The high-quality development of new energy enterprises is of great significance to promote carbon peak and carbon neutrality and cope with the global warming crisis. However, with the increasing intensity of market competition and the appropriate weakening of the expected future subsidies, how to improve their performance through the fulfillment of the social responsibility of stakeholders has become a key scientific problem to be solved. Given the features of the new energy industry, including substantial initial investment, formidable technical barriers, and a pronounced reliance on policy support, this paper takes 182 new energy concept enterprises listed in China's A-shares in 2011–2020 as the research object. Employing qualitative comparative analysis, we extract four key rules for achieving high performance in new energy enterprises from the perspective of value co-creation of core stakeholders, including capital stakeholders (shareholders and creditors), technical stakeholders (employees), policy stakeholders (government and society), and upstream and downstream stakeholders (suppliers and customers). Then, we explore the performance improvement rules of typical cases. Our findings reveal that within the realm of new energy enterprises, capital-intensive enterprises with cost leadership and tax incentives, energy-manufacturing enterprises with suppliers dependence and saving environmental input, technology-innovation enterprises with cost leadership and talents dependence, and comprehensive-mature enterprises with suppliers dependence and tax incentives are more likely to achieve high performance. The findings can better guide management practice and promote the high-quality development of new energy enterprises.

1.
Z.
Khan
,
S.
Ali
,
M.
Umar
,
D.
Kirikkaleli
, and
Z.
Jiao
, “
Consumption-based carbon emissions and international trade in G7 countries: The role of environmental innovation and renewable energy
,”
Sci. Total Environ.
730
,
138945
(
2020
).
2.
Z.
Caineng
,
B.
Xiong
,
X.
Huaqing
,
D.
Zheng
,
G.
Zhixin
,
W.
Ying
,
L.
Jiang
,
P.
Songqi
, and
W.
Songtao
, “
The role of new energy in carbon neutral
,”
Pet. Explor. Dev.
48
(
2
),
480
491
(
2021
).
3.
Y.
Cui
,
S. U.
Khan
,
Z.
Li
, and
M.
Zhao
, “
Environmental effect, price subsidy and financial performance: Evidence from Chinese new energy enterprises
,”
Energy Policy
149
,
112050
(
2021
).
4.
R.-K.
Ye
,
Z.-F.
Gao
,
K.
Fang
,
K.-L.
Liu
, and
J.-W.
Chen
, “
Moving from subsidy stimulation to endogenous development: A system dynamics analysis of China's NEVs in the post-subsidy era
,”
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change
168
,
120757
(
2021
).
5.
J.
Zhang
,
M. S.
Islam
,
M.
Jambulingam
,
W. M.
Lim
, and
S.
Kumar
, “
Leveraging environmental corporate social responsibility to promote green purchases: The case of new energy vehicles in the era of sustainable development
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
434
,
139988
(
2024
).
6.
L.
Liu
,
S.
Liu
,
L.
Wu
,
J.
Zhu
, and
G.
Shang
, “
Forecasting the development trend of new energy vehicles in China by an optimized fractional discrete grey power model
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
372
,
133708
(
2022
).
7.
W.
Yue
,
Y.
Liu
,
Y.
Tong
, and
Z.
Song
, “
Role of government subsidies in the new energy vehicle charging infrastructure industry: A three-party game perspective
,”
Chin. J. Popul., Resour. Environ.
19
(
2
),
143
150
(
2021
).
8.
J.
Ma
,
X.
Liu
,
Y.
Chen
,
G.
Wang
,
X.
Zhao
,
Y.
He
,
S.
Xu
,
K.
Zhang
, and
Y.
Zhang
, “
China's new energy vehicle industry and technology development status and countermeasures
,”
J. China Highw.
31
(
8
),
1
19
(
2018
).
9.
B.
Yuan
, “
Research on the development of China's new energy vehicle industry in the post subsidy era
,”
Reg. Econ. Rev.
3
,
58
64
(
2020
).
10.
N.
Ye
,
T.-B.
Kueh
,
L.
Hou
,
Y.
Liu
, and
H.
Yu
, “
A bibliometric analysis of corporate social responsibility in sustainable development
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
272
,
122679
(
2020
).
11.
L. H. D.
Chi
and
B. T. T.
Hang
, “
Corporate social responsibility expenditure and financial performance: A comparison of Vietnamese listed and unlisted banks
,”
Cogent Econ. Finance
11
(
1
),
2203987
(
2023
).
12.
