Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2020, Vol. 476 Issue (2): 128-146    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
企业创新效率研究——来自股权质押的影响
姜军, 江轩宇, 伊志宏
北京国家会计学院, 北京 101312;
中央财经大学会计学院/中国管理会计研究与发展中心,北京 100081;
中国人民大学商学院, 北京 100872
Efficiency of Corporate Innovation: the Impact of Controlling Shareholders' Stock Pledge
JIANG Jun, JIANG Xuanyu, YI Zhihong
Beijing National Accounting Institute;
School of Accountancy, Central University of Finance and Economics;
School of Business, Renmin University of China
下载:  PDF (543KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 本文结合我国实施创新驱动发展战略及股权质押频繁的现实背景,利用2006—2015年A股上市公司的数据,探讨控股股东的股权质押行为是否以及如何对企业的创新效率产生影响。研究表明,控股股东的股权质押行为会显著降低企业的创新效率。进一步地研究发现:(1)当第二类代理问题越严重,或质押风险越大时,控股股东股权质押行为抑制企业创新效率的作用越明显,表明控股股东股权质押伴随的掏空效应及短视效应,是导致二者负向关系的重要原因;(2)掏空效应和短视效应在影响控股股东股权质押与企业创新效率的关系上存在显著的替代效应;(3)研发投入强度下降时,控股股东股权质押对企业创新效率产生的负面效应更强。本文的研究不仅丰富了企业创新效率影响因素及控股股东股权质押经济后果的相关文献,对于规范控股股东股权质押行为,提高企业创新能力,实现创新驱动发展战略,也具有重要的启示意义。   
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
姜军
江轩宇
伊志宏
关键词:  企业创新  创新效率  股权质押  控股股东    
Summary:  Controlling shareholders in China frequently pledge their stock, and some studies have explored the impact of such stock pledging on corporate innovation inputs and outputs. They find that stock pledging by controlling shareholders can lower the intensity of firm R&D and the amount of patent applications. However, corporate innovation ability is a joint function of innovation efficiency and scale. The literature focuses on the impact of stock pledging on corporate innovation scale while ignoring its effect on innovation efficiency or the dynamic relations between innovation inputs and outputs.
   Theoretically, there are two competing hypotheses that are potentially related to the impact of controlling shareholders' stock pledging on corporate innovation efficiency. On one hand, such stock pledging may reduce corporate innovation efficiency. First, it increases the deviation of controlling shareholders' control rights and cash flow rights, and it mitigates the monitoring effect of large shareholders, leading managers to engage in more innovative activities. Further, it aggravates the extent of tunneling by controlling shareholders, leading to expropriation of economic resources that could have been used for corporate innovation. Second, due to the risk of control rights transfer arising from stock pledging, it can easily cause controlling shareholders' focus to shift from long-term strategic activity to short-term performance and market capitalization management. As a result, controlling shareholders may ignore innovation activities that play a critical role in establishing companies' long-term competitiveness. The tunneling and myopia effects caused by controlling shareholders' stock pledging may reduce firms' innovation inputs, lead to technological lock-in effects or R&D interruptions, and ultimately reduce corporate innovation efficiency.
   On the other hand, controlling shareholders' stock pledging may enhance corporate innovation efficiency. Controlling shareholders who pledge stock may prefer higher risk. This kind of shareholder may have greater tolerance for failure and pay more attention to innovation activities, potentially increasing innovation efficiency. The literature notes that controlling shareholders reduce control rights transfer risks not only by boosting short-term stock returns but also by enhancing long-term firm value. Innovation ability, which is determined by both innovation efficiency and scale, is the key driver of firms' long-term value. The literature finds that controlling shareholders' stock pledging reduces R&D intensity. Thus, controlling shareholders can mitigate control rights transfer risks by promoting short-term performance through innovation scale reductions and maintaining long-term competitiveness through innovation efficiency enhancements. Because improving innovation efficiency can mitigate the negative effect of stock pledging on innovation scale, firms' overall innovation ability can be maintained.
   In this study, we investigate the relation between controlling shareholders' stock pledging and corporate innovation efficiency by using Chinese A-share listed firms over the period 2006-2015. Our findings are as follows. (1) Stock pledging by controlling shareholders significantly decreases firms' innovation efficiency. (2) The negative relation between pledging by controlling shareholders and innovation efficiency is more pronounced for firms with higher agency costs between controlling and minority shareholders, or higher risks of stock pledging. This finding indicates that tunneling and myopia are important channels through which controlling shareholders' stock pledging hinders innovation efficiency. (3) The effects of tunneling and myopia have significant substitution effects on the relation between controlling shareholders' stock pledging and corporate innovation efficiency. (4) The negative impact of pledging on innovation efficiency is stronger when a firm's R&D intensity is reduced.
