Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2023, Vol. 516 Issue (6): 94-112    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
人民币参与国际结算能否激励出口企业创新? ——基于跨境贸易人民币结算试点的研究
袁凯彬, 李万利, 张伟俊
西南财经大学金融学院,四川成都 611130;
湖南大学金融与统计学院,湖南长沙 410000;
兰州财经大学金融学院,甘肃兰州 730101
Does Renminbi Internationalization Foster Exporting Firm Innovation? Evidence from the Pilot Program of Cross-border Trade Settlement in Renminbi
YUAN Kaibin, LI Wanli, ZHANG Weijun
School of Finance, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics;
College of Finance and Statistics, Hunan University;
School of Finance, Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics
下载:  PDF (756KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 本文利用手工收集的企业层面参与跨境贸易人民币结算试点的数据,基于理论模型和回归分析,系统考察跨境人民币结算与出口企业创新的因果关系。研究发现,跨境人民币结算推广后,试点企业为增强议价权以便能用本币做出口结算,其创新动力会受到显著激发,专利产出数量大幅提升。且当出口企业对出口收入的依赖度越高、出口至非主导货币经济体的比重越大、货币错配越严重时,上述效应表现越明显。渠道分析表明,使用本币结算能够有效克服出口收入的随机性特征,期望损失及波动均有所降低,与理论模型分析一致。本文还发现,企业使用人民币结算能够提升生产率,但由于个体垄断势力有限,需要对技术升级所削减的边际成本进行“让利”,致使成本加成率未发生显著变化。本文利用企业层面的人民币结算冲击,为跨境人民币结算相关议题提供了微观经验证据,对有序推进人民币国际化和我国产业向全球价值链中高端迈进具有一定政策启示。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
袁凯彬
李万利
张伟俊
关键词:  人民币国际化  企业创新  外汇风险  议价权激励    
Summary:  The orderly promotion of the internationalization of the renminbi is emphasized in the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. The renminbi internationalization strategy first emerged when the People's Bank of China, the Ministry of Commerce, and other ministries jointly issued the “Administrative Measures for Pilot Cross-border Trade Settlement in Renminbi” in July 2009. According to these measures, pilot firms are no longer restricted to invoicing their current accounts in foreign currencies, thus offering a zero-break in the internationalization of the renminbi. The role of the renminbi in international settlements is steadily developing, and it has gradually become the world's fifth-largest settlement currency. The pilot program has provided the basic conditions for Chinese exporting firms to avoid foreign exchange exposure in international trade, allowing them to transition from the goal of earning foreign exchange to earning the domestic currency.
Theoretically, whether exporting firms use their domestic currency for trade invoicing does not only depend on external policy permissions, as firm-level bargaining power is required to actively choose the settlement currency in cross-border trade. Only when these two prerequisite conditions are simultaneously met can exporting firms achieve domestic currency settlement in cross-border transactions. The rigid requirements for domestic firms to settle in the domestic currency under the current account have been gradually eliminated since the pilot program for cross-border renminbi settlement was implemented in 2009. However, has the promotion of cross-border renminbi settlement achieved the expected policy goals, and what impact does it have on the economic behavior of exporting firms?
In this study, we examine the impact of cross-border renminbi settlement on the innovation of exporting firms. First, we construct a simplified theoretical model and finds that firms will actively expand their innovation activities to improve productivity under the incentive of higher expected profit targets, as they seek the marginal expected profit increase brought by domestic currency settlement. We then use the policy as a quasi-natural experiment and based on a manually collected list of firms participating in the pilot cross-border renminbi settlement program, we conduct our analysis using the difference-in-differences approach. The empirical results show that participating in cross-border renminbi settlement significantly stimulates innovation in exporting firms. The effect is more pronounced when these firms are more dependent on export revenue, have a larger proportion of exports to non-dominant currency economies, and face more severe currency mismatches. A channel analysis indicates that using domestic currency settlement can overcome the stochastic characteristics of export revenue, leading to a reduction in expected losses and volatility. We also find that using renminbi settlement can improve productivity, while the cost markup rate does not change significantly.
The contributions of our study are as follows. First, unlike other studies of the internationalization of the renminbi that mainly conduct qualitative or theoretical model analyses, we quantitatively examine the innovation incentive effects of the cross-border renminbi settlement policy on Chinese exporting firms. This novel approach provides micro empirical evidence of the issues related to cross-border renminbi settlement and has important policy implications for the orderly promotion of renminbi internationalization. Second, the choice of settlement currency has received increasing attention. Some scholars propose the dominant currency settlement theory to explain the popularity of the U.S. dollar, arguing that using the dollar can reduce transaction costs and optimize firms' resource allocation. However, most of these studies are theoretical. Our study provides empirical evidence and extends the theoretical understanding of settlement currency. Third, we contribute to the limited research into the relationship between settlement currency and firm innovation. The literature on the incentive effect of settlement currency and firm-level bargaining power is mainly limited to theoretical analysis or survey questionnaires, thus lacking quantitative testing using large samples. We therefore provide a valuable extension to this research.