M.
Aydoğmuş
,
G.
Gulay
, and
K.
Ergun
, “
Impact of ESG performance on firm value and profitability
,”
Borsa Istanbul Rev.
22
(
2
),
S119
S127
(
2022
).
13.
H. U.
Rahman
,
M.
Zahid
, and
M. A. S.
Al-Faryan
, “
ESG and corporate performance: The rarely explored moderation of sustainability strategy and top management commitment
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
404
,
136859
(
2023
).
14.
M.
Karwowski
and
M.
Raulinajtys‐Grzybek
, “
The application of corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions for mitigation of environmental, social, corporate governance (ESG) and reputational risk in integrated reports
,”
Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manage.
28
(
4
),
1270
1284
(
2021
).
15.
M.
Friedman
,
Capitalism and Freedom
(
University of Chicago Press
,
Chicago
,
1962
).
16.
T. M.
Jones
, “
Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined
,”
Calif. Manage. Rev.
22
(
3
),
59
67
(
1980
).
17.
N. C.
Smith
, “
Corporate social responsibility: Whether or how?
,”
Calif. Manage. Rev.
45
(
4
),
52
76
(
2003
).
18.
D. W.
Greening
and
D. B.
Turban
, “
Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce
,”
Bus. Soc.
39
(
3
),
254
280
(
2000
).
19.
S. P.
Saeidi
,
S.
Sofian
,
P.
Saeidi
,
S. P.
Saeidi
, and
S. A.
Saaeidi
, “
How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction
,”
J. Bus. Res.
68
(
2
),
341
350
(
2015
).
20.
M. A.
Al-Shammari
,
S. N.
Banerjee
, and
A. A.
Rasheed
, “
Corporate social responsibility and corporate performance: A theory of dual responsibility
,”
Manage. Decis.
60
(
6
),
1513
1540
(
2022
).
21.
Z.
Xiang
and
Z.
Wukang
, “
An empirical study on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate performance in oil and gas industry
,”
J. Xi 'an Univ. Finance Econ.
34
(
6
),
108
117
(
2021
).
22.
A. K.
Lau
,
P. K.
Lee
, and
T.
Cheng
, “
An empirical taxonomy of corporate social responsibility in China's manufacturing industries
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
188
,
322
338
(
2018
).
23.
A.
Venugopal
and
D.
Shukla
, “
Identifying consumers' engagement with renewable energy
,”
Bus. Strategy Environ.
28
(
1
),
53
63
(
2019
).
24.
X.-l.
Xu
and
C. K.
Liu
, “
How to keep renewable energy enterprises to reach economic sustainable performance: From the views of intellectual capital and life cycle
,”
Energy Sustainability Soc.
9
(
1
),
7
(
2019
).
25.
P.
Wang
,
Z.
Lu
, and
J.
Sun
, “
Influential effects of intrinsic-extrinsic incentive factors on management performance in new energy enterprises
,”
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
15
(
2
),
292
(
2018
).
26.
G.
Luo
,
Y.
Liu
,
L.
Zhang
,
X.
Xu
, and
Y.
Guo
, “
Do governmental subsidies improve the financial performance of China's new energy power generation enterprises?
,”
Energy
227
,
120432
(
2021
).
27.
J.
Wei
,
R.
Xiong
,
M.
Hassan
,
A. M.
Shoukry
,
F. F.
Aldeek
, and
J.
Khader
, “
Entrepreneurship, corporate social responsibilities, and innovation impact on banks' financial performance
,”
Front. Psychol.
12
,
680661
(
2021
).
28.
A. K.
Sekhon
and
L. M.
Kathuria
, “
Analyzing the impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance: Evidence from top Indian firms
,”
Corporate Governance
20
(
1
),
143
157
(
2020
).
29.
S. C.
Qiu
,
J.
Jiang
,
X.
Liu
,
M.-H.
Chen
, and
X.
Yuan
, “
Can corporate social responsibility protect firm value during the COVID-19 pandemic?
,”
Int. J. Hospitality Manage.
93
,
102759
(
2021
).
30.
H.
Rjiba
,
A.
Jahmane
, and
I.
Abid
, “
Corporate social responsibility and firm value: Guiding through economic policy uncertainty
,”
Finance Res. Lett.
35
,
101553
(
2020
).
31.
L.
Becchetti
,
S.
Di Giacomo
, and
D.
Pinnacchio
, “
Corporate social responsibility and corporate performance: Evidence from a panel of US listed companies
,”
Appl. Econ.