   We contribute to the literature in the following two ways. First, unlike earlier studies that focus on firm size, market competition, corporate property rights, the marketization process, government support, factor market distortion, and margin trading systems, we provide new evidence on whether and how controlling shareholders' stock pledging affects corporate innovation efficiency. This paper offers a new research perspective on the determinants of corporate innovation efficiency. Second, our study provides new evidence linking controlling shareholders' stock pledging to corporate innovation efficiency and therefore extends the literature on the economic consequences of such stock pledging.
Keywords:  Corporate Innovation, Innovation Efficiency, Stock Pledge, Controlling Shareholders
JEL分类号:  G32   G34   O31  
基金资助: * 本文感谢国家自然科学基金项目(71602197;71872175;71972193),中央财经大学“青年英才”计划(QYP1806),北京工商大学国有资产管理协同创新中心开放课题“工薪所得税筹划与国有企业创新”的资助
通讯作者:  江轩宇,管理学博士,副教授,中央财经大学会计学院,E-mail:jiangxuanyu@163.com.   
作者简介:  姜 军,管理学博士,副教授,北京国家会计学院,E-mail:jiangj@mail.nai.edu.cn.伊志宏,经济学博士,教授,中国人民大学商学院,E-mail:yizhihong@rmbs.ruc.edu.cn.
引用本文:    
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.
JIANG Jun, JIANG Xuanyu, YI Zhihong. Efficiency of Corporate Innovation: the Impact of Controlling Shareholders' Stock Pledge. Journal of Financial Research, 2020, 476(2): 128-146.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2020/V476/I2/128
[1] 戴魁早和刘友金,2013,《市场化进程对创新效率的影响及行业差异——基于中国高技术产业的实证检验》,《财经研究》第5期,第4~16页。
[2] 戴魁早和刘友金,2016,《要素市场扭曲与创新效率——对中国高技术产业发展的经验分析》,《经济研究》第7期,第72~86页。
[3] 董晓庆、赵坚和袁朋伟,2014,《国有企业创新效率损失研究》,《中国工业经济》第2期,第97~108页。
[4] 郝项超和梁琪,2009,《最终控制人股权质押损害公司价值吗?》,《会计研究》第7期,第57~63页。
[5] 姜军、申丹琳、江轩宇和伊志宏,2017,《债权人保护与企业创新》,《金融研究》第11期,第128~142页。
[6] 江轩宇,2016,《政府放权与企业创新——基于地方国企金字塔结构视角的研究》,《管理世界》第9期,第120~135页。
[7] 江轩宇、申丹琳和李颖,2017,《会计信息可比性影响企业创新吗?》,《南开管理评论》第4期,第82~92页。
[8] 姜晓文,2019,《控股股东股权质押对企业创新效率的影响》,《会计之友》第24期,第23~29页。
[9] 李常青、李宇坤和李茂良,2018,《控股股东股权质押与企业创新投入》,《金融研究》第7期,第143~157页。
[10] 李春涛和宋敏,2010,《中国制造业企业的创新活动:所有制和CEO激励的作用》,《经济研究》第5期,第55~67页。
[11] 倪骁然和朱玉杰,2016,《劳动保护、劳动密集度与企业创新——来自2008年〈劳动合同法〉实施的证据》,《管理世界》第7期,第154~167页。
[12] 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页。
[13] 文雯、陈胤默和黄雨婷,2018,《控股股东股权质押对企业创新的影响研究》,《管理学报》第7期,第998~1008页。
[14] 王雄元、欧阳才越和史震阳,2018,《股权质押、控制权转移风险与税收规避》,《经济研究》第1期,第138~152页。
[15] 谢德仁、郑登津和崔宸瑜,2016,《控股股东股权质押是潜在的“地雷”吗?——基于股价崩盘风险视角的研究》,《管理世界》第5期,第128~139+188页。
[16] 谢德仁、廖珂和郑登津,2017,《控股股东股权质押与开发支出会计政策隐性选择》,《会计研究》第3期,第30~38页。
[17] 肖文和林高榜,2014,《政府支持、研发管理与技术创新效率——基于中国工业行业的实证分析》,《管理世界》第4期,第71~80页。
[18] 闫冰和冯根福,2005,《基于随机前沿生产函数的中国工业R&D效率分析》,《当代经济科学》第6期,第14~18页。
[19] 翟胜宝、许浩然、刘耀淞和唐玮,2017,《控股股东股权质押与审计师风险应对》,《管理世界》第10期,第51~65页。
[20] 张瑞君、徐鑫和王超恩,2017,《大股东股权质押与企业创新》,《审计与经济研究》第4期,第63~73页。
[21] 郑国坚、林东杰和林斌,2014,《大股东股权质押、占款与企业价值》,《管理科学学报》第9期,第72~87页。
[22] 朱有为和徐康宁,2006,《中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究》,《中国工业经济》第11期,第38~45页。
[23] Bargeron, L. L., K. M. Lehn, and C. J. Zutter. 2010. “Sarbanes-Oxley and Corporate Risk-taking”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49(1-2): 34~52.
