responsibility, and financial performance: the moderating role of the
environment. Bus. Strat. Environ. 28 (4), 542–555. https://doi.
org/10.1002/bse.2263.
Garcia, A., Orsato, R., 2020. Testing the institutional difference hypothesis: a study about
environmental, social, governance, and financial performance. Bus. Strat. Environ.
29 (8), 3261–3272. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2570.
Gras, D., Krause, R., 2018. When does it pay to stand out as stand-up? Competitive
contingencies in the corporate social performance–corporate financial performance
relationship. Strategic Organization. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127018805252.
Grewatsch, S., Kleindienst, I., 2017. When does it pay to be good? Moderators and
mediators in the corporate sustainability–corporate financial performance
relationship: a critical review. J. Bus. Ethics 145 (2), 383–416. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10551-015-2852-5.
* Hadj, 2019. Effects of corporate social responsibility towards stakeholders and
environmental management on responsible innovation and competitiveness.
J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119490.
* Hasan, I., Kobeissi, N., Liu, L., Wang, H., 2018. Corporate social responsibility and firm
financial performance: the mediating role of productivity. J. Bus. Ethics 149 (3),
671–688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3066-1.
* Hossain, M.M., Alamgir, M., Alam, M., 2016. The mediating role of corporate
governance and corporate image on the CSR-FP link evidence from a developing
country. J. Gen. Manag. 41 (3), 33–51. https://doi.
org/10.1177/030630701604100303.
* Hou, T.C.T., 2019. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and
sustainable financial performance: firm-level evidence from Taiwan. Corp. Soc.
Responsib. Environ. Manag. 26 (1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1647.
* Jacobs, B.W., Kraude, R., Narayanan, S., 2016. Operational productivity, corporate
social performance, financial performance, and risk in manufacturing firms. Prod.
Oper. Manag. 25 (12), 2065–2085. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12596.
* Jain, P., Vyas, V., Chalasani, D.P.S., 2016. Corporate social responsibility and financial
performance in SMEs: a structural equation modelling approach. Global Bus. Rev. 17
(3), 630–653. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150916630827.
* Javed, M., Rashid, M.A., Hussain, G., Ali, H.Y., 2020. The effects of corporate social
responsibility on corporate reputation and firm financial performance: moderating
role of responsible leadership. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 27 (3),
1395–1409. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1892.
* Kabir, R., Thai, H.M., 2017. Does corporate governance shape the relationship between
corporate social responsibility and financial performance?. Pac. Account. Rev. 29
(2), 227–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/par-10-2016-0091.
Khan, M.K., He, Y., Anwar, A., Akram, U., Hafeez, M., Tanveer, Y., 2017. Chemical firms’
profitability and social responsibility. Hum. Syst. Manag. 36 (3), 241–249. https://
doi.org/10.3233/HSM-171773.
* Kim, K.-H., Kim, M., Qian, C., 2018. Effects of corporate social responsibility on
corporate financial performance: a competitive-action perspective. J. Manag. 44 (3),
1097–1118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315602530.
* Lee, S., Jung, H., 2016. The effects of corporate social responsibility on profitability:
the moderating roles of differentiation and outside investment. Manag. Decis. 54 (6),
1383–1406. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2015-0268.
* Lee, S., Singal, M., Kang, K.H., 2013. The corporate social responsibility-financial
performance link in the U.S. restaurant industry: do economic conditions matter?.
Int. J. Hospit. Manag. 32 (1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.03.007.
Lin, L., Hung, P.H., Chou, D.W., Lai, C.W., 2019. Financial performance and corporate
social responsibility: empirical evidence from Taiwan. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 24 (1),
61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2018.07.001.
Lu, W., Ye, M., Chau, K., Flanagan, R., 2018. The paradoxical nexus between corporate
social responsibility and sustainable financial performance: evidence from the
international construction business. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 9
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1501.
* Malik, M.S., Kanwal, L., 2016. Impact of corporate social responsibility disclosure on
financial performance: case study of listed pharmaceutical firms of Pakistan. J. Bus.
Ethics 150 (1), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3134-6.
M. Ye et al.
* Marin, L., Martín, P.J., Rubio, A., 2017. Doing good and different! The mediation effect
of innovation and investment on the influence of CSR on competitiveness. Corp. Soc.
Responsib. Environ. Manag. 24 (2), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1412.
Marin, L., Rubio, A., de Maya, S.R., 2012. Competitiveness as a strategic outcome of
corporate social responsibility. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 19 (6),
364–376. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1288.
Mio, C., Panfilo, S., Blundo, B., 2020. Sustainable development goals and the strategic
role of business: a systematic literature review. Bus. Strat. Environ. 29 (8),
3220–3245. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2568.
Mohtsham Saeed, M., Arshad, F., 2012. Corporate social responsibility as a source of
competitive advantage: the mediating role of social capital and reputational capital.
J. Database Mark. Cust. Strategy Manag. 19 (4), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1057/
dbm.2012.19.
Murray, M., Dainty, A., 2008. Corporate social responsibility: challenging the
construction industry. In: Murray, M., Dainty, A. (Eds.), Corporate Social
Responsibility in the Construction Industry. Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 23–118.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L., Rynes, S.L., 2003. Corporate social and financial
performance: a meta- analysis. Organ. Stud. 24 (3), 403–441. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0170840603024003910.
