Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2025, Vol. 540 Issue (6): 171-188    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
共同机构持股的创新信息扩散效应
刘慧龙, 苗小雨, 王一飞
对外经济贸易大学国际商学院, 北京 100029
The Effect of Common Institutional Ownership on Innovation Information Diffusion
LIU Huilong, MIAO Xiaoyu, WANG Yifei
Business School, University of International Business and Economics
下载:  PDF (607KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 本文聚焦于共同机构持股是否具备创新信息扩散效应这一问题,以企业间形成共同机构持股关联的事件为研究场景,运用双重差分法展开实证分析。研究结果显示,共同机构投资者促进了被投资企业之间的专利引用,证实共同机构持股具有创新信息扩散效应。机制检验表明,共同机构投资者的信息获取能力及信息传递意愿均会影响其创新信息扩散效应。分组回归结果显示,在创新信息复杂度较低、共同机构投资者行业影响力较小以及地区知识产权保护程度较高的情况下,共同机构持股的创新信息扩散效应更强。此外,共同机构持股的创新信息扩散效应不仅增加了企业研发投入,提高了创新产出,还改善了研发创新效率。本文丰富了对共同机构持股经济后果的理解,拓展了对创新信息跨企业边界传播渠道及其影响因素的认识。
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
刘慧龙
苗小雨
王一飞
关键词:  共同机构持股  机构投资者  技术创新  创新信息扩散    
Summary:  In recent decades, the rapid global expansion of institutional investors has spurred growth in common institutional ownership, leading to research on its economic consequences. While extant research has primarily focused on the “collusion effect” and “synergistic governance effect”, this study explores an underexplored aspect: whether common institutional ownership facilitates the diffusion of innovation information among firms.
Using patent citations as a proxy for innovation diffusion, we take the establishment of common institutional ownership linkages between a pair of firms as the research setting. Based on the data of China's A-share listed companies from 2007 to 2022, our difference-in-differences analysis shows that common institutional ownership increases patent citations among invested firms by an average of 7.77%, indicating a clear innovation information diffusion effect. Mechanism analysis suggests that this effect stems from institutional investors' capability and willingness to share information. Heterogenous tests demonstrate that the effect weakens when innovation information is more complex, institutional investors exert stronger influence in the industry, or intellectual property protection is weaker. Further research demonstrates that this diffusion effect enhances R&D investment, innovation output, and efficiency among invested firms.
This study contributes to the literature in two ways. First, it enriches research on the economic consequences of common institutional ownership. While prior work has extensively studied these consequences, few have explored their role in innovation information diffusion—with Kostovetsky and Manconi (2020) as a notable exception. Our findings validate and extend their results by (1) examining both “capability” and “willingness” mechanisms, (2) showing how diffusion varies with innovation complexity, investor characteristics, and intellectual property protection, and (3) linking diffusion to R&D investment, output, and efficiency. These insights complement studies analyzing common institutional ownership's impact on innovation through “duplicate costs”, “technology spillover effects”, and “market competition effects” (Li et al., 2023; López and Vives, 2019; Antón et al., 2024). Specifically, we demonstrate that common institutional ownership boosts R&D investment and innovation performance via information diffusion, clarifying a key mechanism in its influence on innovation.
Second, this study advances research on innovation information diffusion channels by introducing common institutional ownership as a direct pathway. Previous literature has focused on collaboration networks, director ties, or digital platforms, often inferring diffusion effects indirectly through innovation outcomes. In contrast, we establish common institutional ownership as an explicit diffusion channel, offering new insights into innovation information dynamics among Chinese listed firms.
Our findings have important theoretical implications. First, institutional investors emerge as active facilitators of innovation information diffusion, extending beyond their traditional roles like providing funds and stabilizing the market. This provides fresh perspectives on their shareholder activism and outcomes. Second, from an organizational linkage perspective, we uncover how common institutional ownership creates new pathways for innovation information diffusion. Third, our results enhance understanding of business ecosystems, revealing that firms not only interact with supply chain partners but also form knowledge-sharing linkages with otherwise unrelated firms through common institutional investors. Finally, our findings suggest that when studying the innovation information diffusion effects of other entities, researchers should consider both the capabilities and willingness of the entities to share information, as well as contextual factors like information complexity and intellectual property protection.
Our findings also yield practical and policy implications. First, policymakers could promote the development of common institutional ownership to enhance national innovation capacity. Second, policymakers could accelerate innovation diffusion and foster innovation by strengthening intellectual property protection. Finally, institutional investors need to enhance their industry-specific technical knowledge to transmit innovation information among portfolio companies more effectively.
