The COVID‐19 epidemic broke out in China in January 2020, which triggered the largest wave of corporate philanthropic donations since the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Based on A‐share listed firms in the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges in 2020, we study whether substantive and symbolic corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategies affect corporate philanthropic responses during the COVID‐19 crisis. We use the lagged annual donation and technical dimension scores (T scores) of rankins ratings (RKS) as proxies of CSR performance and CSR disclosure and then define the CSR gap as the gap between the two. The results show that substantive and symbolic strategies cause firms to have material differential responses in the COVID‐19 crisis. Specifically, the CSR gap is negatively related to the possibility and the level of crisis donation. In addition, (1) this difference is more pronounced in the earlier period of the COVID‐19 crisis; (2) the negative correlation is more pronounced in private firms; and (3) the crisis donation of firms with either strategy obtains no different response from the capital market. Our evidence suggests that the established CSR strategy influences the substantive response of Chinese firms to public emergencies, but their substantive response does not result in different reactions in the capital market.

This paper investigates the influence of board network centrality on corporate social responsibility (CSR) decoupling. CSR decoupling refers to the gap between corporate internal and external actions in CSR practices. Specifically, we measure CSR decoupling as the difference between corporate social disclosure (CSD) and corporate social performance (CSP). This paper uses a sample of Chinese A-share listed firms during 2009–2018, takes the technical dimension score (T-score) and content dimension score (C-score) of RKS ratings as proxies of CSD and CSP, and obtains CSR decoupling as the difference between CSD and CSP. Our results show that (1) board network centrality is positively related to over-decoupling in the pre-adoption period (2009–2014) of the new environmental law but negatively related to over-decoupling in the post-adoption period (2015–2018) and (2) centrality is not related to under-decoupling in the pre-adoption period but a significantly positive related in the post-adoption period. Our finding reveals a complex role of the board network in CSR practices in China.