摘要：在企业高质量发展导向下，聚焦客户公司可持续发展能力的外部ESG评级分歧是否被纳入审计定价值得关注。本文采用2012—2022年度沪深A股上市公司样本,实证检验了ESG评级分歧对审计定价的影响,以及审计市场预防性监管程度的调节效用。研究结果表明：企业ESG评级分歧越大,审计定价越高，预防性监管强度能够有效缓解ESG评级分歧对审计定价的正向影响。通过一系列稳健性检验后,上述研究结论依然成立。机制检验得出，ESG评级分歧会通过恶化企业信息环境，降低审计师对于盈余管理行为的容忍程度，提高审计师定价；异质性分析得出,在企业ESG平均评级较高、非重污染企业、审计师具备行业专长、由大规模会计师事务所审计的企业中，ESG评级分歧与审计定价之间的正向关系更显著；区分中注协约谈方式下,当面约谈和电话约谈较书面约谈更能发挥ESG评级分歧的替代效用。为此，中国注册会计师协会应通过审计监管，加强对ESG评级分歧企业的审计风险防范，监管部门应推动建立更为有效的ESG评价体系。
关键词：ESG评级分歧；审计定价；预防性监管；企业信息环境；审计师风险判断
ESG Rating Discrepancies and Audit Pricing: A Preventive Regulatory Perspective
Deng Kaiyue, Lv Wendai, Ji Qiang
Abstract：In light of the growing emphasis on high-quality development, it is essential to examine whether ESG rating divergence is factored into audit pricing. This paper explores the relationship between ESG rating divergence and audit pricing among Chinese listed firms from 2012 to 2022, also considering the moderating influence of preventive regulation. Our empirical analysis reveals that greater ESG rating divergence is associated with higher audit pricing. Furthermore, we find that the strength of preventive regulation weakens the positive correlation between ESG rating divergence and audit pricing. These findings remain robust across various sensitivity tests. Additional investigations indicate that ESG rating divergence contributes to increased audit pricing by negatively impacting the corporate information environment and reducing auditor risk tolerance for earnings management. Heterogeneity analysis further unveils that the positive relationship between ESG rating divergence and audit pricing is especially pronounced for enterprises with higher ESG rating, non-heavy-polluting industries, engage auditors with industry expertise, or are audited by top accounting firms. Moreover, our research identifies that face-to-face and telephone interviews conducted by the CICPA (China Institute of Certified Public Accountants) are more effective than written interviews as substitutes for resolving ESG rating disagreement. It is recommend that the CICPA should enhance audit risk prevention for firms with significant ESG rating divergence through intensified regulatory oversight, while policymakers should prioritize establishing a more unified and effective ESG evaluation framework to reduce the negative impact of the divergence.
Keywords：ESG Rating Divergence; Audit Pricing; Preventive Regulation; Corporate Information Environment; Auditor Risk Judgment