Keywords:  Common Institutional Ownership    Institutional Investor    Technological Innovation    Innovation Information Diffusion
JEL分类号:  G30   O30  
基金资助: *本文感谢国家自然科学基金面上项目(71772039)和对外经济贸易大学中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(CXTD14-01)的资助。感谢匿名审稿人的宝贵意见,文责自负。
作者简介:  刘慧龙,管理学博士,教授,对外经济贸易大学国际商学院,E-mail:lhlgsmer@126.com.
苗小雨,博士研究生,对外经济贸易大学国际商学院,E-mail:xiaoyumiao@uibe.edu.cn.
王一飞,博士研究生,对外经济贸易大学国际商学院,E-mail:yifeiwang@uibe.edu.cn.
引用本文:    
刘慧龙, 苗小雨, 王一飞. 共同机构持股的创新信息扩散效应[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 540(6): 171-188.
LIU Huilong, MIAO Xiaoyu, WANG Yifei. The Effect of Common Institutional Ownership on Innovation Information Diffusion. Journal of Financial Research, 2025, 540(6): 171-188.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2025/V540/I6/171
[1] 戴静雯、许荣、祝天琪和陆超,2024,《共同机构所有权与企业诉讼风险》,《金融研究》第4期,第94~112页。
[2] 杜勇、孙帆和邓旭,2021,《共同机构所有权与企业盈余管理》,《中国工业经济》第6期,第155~173页。
[3] 雷雷、张大永和姬强,2023,《共同机构持股与企业ESG表现》,《经济研究》第4期,第133~151页。
[4] 权小锋和尹洪英,2017,《中国式卖空机制与公司创新——基于融资融券分步扩容的自然实验》,《管理世界》第1期,第128~144+187~188页。
[5] 王营和张光利,2018,《董事网络和企业创新:引资与引智》,《金融研究》第6期,第189~206页。
[6] 吴晓晖、李玉敏和柯艳蓉,2022,《共同机构投资者能够提高盈余信息质量吗》,《会计研究》第6期,第56~74页。
[7] 周泽将、汪顺和张悦,2022,《知识产权保护与企业创新信息困境》,《中国工业经济》第6期,第136~154页。
[8] Antón, M., F. Ederer, M. Giné, and M. Schmalz, 2023, “Common Ownership, Competition, and Top Management Incentives”, Journal of Political Economy, 131(5), pp. 1294~1355.
[9] Antón, M., F. Ederer, M. Giné, and M. Schmalz, 2024, “Innovation: The Bright Side of Common Ownership?”, Management Science, 70(10), pp.6173~6196.
[10] Azar, J., M. C. Schmalz, and I. Tecu, 2018, “Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership”, The Journal of Finance, 73(4), pp. 1513~1565.
[11] Azar, J., S. Raina, and M. Schmalz, 2022, “Ultimate Ownership and Bank Competition”, Financial Management, 51(1), pp. 227~269.
[12] Balachandran, S., and J. Eklund, 2024, “The Impact of Partner Organizational Structure on Innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 69, pp. 80~130.
[13] Biasi, B., and H. Sarsons, 2022, “Flexible Wages, Bargaining, and the Gender Gap”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137(1), pp. 215~266.
[14] Bloomfield, M., H. L. Friedman, and H. Y. Kim, 2024, “Common Ownership, Executive Compensation, and Product Market Competition”, The Accounting Review, 99(2), pp. 31~56.
[15] Boller, L., and F. S. Morton, 2020, “Testing the Theory of Common Stock Ownership”, NBER Working Paper, No. 27515.
[16] Cengiz, D., A. Dube, A. Lindner, and B. Zipperer, 2019, “The Effect of Minimum Wages on Low-Wage Jobs”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134, pp. 1405~1454.
[17] Chen, S., H. Ma, Q. Wu, and H. Zhang, 2023, “Does Common Ownership Constrain Managerial Rent Extraction? Evidence from Insider Trading Profitability”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 80, 102389.
[18] Cheng, X., H. Wang, and X. Wang, 2022, “Common Institutional Ownership and Corporate Social Responsibility”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 136, 106218.
[19] Clarke, D., and K. Tapia-Schythe, 2021, “Implementing the Panel Event Study”, The Stata Journal, 21(4), pp. 853~884.
