Replication Data for: Environmental Regulation, Green Finance, and Corporate Green Investment Efficiency

This study utilizes Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2015 to 2022 as the overall sample, applying the following data screening criteria. (1) Financial firms are excluded due to significant differences in business models, operational risks, and profit generation methods compared to manufacturing firms, resulting in a lack of representativeness and comparability among samples. (2) Firms undergoing ownership changes or shifts in primary business operations during the sample period are excluded. (3) Firms designated as ST or *ST during the sample period are excluded. (4) Firms with missing data or obvious outliers are excluded. Data are sourced from the Wind database, the China National Research Database (CNRDS), and official websites such as the National Bureau of Statistics. For certain corporate data not available from authoritative websites, manual collection is conducted by reviewing firms’ annual reports and other materials. The final valid sample consists of 10,424 observations.The following conclusions are drawn from the research findings. (i) Environmental regulation exhibits a pronounced “inverted U-shaped” nonlinear relationship with corporate green investment efficiency. Environmental Regulation promotes efficiency below a critical threshold, while exceeding this threshold inhibits it. Moreover, different regulatory tools demonstrate distinct effects, with market-based environmental regulation showing a more pronounced “inverted U-shaped” relationship with green investment efficiency. (ii) Green finance enhances corporate green investment efficiency and significantly strengthens the “inverted U-shaped” relationship between market-based environmental regulation and corporate green investment efficiency. However, green finance does not play a discernible role in how administrative environmental regulation influences corporate green investment efficiency. (iii) Environmental regulation exerts a pronounced “inverted U-shaped” effect on corporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance, which in turn positively correlates with green investment efficiency. Therefore, environmental regulation has an “inverted U-shaped” nonlinear impact on green investment efficiency by influencing corporate ESG performance. (iv) Environmental regulation exhibits a “U-shaped” relationship with Type I agency costs, and these costs inhibit improvements in corporate green investment efficiency. However, Type II agency costs do not show a significant impact on the transmission path of environmental regulation affecting corporate green investment efficiency.