* Park, S., 2017. Corporate social responsibility, visibility, reputation and financial
performance: empirical analysis on the moderating and mediating variables from
Korea. Soc. Responsib. J. 13 (4), 856–871. https://doi.
org/10.1108/SRJ-01-2017-0012.
Peloza, J., Papania, L., 2008. The missing link between corporate social responsibility
and financial performance: stakeholder salience and identification. Corp. Reput. Rev.
11 (2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2008.13.
* Peng, C.W., Yang, M.L., 2014. The effect of corporate social performance on financial
performance: the moderating effect of ownership concentration. J. Bus. Ethics 123
(1), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1809-9.
* Rais, S., Goedegebuure, R., 2009. Corporate social performance and financial
performance: the case of Indonesian firms in the manufacturing industry. Probl.
Perspect. Manag. 7 (1–1), 224–237.
Rivera, J.M., Muñoz, M.J., Moneva, J.M., 2017. Revisiting the relationship between
corporate stakeholder commitment and social and financial performance. Sustain.
Dev. 25 (6), 482–494. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1664.
* Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P., Saaeidi, S.A., 2015. How does corporate
social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of
competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. J. Bus. Res. 68 (2),
341–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.06.024.
Simpson, W.G., Kohers, T., 2002. The link between corporate social and financial
performance: evidence from the banking industry. J. Bus. Ethics 35 (2), 97–109.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013082525900.
Soana, M.G., 2011. The relationship between corporate social performance and
corporate financial performance in the banking sector. J. Bus. Ethics 104 (1),
133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0894-x.
* Sun, J., Yoo, S., Park, J., Hayati, B., 2018. Indulgence versus restraint: the moderating
role of cultural differences on the relationship between corporate social performance
and corporate financial performance. J. Global Market. 32 (2), 83–92. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08911762.2018.1464236.
10
Journal of Cleaner Production 313 (2021) 127919
* Suteja, J., Gunardi, A., Mirawati, A., 2016. Moderating effect of earnings management
on the relationship between corporate social responsibility disclosure and
profitability of banks in Indonesia. Int. J. Econ. Financ. Issues 6 (4), 1360–1365.
* Tang, Z., Hull, C.E., Rothenberg, S., 2012. How corporate social responsibility
engagement strategy moderates the CSR-financial performance relationship.
J. Manag. Stud. 49 (7), 1274–1303. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01068.x.
* Tran, H.L., Bui, V.H., Phan, T.T.H., Dau, X.C., Tran, M.D., Do, D.T., 2019. The impact of
corporate social responsibility and risk management on financial performance: the
case of Vietnamese textile firms. Management Science Letters 9 (7), 1029–1036.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.4.003.
Tuppura, A., Arminen, H., Patari, S., Jantunen, A., 2016. Corporate social and financial
performance in different industry contexts: the chicken or the egg? Soc. Responsib. J.
12 (4), 672–686. https://doi.org/10.1108/srj-12-2015-0181.
Van Der Laan, G., Van Ees, H., Van Witteloostuijn, A., 2008. Corporate social and
financial performance: an extended stakeholder theory, and empirical test with
accounting measures. J. Bus. Ethics 79 (3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10551-007-9398-0.
* Wang, H., Choi, J., 2013. A new look at the corporate social-financial performance
relationship: the moderating roles of temporal and interdomain consistency in
corporate social performance. J. Manag. 39 (2), 416–441. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0149206310375850.
Wang, H., Gibson, C., Zander, U., 2020. Editors’ comments: is research on corporate
social responsibility undertheorized? Acad. Manag. Rev. 45 (1), 1–6. https://doi.
org/10.5465/amr.2019.0450.
Wang, H., Lu, W., Ye, M., Chau, K., Zhang, X., 2016a. The curvilinear relationship
between corporate social performance and corporate financial performance:
evidence from the international construction industry. J. Clean. Prod. 137,
1313–1322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.184.
Wang, Q., Dou, J.S., Jia, S.H., 2016b. A meta-analytic review of corporate social
responsibility and corporate financial performance: the moderating effect of
contextual factors. Bus. Soc. 55 (8), 1083–1121. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0007650315584317.
* Wang, Y., Berens, G., 2014. The impact of four types of corporate social performance on
reputation and financial performance. J. Bus. Ethics 131 (2), 337–359. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10551-014-2280-y.
* Wang, Z., Sarkis, J., 2017. Corporate social responsibility governance, outcomes, and
financial performance. J. Clean. Prod. 162, 1607–1616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2017.06.142.
* Xie, X., Jia, Y., Meng, X., Li, C., 2017. Corporate social responsibility, customer
satisfaction, and financial performance: the moderating effect of the institutional
environment in two transition economies. J. Clean. Prod. 150, 26–39. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.192.
Xiong, B., Lu, W., Skitmore, M., Chau, K., Ye, M., 2016. Virtuous nexus between
corporate social performance and financial performance: a study of construction
enterprises in China. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.078.
* Zhao, Z., Meng, F., He, Y., Gu, Z., 2019. The influence of corporate social responsibility
on competitive advantage with multiple mediations from social capital and dynamic
capabilities. Sustainability 11 (1) https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010218.