| 10 | 0 | 7 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
智慧环境监管通过信息技术赋能,能够促使企业改善环境行为,进而引导企业追求绿色可持续发展。本文从以风险为决策导向的外部第三方视角出发,通过考察智慧环境监管情境下会计师事务所的审计定价决策,来揭示智慧环境监管的治理效应。研究发现,智慧环境监管显著降低了重污染企业的审计费用。机制检验表明,智慧环境监管能够通过改善企业信息环境和降低环境风险影响事务所的定价决策。进一步地,在数字基础设施建设水平较高与公众环境关注度较低的地区、民营企业以及规模较小和专长较弱的事务所,智慧环境监管对审计费用的降低效应更为明显。此外,在智慧环境监管背景下,降低审计费用是事务所的合理定价决策,这并不意味着审计质量的下降。本文揭示了智慧环境监管背景下事务所审计定价决策的权衡过程,为进一步发挥智慧环境监管效果及提升事务所执业能力提供理论参考和实证支持。
Abstract：Empowered by information technology, smart environmental regulation encourages firms to improve their environmental behavior and guides them toward green and sustainable development. From the perspective of external third parties whose decisions are risk-oriented, this paper investigates auditors' pricing decisions under smart environmental regulation to reveal its governance effects. The results show that smart environmental regulation significantly reduces audit fees for heavily polluting firms. Mechanism tests indicate that smart environmental regulation affects audit pricing by improving firms' information environment and reducing environmental risks. Furthermore, the fee-reducing effect is more pronounced in regions with stronger digital infrastructure but lower public environmental concern, among private firms, and for smaller audit firms with weaker industry specialization. In addition, the decrease in audit fees under smart environmental regulation reflects auditors' rational pricing decisions rather than a decline in audit quality. This study reveals the trade-off process behind audit pricing decisions in the context of smart environmental regulation and provides both theoretical insights and empirical evidence for enhancing the effectiveness of such regulation and improving auditors' professional competence.
包群,邵敏,杨大利, 2013.环境管制抑制了污染排放吗?[J].经济研究, 48(12):42-54.
陈林,陈臻,肖倩冰, 2024.产能过剩与环境规制相机选择:基于正式与非正式环境规制视角[J].中国工业经济(3):62-80.
丁浩员,董文娟,余心玎, 2024.贸易政策冲击下的跨国供应链断裂与重构研究[J].经济研究,59(8):95-113.
杜佳轩,何涌, 2025.金融科技影响审计费用吗?[J].审计研究(1):147-160.
范经华,张雅曼,刘启亮, 2013.内部控制、审计师行业专长、应计与真实盈余管理[J].会计研究(4):81-88, 96.
郭檬楠,田雨薇,焦然, 2023.国家审计信息化建设与国有企业审计收费:基于金审工程的准自然实验[J].审计与经济研究, 38(3):11-21.
郭雪萌,马佳欣, 2024.环境问责风险与重污染企业审计费用:基于中央生态环境保护督察的准自然实验研究[J].审计研究(3):113-124.
胡珺,方祺,龙文滨, 2023.碳排放规制、企业减排激励与全要素生产率:基于中国碳排放权交易机制的自然实验[J].经济研究, 58(4):77-94.
韩国高,陈庭富,刘田广, 2022.数字化转型与企业产能利用率:来自中国制造企业的经验发现[J].财经研究, 48(9):154-168.
韩国高,刘田广,庞明川, 2025.生态环境智慧监测与企业环境信息粉饰[J].世界经济, 48(7):3-35.
蒋伏心,王竹君,白俊红, 2013.环境规制对技术创新影响的双重效应:基于江苏制造业动态面板数据的实证研究[J].中国工业经济(7):44-55.
金浩,陈诗一, 2022.地理距离对政府监管企业污染排放的影响效应研究:兼论数据技术监管的作用[J].数量经济技术经济研究, 39(10):109-128.
李青原,肖泽华, 2020.异质性环境规制工具与企业绿色创新激励:来自上市企业绿色专利的证据[J].经济研究, 55(9):192-208.
李珒,赵静, 2023.环境治理中的数字赋能与监管效率提升:基于人工替代的视角[J].中国人口·资源与环境, 33(8):130-137.
李秀丽,张琳琅,李岩琼, 2023.企业创新与审计费用[J].会计研究(6):167-178.
梁毕明,郭振雄, 2024.企业漂棕行为与审计收费[J].安徽大学学报(哲社版), 48(3):135-145.
梁宇超,庞军,贾真,等, 2024.现代智慧生态环境治理评价体系的构建与应用研究[J].中国环境管理, 16(5):68-79.
廖义刚,余梁, 2025.审计师会关注企业合规管理水平吗?:基于年报文本信息的经验证据[J].审计研究(2):120-133.