[20] Dennis, P. J., K. Gerardi, and C. Schenone, 2022, “Common Ownership Does Not Have Anti-competitive Effects in the Airline Industry”, Journal of Finance, 77(5), pp. 2765~2798.
[21] DesJardine, M. R., J. Grewal, and K. Viswanathan, 2023, “A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats: The Effects of Common Ownership on Corporate Social Responsibility”, Organization Science, 34(5), pp. 1716~1735.
[22] Edmans, A., D. Levit, and D. Reilly, 2019, “Governance Under Common Ownership”, The Review of Financial Studies, 32(7), pp. 2673~2719.
[23] European Competition Commission, 2017, “Commission Decision” M.7932-Dow/DuPont, https://ec.europa.eu/competition/ mergers/cases/decisions/m7932_13668_3.pdf.
[24] Federal Trade Commission, 2018, “Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century”, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_events/1422929/ftc_hearings_session_8_transcript_12-6-18_0.pdf.
[25] Foerderer, J., 2020, “Interfirm Exchange and Innovation in Platform Ecosystems: Evidence from Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference”, Management Science, 66(10), pp. 4772~4787.
[26] Glaeser, S., and M. Lang, 2024, “Measuring Innovation and Navigating Its Unique Information Issues: A Review of the Accounting Literature on Innovation”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 101720.
[27] He, J., and J. Huang, 2017, “Product Market Competition in a World of Cross-ownership: Evidence from Institutional Blockholdings”, The Review of Financial Studies, 30(8), pp. 2674~2718.
[28] He, J., J. Huang, and S. Zhao, 2019, “Internalizing Governance Externalities: The Role of Institutional Cross-ownership”, Journal of Financial Economics, 134(2), pp. 400~418.
[29] Jaffe, A. B., and M. Trajtenberg, 1996, “Flows of Knowledge from Universities and Federal Laboratories: Modeling the Flow of Patent Citations over Time and across Institutional and Geographic Boundaries”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93(23), pp. 12671~12677.
[30] Kaplan, S. N., and L. Zingales, 1997, “Do Investment-cash Flow Sensitivities Provide Useful Measures of Financing Constraints?”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(1), pp. 169~215.
[31] Kini, O., S. Lee, and M. Shen, 2024, “Common Institutional Ownership and Product Market Threats”, Management Science, 70(5), pp. 2705~2731.
[32] Koch, A., M. Panayides, and S. Thomas, 2021, “Common Ownership and Competition in Product Markets”, Journal of Financial Economics, 139(1), pp. 109~137.
[33] Kong, D., C. Lin, W. Lai, and J. Zhang, 2022, “Information Accessibility and Corporate Innovation”, Management Science, 68(11), pp. 7837~7860.
[34] Kostovetsky L., and A. Manconi, 2020, “Common Institutional Ownership and Diffusion of Innovation”, SSRN Working Paper, No. 2896372.
[35] Lewellen, K., and M. Lowry, 2021, “Does Common Ownership Really Increase Firm Coordination?”, Journal of Financial Economics, 141(1), pp. 322~344.
[36] Li, K., J. Qiu, and J. Wang, 2019, “Technology Conglomeration, Strategic Alliances, and Corporate Innovation”, Management Science, 65(11), pp. 5065~5090.
[37] Li, X., T. Liu, and L. A. Taylor, 2023, “Common Ownership and Innovation Efficiency”, Journal of Financial Economics, 147(3), pp. 475~497.
[38] López, Á. L., and X. Vives, 2019, “Overlapping Ownership, R&D Spillovers, and Antitrust Policy”, Journal of Political Economy, 127(5), pp. 2394~2437.
[39] Martens, T., and C. J. Sextroh, 2021, “Analyst Coverage Overlaps and Interfirm Information Spillovers”, Journal of Accounting Research, 59(4), pp. 1425~1480.
[40] Park, J., J. Sani, N. Shroff, and H. White, 2019, “Disclosure Incentives when Competing Firms Have Common Ownership”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 67(2-3), pp. 387~415.
[41] Ramalingegowda, S., S. Utke, and Y. Yu, 2021, “Common Institutional Ownership and Earnings Management”, Contemporary Accounting Research, 38(1), pp. 208~241.
[42] Rambachan, A., and J. Roth, 2023, “A More Credible Approach to Parallel Trends”, The Review of Economic Studies, 90(5), pp. 2555~2591.