40
(
5
),
541
567
(
2008
).
32.
X.
Dai
,
W.
Zhu
,
C.
Zhang
,
Y.
Wu
, and
X.
Hu
, “
How to manage intellectual capital configurations to improve corporate performance in the internet medical industry
,”
J. Bus. Econ. Manage.
23
(
1
),
20–39
20–39
(
2022
).
33.
R. M.
Haniffa
and
T. E.
Cooke
, “
The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting
,”
J. Account. Public Policy
24
(
5
),
391
430
(
2005
).
34.
S.
Pahuja
, “
Relationship between environmental disclosures and corporate characteristics: A study of large manufacturing companies in India
,”
Soc. Responsib. J.
5
(
2
),
227
244
(
2009
).
35.
C. T.
Setyorini
and
Z.
Ishak
, “
Corporate social and environmental disclosure: A positive accounting theory view point
,”
Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci.
3
(
9
),
152
164
(
2012
).
36.
R. J.
Brodie
,
H.
Löbler
, and
J. A.
Fehrer
, “
Evolution of service-dominant logic: Towards a paradigm and metatheory of the market and value cocreation?
,”
Ind. Mark. Manage.
79
,
3
12
(
2019
).
37.
C.
Shousheng
,
L.
Jinfeng
, and
S.
Jun
, “
Social responsibility and corporate value enhancement of listed tourism enterprises: An empirical study based on QCA method
,”
J. Shandong Univ.
246
(
3
),
117
126
(
2021
).
38.
P. C.
Fiss
, “
A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations
,”
Acad. Manage. Rev.
32
(
4
),
1180
1198
(
2007
).
39.
C. C.
Ragin
,
The Comparative Method: Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies
(
University of California Press
,
2014
).
40.
M.
Brogi
and
V.
Lagasio
, “
Environmental, social, and governance and company profitability: Are financial intermediaries different?
,”
Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manage.
26
(
3
),
576
587
(
2019
).
41.
F.
He
,
S.
Qin
,
Y.
Liu
, and
J. G.
Wu
, “
CSR and idiosyncratic risk: Evidence from ESG information disclosure
,”
Finance Res. Lett.
49
,
102936
(
2022
).
42.
G.
Friede
,
T.
Busch
, and
A.
Bassen
, “
ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies
,”
J. Sustainable Finance Investment
5
(
4
),
210
233
(
2015
).
43.
Y.
Yurong
and
H.
Huifen
, “
Empirical analysis of the relationship between corporate performance and stakeholders - Based on data from Anhui listed companies
,”
Bus. Econ. Res.
1
,
90
91
(
2017
).
44.
A.
Uyar
,
C.
Kuzey
, and
A. S.
Karaman
, “
ESG performance and CSR awards: Does consistency matter?
,”
Finance Res. Lett.
50
,
103276
(
2022
).
45.
D. Z.
Huang
, “
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) activity and corporate performance: A review and consolidation
,”
Account. Finance
61
(
1
),
335
360
(
2021
).
46.
Z.
Weidong
,
Z.
Chao
,
W.
Yong
et al, “
A study on the evolutionary model of labor capital symbiosis between employees and shareholders - based on the theory of value-added and stakeholders
,”
J. Manage. Sci.
22
(
02
),
112
126
(
2019
).
47.
B.
Rihoux
and
C. C.
Ragin
,
Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques
(
Sage Publications
,
2008
).
48.
P. C.
Fiss
, “
Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research
,”
Acad. Manage. J.
54
(
2
),
393
420
(
2011
).
49.
C. C.
Ragin
,
Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond
(
University of Chicago Press
,
2008
).
50.
C. C.
Ragin
and
P. C.
Fiss
, “
Net effects analysis versus configurational analysis: An empirical demonstration
,” in
Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond
(
University of Chicago Press
,
2008
), pp.
190
212
.
51.
T.
Ketao
,
Z.
Shudan
, and
Z.
Yunhui
, “
What determines the performance of government public health governance? - Based on linkage effect of the QCA method research
,”
Manage. World
5
(
5
),
128
138
(
2021
).
52.
M. W.
Zafar
,
M.
Shahbaz
,
A.
Sinha
,
T.
Sengupta
, and
Q.
Qin
, “
How renewable energy consumption contribute to environmental quality? The role of education in OECD countries
,”
J. Cleaner Prod.
268
,
122149
(
2020
).
You do not currently have access to this content.