[24] Graham, J.R., C.R. Harvey, and S. Rajgopal. 2005. “The Economic Implications of Corporate Financial Reporting”, Journal of Accounting and Economics. 40(1-3): 3~73.
[25] Hall, B.H. 2002. “The Financing of Research and Development”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1): 35~51.
[26] He, J., and X. Tian. 2013. “The Dark Side of Analyst Coverage: The Case of Innovation”, Journal of Financial Economics, 109(3): 856~878.
[27] Jiang, G., C. M.C. Lee, and H. Yue. 2010, “Tunneling through Intercorporate Loans: The China Experience”, Journal of Financial Economics, 98 (2010): 1~20.
[28] Manso, G. 2011. “Motivating Innovation”, The Journal of Finance, 66(5): 1823~1860.
[29] Meng, Q., X. Ni, and J. Zhang. 2019. “Share Pledging and Corporate Risk-Taking: Insights from the Chinese Stock Market”, SSRN Working Paper.
[1] 程新生, 武琼, 刘孟晖, 程昱. 企业集团现金分布、管理层激励与资本配置效率[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 91-108.
[2] 顾雷雷, 郭建鸾, 王鸿宇. 企业社会责任、融资约束与企业金融化[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 109-127.
[3] 徐光, 赵茜, 王宇光. 定向支持政策能缓解民营企业的融资约束吗?——基于民营企业债务融资支持工具政策的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 474(12): 187-206.
[4] 邵新建, 王兴春, 贾中正, 廖静池. 投资银行-机构投资者关系、“捧场”与IPO中的利益问题[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 473(11): 170-188.
[5] 陈胜蓝, 刘晓玲. 中国城际高铁与商业信用供给——基于准自然实验的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 472(10): 117-134.
[6] 宫汝凯, 徐悦星, 王大中. 经济政策不确定性与企业杠杆率[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 472(10): 59-78.
[7] 张国峰, 王永进, 李坤望. 贸易自由化对制造业企业现金储蓄的影响——预防性动机还是投资挤压?[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 471(9): 19-38.
[8] 刘威, 黄晓琪. 经济政策不确定性、地区文化与保险需求[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 471(9): 39-56.
[9] 苏冬蔚, 彭松林. 卖空者与内幕交易——来自中国证券市场的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 471(9): 188-207.
[10] 谭小芬, 李源, 苟琴. 美国货币政策推升了新兴市场国家非金融企业杠杆率吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 470(8): 38-57.
[11] 戴亦一, 张鹏东, 潘越. 老赖越多,贷款越难?——来自地区诚信水平与上市公司银行借款的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 470(8): 77-95.
[12] 唐松, 施文, 孙安其. 环境污染曝光与公司价值——理论机制与实证检验[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 470(8): 133-150.
[13] 江伟, 底璐璐, 胡玉明. 改进型创新抑或突破型创新——基于客户集中度的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 469(7): 155-173.
[14] 宋全云, 李晓, 钱龙. 经济政策不确定性与企业贷款成本[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 469(7): 57-75.
[15] 钱雪松, 唐英伦, 方胜. 担保物权制度改革降低了企业债务融资成本吗?——来自中国《物权法》自然实验的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 469(7): 115-134.
[1] 周小川. 养老金改革考验我们经济学的功底和智慧[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 475(1): 1 -8 .
[2] 邹文理, 王曦, 谢小平. 中央银行沟通的金融市场响应──基于股票市场的事件研究[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 34 -50 .
[3] 卢冰, 王雅琦, 洪圣杰. 人民币预期汇率变动与虚假贸易——基于套汇视角的分析[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 475(1): 9 -27 .
[4] 陈雨露. 当前全球中央银行研究的若干重点问题[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 1 -14 .
[5] 张礼卿, 钟茜. 全球金融周期、美国货币政策与“三元悖论”[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 15 -33 .
[6] 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 .
[7] 戴魁早, 刘友金. 市场化改革能推进产业技术进步吗?——中国高技术产业的经验证据[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 71 -90 .
[8] 程新生, 武琼, 刘孟晖, 程昱. 企业集团现金分布、管理层激励与资本配置效率[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 91 -108 .
[9] 顾雷雷, 郭建鸾, 王鸿宇. 企业社会责任、融资约束与企业金融化[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 109 -127 .
[10] 武佳薇, 汪昌云, 陈紫琳, Jie Michael Guo. 中国个人投资者处置效应研究——一个非理性信念的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 147 -166 .
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