[43] Sampson, R. C., 2007, “R&D Alliances and Firm Performance: The Impact of Technological Diversity and Alliance Organization on Innovation”, Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), pp. 364~386.
[44] Schilling, M. A., and C. C. Phelps, 2007, “Interfirm Collaboration Networks: The Impact of Large-Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation”, Management Science, 53(7), pp. 1113~1126.
[45] Tian, X., J. Yan, and L. Zuo, 2022, “Do Shared Auditors Facilitate Information Transfer between Clients? Evidence from Patent Citations”, SSRN Working Paper, No. 4099144.
[46] Tseng, K., 2022, “Learning from the Joneses: Technology Spillover, Innovation Externality, and Stock Returns”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 73(2-3), pp. 1~17.
[1] 魏晓云, 韩立岩. 环境规制、绿色技术创新与违约风险[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 528(6): 169-187.
[2] 李哲, 薛淞. 政府环境影响评价制度与企业绿色技术创新[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 525(3): 94-112.
[3] 赵葆颖, 江轩宇, 伊志宏, 张澈. 注册制改革对企业劳动生产率的溢出效应研究——基于信息反馈效应的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 525(3): 132-149.
[4] 吴翌琳, 张旻, 于鸿君. 融资方式与企业二元创新路径选择——基于技术创新与非技术创新视角[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 523(1): 38-55.
[5] 林兟, 何为, 余剑峰, 熊熊. 公募基金改善了市场定价效率吗?——持股基金质量与股票收益[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 514(4): 149-167.
[6] 陆瑶, 施函青. 我国科技企业融资的决定因素研究——基于科创板企业的机器学习分析[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 507(9): 132-151.
[7] 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.
[8] 邵新建, 王慧强, 王兴春, 覃家琦. 中国机构投资者的学习机制研究——理性贝叶斯还是简单强化式学习[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 502(4): 188-206.
[9] 李安泰, 张建宇, 卢冰. 机构投资者能抑制上市公司商誉减值风险吗?——基于中国A股市场的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 508(10): 189-206.
[10] 陈胜蓝, 李璟. 基金网络能够提高投资绩效吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 492(6): 170-188.
[11] 聂秀华, 江萍, 郑晓佳, 吴青. 数字金融与区域技术创新水平研究[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 489(3): 132-150.
[12] 陈经伟, 姜能鹏. 中国OFDI技术创新效应的传导机制——基于资本要素市场扭曲视角的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 482(8): 74-92.
[13] 张盼盼, 张胜利, 陈建国. 融资约束、金融市场化与制造业企业出口国内增加值率[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 478(4): 48-69.
[14] 叶永卫, 李增福. 续贷限制与企业技术创新[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 485(11): 151-169.
[15] 胡珺, 黄楠, 沈洪涛. 市场激励型环境规制可以推动企业技术创新吗?——基于中国碳排放权交易机制的自然实验[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 475(1): 171-189.
[1] 杨子晖, 陈雨恬, 林师涵. 系统性金融风险文献综述:现状、发展与展望[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 499(1): 185 -217 .
[2] 陈宇, 陈超凡, 李钊, 邓磊. 增值税留抵退税、预期与企业雇佣[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 529(7): 96 -114 .
[3] 沈坤荣, 闫佳敏. 高铁开通与企业数字化转型——基于信息学习效应与资源集聚效应的双重视角[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 530(8): 150 -168 .
[4] 谭莹, 王盼, 张勋. 数字金融发展的劳动力迁移效应——来自中国家庭追踪调查的微观证据[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 532(10): 39 -57 .
[5] 许楠, 毛奕欢, 刘浩. 经营预算信息链式传递与供应链长鞭效应——基于信息溢出与风险自治的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 533(11): 38 -56 .
[6] 罗章权, 郭凯明, 吴红晨. 生产结构转型与生产率——基于全球视角的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 536(2): 1 -19 .
[7] 李志生, 刘周熠. 资本工具创新与银行流动性创造——来自永续债的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 534(12): 40 -58 .
[8] 张博, 张晓帆, 蔡子阳. 金融科技、金融普惠与非法集资风险[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 535(1): 39 -57 .
[9] 郭豫媚, 王航, 郭田勇, 郭俊杰. 中央银行通货膨胀预期管理有效性评估——基于文本通货膨胀预期指数的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 538(4): 1 -20 .
[10] 高崧耀, 王佳欣, 崔百胜. 房地产市场调整、银行资产负债表与货币政策应对[J]. 金融研究, 2025, 537(3): 40 -57 .
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