Keywords:  Renminbi Internationalization    Firm Innovation    Foreign Exchange Risk    Bargaining Power Incentives
JEL分类号:  G30   F31   F38  
基金资助: * 本文感谢国家自然科学基金青年项目(72002068)和湖南省自然科学基金青年项目(2022JJ40104)的支持。感谢匿名审稿人的宝贵意见,文责自负。
通讯作者:  李万利,管理学博士,副教授,湖南大学金融与统计学院,E-mail:liwanli0223@hnu.edu.cn.   
作者简介:  袁凯彬,经济学博士,讲师,西南财经大学金融学院,E-mail:kaibin.yuan@foxmail.com.张伟俊,经济学博士,讲师,兰州财经大学金融学院,E-mail:zhangwj1125@foxmail.com.
引用本文:    
袁凯彬, 李万利, 张伟俊. 人民币参与国际结算能否激励出口企业创新? ——基于跨境贸易人民币结算试点的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 516(6): 94-112.
YUAN Kaibin, LI Wanli, ZHANG Weijun. Does Renminbi Internationalization Foster Exporting Firm Innovation? Evidence from the Pilot Program of Cross-border Trade Settlement in Renminbi. Journal of Financial Research, 2023, 516(6): 94-112.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2023/V516/I6/94
[1] 陈雨露、王芳、杨明,2005,《作为国家竞争战略的货币国际化:美元的经验证据——兼论人民币的国际化问题》,《经济研究》第2期,第35~44页。
[2] 邓贵川、彭红枫,2019,《货币国际化、定价货币变动与经济波动》,《世界经济》第6期,第20~46页。
[3] 郭飞、游绘新、郭慧敏,2018,《为什么使用外币债务?——中国上市公司的实证证据》,《金融研究》第3期,第137~154页。
[4] 李稻葵、尹兴中,2010,《国际货币体系新架构:后金融危机时代的研究》,《金融研究》第2期,第31~43页。
[5] 李绍荣、李四光,2010,《中国和东盟人民币贸易结算的经济学分析》,《经济研究》第2期,第18~31页。
[6] 孙杰,2014,《跨境结算人民币化还是人民币国际化?》,《国际金融研究》第4期,第39~49页。
[7] 许祥云、吴烨,2011,《货币国际化降低了出口汇率风险吗?——以金融危机中的日本为例》,《金融研究》第2期,第17~31页。
[8] 张贵乐、张乃忠,1993,《论人民币自由兑换和国际化问题》,《金融研究》第10期,第44~46页。
[9] 郑木清,1995,《论人民币国际化的经济效应》,《国际金融研究》第7期,第34~35页。
[10] Adam, T., Dasgupta, S., and S. Titman. 2007. “Financial Constraints, Competition, and Hedging in Industry Equilibrium”, Journal of Finance, 62(5):2445~2473.
[11] Allayannis, G., and E. Ofek. 2001. “Exchange Rate Exposure, Hedging, and the Use of Foreign Currency Derivatives”, Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2):273~296.
[12] Bacchetta, P., and E. van Wincoop. 2005. “A Theory of the Currency Denomination of International Trade”, Journal of International Economics, 67(2):295~319.
[13] Chava, S., A. Oettl, A. Subramanian, and K. V. Subramanian. 2013. “Banking Deregulation and Innovation”, Journal of Financial Economics, 109(3):759~774.
[14] Chipty, T. and C. M. Snyder. 1999. “The Role of Firm Size in Bilateral Bargaining: A Study of the Cable Television Industry”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(2):326~340.
[15] Chod, J., and E. Lyandres. 2011. “Strategic IPOs and Product Market Competition”, Journal of Financial Economics, 100(1):45~67.
[16] Devereux, M., W. Dong, and B. Tomlin. 2017. “Importers and Exporters in Exchange Rate Pass-through and Currency Invoicing”, Journal of International Economics, 105(C):187~204.
[17] Eichengreen, B. 2011. “The Renminbi as an International Currency”, Journal of Policy Modeling, 33(5):752~759.
[18] Fan, H., Y. A. Li, and S. R. Yeaple. 2018. “On the Relationship Between Quality and Productivity: Evidence From China's Accession to the WTO”, Journal of International Economics, 110(C): 28~49.
[19] Fidora, M., M. Fratzscher, and C. Thimann. 2007. “Home Bias in Global Bond and Equity Markets: The Role of Real Exchange Rate Volatility”, Journal of International Money and Finance, 26(4): 631~655.
[20] Friberg, R., and F. Wilander. 2008. “The Currency Denomination of Exports-A Questionnaire Study”, Journal of International Economics, 75(1):54~69.
[21] Goldberg, L. S., and C. Tille. 2013. “A Bargaining Theory of Trade Invoicing and Pricing”, National Bureau of Economic Research.