刘金科,肖翊阳, 2022.中国环境保护税与绿色创新:杠杆效应还是挤出效应?[J].经济研究,57(1):72-88.
马平平,张明,宋妍, 2024.公众新媒体监督如何促进企业绿色转型:基于发展与减排协同视角[J].中国管理科学, 32(12):71-87.
宋献中,陈新,龙文滨, 2024.数字化环境监测与企业绿色创新:基于环境监测网络建设的准自然实验[J].统计研究, 41(7):64-76.
陶春华,张资政,孙凯, 2025.碳排放权交易机制与企业审计费用[J].审计研究(1):119-132.
王云,李延喜,马壮,等, 2017.媒体关注、环境规制与企业环保投资[J].南开管理评论, 20(6):83-94.
王婉菁,朱红兵,张兵, 2021.资本市场开放与环境信息披露质量[J].管理科学, 34(6):29-42.
王岭,刘相锋,熊艳, 2019.中央环保督察与空气污染治理:基于地级城市微观面板数据的实证分析[J].中国工业经济(10):5-22.
王跃堂,马靓,沈小燕, 2024.退市新规提高了审计收费吗?[J].审计研究(5):75-88.
吴力波,杨眉敏,孙可哿, 2022.公众环境关注度对企业和政府环境治理的影响[J].中国人口·资源与环境, 32(2):1-14.
徐悦,张亚楠,卢锐,等, 2024.环境法治与上市公司权益资本成本:基于环保法庭设立的准自然实验[J].会计研究(1):4-20.
姚圣,戚雅雯, 2024.碳风险与审计定价:基于“双碳”目标的研究[J].当代会计评论, 1(3):78-102.
叶陈刚,王孜,武剑锋,等, 2015.外部治理、环境信息披露与股权融资成本[J].南开管理评论,18(5):85-96.
于连超,耿弘基,王雷,等, 2023.绿色税制改革对审计费用的影响机制研究:来自《环境保护税法》实施的准自然实验证据[J].审计研究(4):139-149.
余怒涛,苗瑞晨,王佳妮, 2024.绿色信贷政策的溢出效应:基于审计定价决策视角[J].审计与经济研究, 39(3):54-63.
张琦,郑瑶,孔东民, 2019.地区环境治理压力、高管经历与企业环保投资:一项基于《环境空气质量标准(2012)》的准自然实验[J].经济研究, 54(6):183-198.
郑建明,孙诗璐, 2021.税收征管与审计费用:来自“金税三期”的准自然实验证据[J].审计研究(4):43-52.
郑明晖,金凇宇,刘运国, 2023.企业成本结构影响审计定价吗?[J].审计研究(5):83-94.
周楷唐,李英,吴联生, 2020.行业专长与审计生产效率[J].会计研究(9):105-119.
AUSTIN A A, CARPENTER T D, CHRIST M H, et al., 2021. The data analytics journey:interactionsamong auditors, managers, regulation, and technology[J]. Contemporary accounting research, 38(3):1888-1924.
BARTRAM S M, HOU K, KIM S, 2022. Real effects of climate policy:financial constraints and spillovers[J].Journal of financial economics, 143(2):668-696.
BEDARD J C, JOHNSTONE K M, 2004. Earnings manipulation risk, corporate governance risk, and'auditors planning and pricing decisions[J]. The Accounting Review, 79(2):277-304.
BRUNNERMEIER S B, COHEN M A, 2003. Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturingindustries[J]. Journal of environmental economics and management, 45(2):278-293.
CHEN Z F, ZHANG X, CHEN F L, 2021. Do carbon emission trading schemes stimulate green innovation inenterprises? Evidence from China[J/OL]. Technological forecasting and social change, 168. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j. techfore. 2021. 120744.
DAVIS L R, RICCHIUTE D N, TROMPETER G, 1993. Audit effort, audit fees, and the provision ofnonaudit services to audit clients[J]. The accounting review, 68(1):135-150.
DU X Q, JIAN W, ZENG Q, et al., 2016. Do auditors applaud corporate environmental performance?Evidence from China[J]. Journal of business ethics, 151(4):1049-1080.
FAN J P H, WONG T J, ZHANG T Y, 2007. Politically connected CEOs, corporate governance, and post-'IPO performance of Chinas newly partially privatized firms[J]. Journal of financial economics, 84(2):330-357.
FRANCIS J R, YU M D, 2009. Big 4 office size and audit quality[J]. The accounting review, 84(5):1521-1552.
GONG Q H, LI O Z, LIN Y P, et al., 2015. On the benefits of audit market consolidation:evidence frommerged audit firms[J]. The accounting review, 91(2):463-488.
GUNNINGHAM N, GRABOSKY P, SINCLAIR D, 1998. Smart regulation[M]. Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress.
