本研究旨在探討我國上市化學工業公司研發支出與資本支出之價值攸關性，並進一步分析不同子產業特性與永續表現對投資性支出與公司價值關係之影響。近年來，化學產業受全球低碳轉型、環保法規趨嚴及高附加價值材料需求提升影響，產業競爭模式逐漸由傳統產能規模導向轉向技術創新與永續轉型能力，因此研發投入與資本投資對企業價值之影響亦受到市場關注。本研究以 2016 年至 2024 年我國上市化工業公司為研究樣本，依循 Ohlson（1995）價值攸關性模型進行實證分析。研究結果顯示，研發支出對公司價值具有顯著正向影響，而資本支出於整體樣本中未呈現顯著之價值攸關性。進一步分析結果顯示，研發支出之價值攸關性高於資本支出，且其影響效果隨子產業特性而有所差異。子產業分析結果發現，於技術導向程度較高之子產業中，研發支出較容易被市場視為具有未來成長潛力之資訊。此外，納入 TESG 永續分數之分析結果顯示，永續表現可能影響市場對不同投資性支出之評價方式，其中資本支出於永續表現較佳之企業中較容易被市場給予正向評價。另以 Tobin’s Q 作為公司價值之替代衡量指標進行穩健性檢驗，實證結果與主模型方向大致一致，顯示研究結論具有一定穩健性。本研究結果可補充化學產業投資性支出與公司價值關聯之相關文獻，並提供企業投資決策、產業分析及後續研究之參考。

This study examines the value relevance of research and development (R&D) expenditures and capital expenditures in Taiwan’s listed chemical companies, and further investigates whether sub-industry characteristics and sustainability performance influence the relationship between investment expenditures and firm value. In recent years, the chemical industry has experienced structural transformation driven by stricter environmental regulations, low-carbon transition, ESG-related pressures, and increasing demand for high value-added materials. Under such industrial trends, market competition has gradually shifted from production scale toward technological capability, product differentiation, and sustainability transformation. Therefore, how the capital market evaluates different types of investment expenditures has become an important issue in the chemical industry.
This study uses listed chemical companies in Taiwan during the period from 2016 to 2024 as the research sample and adopts the value relevance framework proposed by Ohlson (1995). The empirical results show that R&D expenditures are positively and significantly associated with firm value, whereas capital expenditures do not exhibit significant value relevance in the overall sample. Further analysis indicates that the value relevance of R&D expenditures is stronger than that of capital expenditures, suggesting that the capital market places greater emphasis on firms’ technological innovation capability and long-term growth potential.
Sub-industry analyses further reveal significant industrial heterogeneity. In technology-oriented sub-industries, such as resin and specialty chemical industries, R&D expenditures are more likely to be positively valued by the market. By contrast, the effects of capital expenditures remain insignificant in most sub-industries. In addition, the results incorporating TESG sustainability scores indicate that sustainability performance may influence how the market evaluates different types of investment expenditures. Specifically, capital expenditures are more likely to receive positive market valuation in firms with better sustainability performance.
Furthermore, robustness tests using Tobin’s Q as an alternative proxy for firm value yield results generally consistent with the main model. Overall, the findings suggest that different types of investment expenditures convey distinct economic implications in the chemical industry, and that sustainability transformation and industry characteristics further affect the market valuation mechanism. This study contributes to the literature on investment expenditures and firm value in the chemical industry and provides implications for corporate investment decisions, sustainability transformation, and future research.