[22] Goldberg, L. S., and C. Tille. 2016. “Micro, Macro, and Strategic Forces in International Trade Invoicing: Synthesis and Novel Patterns”, Journal of International Economics, 102:173~187.
[23] Gopinath, G., E. Boz, C. Casas, F. J. Díez, P. Gourinchas, and M. Plagborg-Moller. 2020. “Dominant Currency Paradigm”, American Economic Review, 110(3):677~719.
[24] Gopinath, G., and J. C. Stein. 2021. “Banking, Trade, and the Making of a Dominant Currency”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 136(2):783~830.
[25] Ito, H., and M. Kawai. 2016. “Trade Invoicing in Major Currencies in the 1970S-1990S: Lessons for Renminbi Internationalization”, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 42(C):123~145.
[26] Ito, T., S. Koibuchi, K. Sato, and J. Shimizu, 2012. “The Choice of an Invoicing Currency by Globally Operating Firms: A Firm‐Level Analysis of Japanese Exporters”, International Journal of Finance & Economics, 17(4), 305~320.
[27] McKinnon, R. I. 1969. “Private and Official International Money: The Case for the Dollar”, International Finance Section, Department of Economics, Princeton University.
[28] Sokolova, M. V. 2015. “Strategic Currency Choice in International Trade”, CESifo Working Paper.
[29] Zhang, T. 2022. “Monetary Policy Spillovers through Invoicing Currencies”, Journal of Finance, 77(1):129~ 161.
[1] 许年行, 王崇骏, 章纪超. 破产审判改革、债权人司法保护与企业创新 ——基于清算与破产审判庭设立的准自然实验[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 516(6): 150-168.
[2] 冀云阳, 周鑫, 张谦. 数字化转型与企业创新——基于研发投入和研发效率视角的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 514(4): 111-129.
[3] 潘红波, 杨朝雅, 李丹玉. 如何激发民营企业创新——来自实际控制人财富集中度的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 502(4): 114-132.
[4] 郝项超, 梁琪. 非高管股权激励与企业创新:公平理论视角[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 501(3): 171-188.
[5] 张杰, 王文凯. 方言多样化和企业创新——中国的事实及机制[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 501(3): 135-151.
[6] 尹洪英, 李闯. 智能制造赋能企业创新了吗?——基于中国智能制造试点项目的准自然试验[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 508(10): 98-116.
[7] 许红梅, 倪骁然, 刘亚楠. 上市企业员工满意度与创新——来自“中国年度最佳雇主100强”的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 495(9): 170-187.
[8] 蔡庆丰, 陈熠辉, 林海涵. 开发区层级与域内企业创新:激励效应还是挤出效应?——基于国家级和省级开发区的对比研究[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 491(5): 153-170.
[9] 张杰, 吴书凤, 金岳. 中国金融扩张下的本土企业创新效应——基于倒U型关系的一个解释[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 490(4): 55-72.
[10] 江轩宇, 贾婧, 刘琪. 债务结构优化与企业创新——基于企业债券融资视角的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 490(4): 131-149.
[11] 林志帆, 杜金岷, 龙晓旋. 股票流动性与中国企业创新策略:流水不腐还是洪水猛兽?[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 489(3): 188-206.
[12] 庄毓敏, 储青青, 马勇. 金融发展、企业创新与经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 478(4): 11-30.
[13] 郝项超. 委托理财导致上市公司脱实向虚吗?——基于企业创新的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 477(3): 152-168.
[14] 戴静, 杨筝, 刘贯春, 许传华. 银行业竞争、创新资源配置和企业创新产出——基于中国工业企业的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 51-70.
[15] 姜军, 江轩宇, 伊志宏. 企业创新效率研究——来自股权质押的影响[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 128-146.
[1] 步丹璐, 狄灵瑜. 治理环境、股权投资与政府补助[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 448(10): 193 -206 .
[2] 王曦, 朱立挺, 王凯立. 我国货币政策是否关注资产价格?——基于马尔科夫区制转换BEKK多元GARCH模型[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 1 -17 .
[3] 刘勇政, 李岩. 中国的高速铁路建设与城市经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 18 -33 .
[4] 况伟大, 王琪琳. 房价波动、房贷规模与银行资本充足率[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 34 -48 .
[5] 祝树金, 赵玉龙. 资源错配与企业的出口行为——基于中国工业企业数据的经验研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 49 -64 .
[6] 陈德球, 陈运森, 董志勇. 政策不确定性、市场竞争与资本配置[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 65 -80 .
[7] 牟敦果, 王沛英. 中国能源价格内生性研究及货币政策选择分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 81 -95 .
[8] 王丽艳, 马光荣. 帆随风动、人随财走?——财政转移支付对人口流动的影响[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 448(10): 18 -34 .
[9] 李少昆. 美国货币政策是全球发展中经济体外汇储备影响因素吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 448(10): 68 -82 .
[10] 高铭, 江嘉骏, 陈佳, 刘玉珍. 谁说女子不如儿郎?——P2P投资行为与过度自信[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 96 -111 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1