在當代資本市場中，企業之ESG績效對外部資訊使用者——特別是財務分析師——之預測決策，扮演舉足輕重之角色。隨著國際永續趨勢推進，環境、社會與公司治理（ESG）議題已從過往單純之社會責任倡議，逐步轉化為資本市場關切之核心議題。台灣金融監督管理委員會自2014年起逐步擴大強制揭露之適用範圍，使企業ESG揭露由「自願行為」轉為「合規要求」。然而，過往研究多以二元揭露變數衡量ESG資訊，較少以連續性績效指標同時檢視其對資訊環境不同層面之差異化影響路徑。 本研究以2014年至2024年台灣上市公司之追蹤資料（Panel Data）為研究樣本，以ESG三構面加總績效分數（TOTAL = E_SCORE + S_SCORE + G_SCORE，範圍0–143）作為核心自變數，檢視其對七項應變數之影響：財報可比性（COMP）、永續報告書可驗證性（VER）、確定性語調（TONE）、綜合揭露績效指標（COMPOSITE）、分析師追蹤人數（FOLLOWER）、預測誤差（ERROR）及預測離散度（DISP）。本研究進一步將應變數區分為「永續報告書品質層」與「資本市場行為層」兩個傳導層次，據此檢視ESG績效對不同層面之差異化效果。 實證結果發現：第一，ESG揭露績效對永續報告書可比性具有顯著正向影響（H1），對永續報告書可驗證性亦呈顯著正向效應（H2），顯示ESG績效有效提升永續報告書品質層之資訊特性。第二，ESG揭露績效對確定性語調呈顯著負向效應（H3），此一反直覺發現揭示績效分數提升未必帶來語調正面化，兩者間存在非線性張力。第三，ESG揭露績效對資本市場行為層（預測誤差H4、預測離散度H5、分析師追蹤人數H6）之影響均不顯著，呈現明顯之「天花板現象」——在控制公司規模、財務特性等結構性因素後，ESG績效之邊際效應相當有限。第四，ESG三構面（E、S、G）對財報可比性皆呈正向影響，惟強度存在異質性：社會與環境之效果幅度相當，且均約為治理之兩倍，支持構面重大性（materiality）觀點。;In today’s capital markets， a company’s ESG performance plays a pivotal role in the forecasting and decision-making of external information users—particularly financial analysts. As global sustainability trends advance， environmental， social， and corporate governance (ESG) issues have gradually evolved from mere social responsibility initiatives into core concerns of the capital markets. Since 2014， Taiwan’s Financial Supervisory Commission has gradually expanded the scope of mandatory disclosure， transforming corporate ESG disclosure from a “voluntary practice” into a “regulatory requirement.” However， previous studies have primarily measured ESG information using binary disclosure variables， with few examining the differentiated impact pathways on various aspects of the information environment using continuous performance indicators. This study uses panel data from Taiwanese listed companies from 2014 to 2024 as its sample. It employs the aggregate performance score across the three ESG dimensions (TOTAL = E_SCORE + S_SCORE + G_SCORE， range 0–143) as the core independent variable to examine its impact on seven dependent variables: financial statement comparability (COMP)， sustainability report verifiability (VER)， certainty of tone (TONE)， composite disclosure performance index (COMPOSITE)， number of analysts covering the firm (FOLLOWER)， forecast error (ERROR)， and forecast dispersion (DISP). This study further categorizes the dependent variables into two transmission levels—“Sustainability report quality” and “Capital market behavior”—to examine the differentiated effects of ESG performance across these dimensions. The empirical results reveal: First， ESG disclosure performance has a significant positive effect on Sustainability report comparability (H1) and also exhibits a significant positive effect on the verifiability of sustainability reports (H2)， indicating that ESG performance effectively enhances the informational characteristics of the sustainability report quality layer. Second， ESG disclosure performance has a significant negative effect on the certainty of tone (H3). This counterintuitive finding reveals that higher iii performance scores do not necessarily lead to a more positive tone， indicating a nonlinear tension between the two. Third， the impact of ESG disclosure performance on the capital market behavior dimension (forecast error (H4)， and forecast dispersion (H5)， number of analysts covering the firm (H6)) was not significant， revealing a clear “ceiling effect”—after controlling for structural factors such as firm size and financial characteristics， the marginal effects of ESG performance were quite limited. Fourth， all three ESG dimensions (E， S， G) are positively associated with financial statement comparability， though with heterogeneous magnitudes: the social and Environmental dimensions exhibit comparable effect sizes， both roughly twice that of Governance， supporting the perspective of dimensional materiality.