一、中文文獻
歐進士(1998)，我國企業研究發展與經營績效關聯之實證，中山管理評論， 6(2)，頁357-386。
金成隆、林修葳、邱煒恒(2005)。研究發展支出與資本支出的價值攸關性：以企業生命週期論析。中山管理評論，13(3)，617-643。
程銀宗(2000)，資本支出宣告之市場反應影響因素探討，國立中正大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
黃雅苓(1999)，研究發展支出與經營績效關係及其費用化之探討－以台灣上市公司之電子業與非電子業為例，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。
劉正田(2001)，研發支出資本化之會計基礎股票評價，會計評論，33，頁1-26。
劉昱廷(2016)，資本支出對股價報酬率之影響：產業別分析，國立臺灣大學財務金融學研究所碩士論文。
陳振遠、張智堯、王蘭芬、李文智(2004)，應用Ohlson會計評價模型探究公司治理之價值攸關性—以台灣上市公司電子業為例，臺大管理論叢，15(2)，頁123-141。
陳琬妮(2013)，研究發展費用和股價報酬率的相關性，國立中正大學財務金融研究所碩士論文。
陳筱淇(2024)，結合TESG評分與財務數據觀察臺灣上市公司表現，國立臺灣大學管理學院商學研究所碩士論文。
國際會計準則理事會（International Accounting Standards Board, IASB）（2004）。《國際會計準則第 38 號：無形資產（IAS 38）》。IFRS Foundation。
國家科學及技術委員會。科技統計資料庫－OECD 分類企業部門研發經費（依我國行業分類）。取自：https://wsts.nstc.gov.tw/stsweb/technology/TechnologyStatistics.aspx?language=C&ID=7
二、英文文獻
Ball, R., and Brown, P.(1968), “An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers,” Journal of Accounting Research, 6(2) , pp.159-178.
Barth, M. E., Beaver, W. H., Hand, J. R., and Landsman, W. R. (1999) , “Accruals, cash flows, and equity values,” Review of Accounting Studies, 4, pp.205-229.
Barth, M. E., Li, K., and McClure, C. G. (2022) , “Evolution in value relevance of accounting information,” The Accounting Review, 98(1) , pp.1-28.
Beaver, W. H. (1968) , “The information content of annual earnings announcements,” Journal of Accounting Research, 6, pp.67-92.
Biddle, G. C., Hilary, G., and Verdi, R. S. (2009), “How does financial reporting quality relate to investment efficiency?”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 48(2–3), pp.112–131.
Chan, L. K. C., Lakonishok, J., and Sougiannis, T. (2001) , “The stock market valuation of research and development expenditures,” The Journal of Finance, 56(6) , pp.2431-2456.
Chung, K. H., Wright, P., and Charoenwong, C. (1998) , “Investment opportunities and market reaction to capital expenditure decisions,” Journal of Banking and Finance, 22, pp.41-60.
Chirinko, R. S. (1993), “Business fixed investment spending: Modeling strategies, empirical results, and policy implications,” Journal of Economic Literature, 31(4), pp.1875-1911.
Collins, D. W., Maydew, E. L., and Weiss, I. S. (1997), “Changes in the value-relevance of earnings and book values over the past forty years,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24(1), pp.39–67.
Eberhart, A. C., Maxwell, W. F., and Siddique, A. R. (2004), “An examination of long‐term abnormal stock returns and operating performance following R&D increases,” Journal of Finance, 59(2), pp. 623–650.
Feltham, G., and J. Ohlson. (1995). Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2), 689–731.
Jin, S., Xiong, R., Peng, H., and Tang, S. (2025) , “ESG performance and private enterprise resilience: Evidence from Chinese financial markets,” International Review of Financial Analysis, 98, pp.103884.
Lee, C. C. (2007) , “Empirical investigation of the Ohlson model: The case of Taiwan,” Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets and Policies, 10(4) , pp.519-542.
Lev, B., and Sougiannis, T. (1996) , “The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21(1) , pp.107-138.
McConnell, J. J., and Muscarella, C. J. (1985), “Corporate capital expenditure decisions and the market value of the firm,” Journal of Financial Economics, 14(3), pp.399-422.
Mahmood, A., Mehmood, A., Terzani, S., De Luca, F., and Djajadikerta, H. G. (2024) , “ESG performance and firm value: Evidence from EU-listed firms,” SSRN Working Paper, No. 4930587.
Morbey, G. K., and Reithner, R. M. (1990) , “How R&D affects sales growth, productivity and profitability,” Research Technology Management, 33(3) , pp.11-14.
Ohlson, J. A. (1995) , “Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation,” Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2) , pp.661-687.
Sougiannis, T. (1994) , “The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D,” The Accounting Review, 69(1) , pp.44-68.
Aydoğmuş, M., Gülay, G., and Ergün, B. (2022) , “Impact of ESG performance on firm value and profitability,” Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(2) , pp.246-258.