HAY D C, KNECHEL W R, WONG N, 2006. Audit fees:a meta-analysis of the effect of supply anddemand attributes[J]. Contemporary accounting research, 23(1):141-191.
HE G, JIANG H Y, ZHU Y N, 2024. The effect of digital technology development on the improvement ofenvironmental governance capacity:a case study of China[J/OL]. Ecological indicators, 165. https://doi. org/10. 1016/j. ecolind. 2024. 112162.
HOOPES J L, MERKLEY K J, PACELLI J, et al., 2018. Audit personnel salaries and audit quality[J].Review of accounting studies, 23(3):1096-1136.
JOHNSTONE K M, BEDARD J C, 2004. Audit firm portfolio management decisions[J ]. Journal ofaccounting research, 42(4):659-690.
'KARPLUS V J, WU M Y, 2023. Dynamic responses of SO2pollution to Chinas environmental inspections[J/OL].Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 120(17). DOI:10.1073/pnas.2214262120.
LIU B Y, DU H Y, FAN J, et al., 2021. The gap between public perceptions and monitoring indicators ofenvironmental quality in Beijing[J/OL]. Journal of environmental management, 277. https://doi. org/10.1016/j. jenvman. 2020. 111414.
LIU Z, SHEN H T, WELKER M, et al., 2021. Gone with the wind:an externality of earnings pressure[J/OL].Journal of accounting and economics, 72(1). https://doi. org/10. 1016/j. jacceco. 2021. 101403.
LOBO G J, ZHAO Y P, 2013. Relation between audit effort and financial report misstatements:evidencefrom quarterly and annual restatements[J]. The accounting review, 88(4):1385-1412.
LU Y, TAO Z G, ZHU L M, 2017. Identifying FDI spillovers[J]. Journal of international economics, 107:75-90.
MI Z F, ZENG G, XIN X R, et al., 2018. The extension of the Porter hypothesis:can the role ofenvironmental regulation on economic development be affected by other dimensional regulations?[J]. Journalof cleaner production, 203:933-942.
POPE S, PEILLEX J, EL OUADGHIRI I, et al., 2023. Floodlight or spotlight? Public attention and theselective disclosure of environmental information[J]. Journal of management studies, 61(4):1230-1265.
SIMUNIC D A, 1980. The pricing of audit services:theory and evidence[J]. Journal of accounting research,18(1):161-190.
WANG L T, ZHANG H J, JIN L, et al., 2023. How to realize digital transformation in satellite communicationindustry?—configuration analysis based on the technology-organization-environment framework[J/OL].Frontiers in environmental science, 11. https://doi. org/10. 3389/fenvs. 2023. 1002135.
WU X T, LUO L, YOU J X, 2025. Actions speak louder than words:environmental law enforcement andaudit fees[J]. Review of accounting studies, 30(1):519-574.
ZENG H X, LI X M, ZHOU Q, et al., 2022. Local government environmental regulatory pressures andcorporate environmental strategies:evidence from natural resource accountability audits in China[J].Business strategy and the environment, 31(7):3060-3082.
ZHANG Q, YU Z, KONG D M, 2019. The real effect of legal institutions:environmental courts and firmenvironmental protection expenditure[J/OL]. Journal of environmental economics and management, 98.https://doi. org/10. 1016/j. jeem. 2019. 102254.
(1)各地通过智慧环境监管平台远程推送识别线索,有效缓解监管区域大、执法人员不足等问题。(详见:https://www. mee. gov. cn/ywdt/dfnews/202003/t20200316_769146. shtml。)
(2)各省市通过公开污染排放数据、引入公众参与,对企业环境行为起到积极的监督作用。(详见https://finance. sina. com. cn/esg/2023-02-02/doc-imyehyin6701896. shtml。)
(3)各省市通过积极推动智慧监管能力建设,显著提升环境执法精准度。(详见http://www. legaldaily. com. cn/index/content/2024-12/24/content_9106746. html。)
(1)依据中国证券监督委员会2012年修订的《上市公司行业分类指引》、环境保护部2008年制定的《上市公司环保核查行业分类管理名录》(环办函[2008] 373号)以及《上市公司环境信息披露指南》(环办函[2010]78号),主要包括煤炭、采矿、纺织、制革、造纸、石化、制药、化工、冶金、火电等16个重污染行业。
基本信息:
中图分类号:X322;F832.51;F239.4
引用信息:
[1]王洋洋,廖家豪,李英.智慧环境监管与审计定价——来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J].当代会计评论,2025,2(04):97-119.
基金信息:
国家自然科学基金(72362023); 江西省社会科学重点项目(24YJ02); 江西省研究生创新专项资金项目(YC2025-B117)的支持
