|
|
|
| International Relations and Cross-Border M&A —— Evidence from Chinese Firms |
| WANG Xiaosong, YUAN Jiaqi, FENG Sheng
|
China Economic Reform and Development Research Institute, Renmin University of China; School of Economics, Renmin University of China;
China Construction Bank;
School of Applied Economics, Renmin University of China |
|
|
|
Abstract In recent years, facing new situations and challenges, Chinese firms have paid particular attention to the internationalization strategy of “venturing overseas and going global”. Against this backdrop, there has been a significant increase in cross-border M&A by Chinese firms, with China surpassing the United States to become the world's largest cross-border acquirer. China has long advocated the establishment of a new type of international relations centered on win-win cooperation, and provided opportunities for Chinese firms to accelerate their overseas development through the Belt and Road Initiative and other cooperation mechanisms. But at the same time, China's OFDI still faces various risks, with political risk being a major risk category encountered by Chinese firms' investment. specifically, political risks related to international relations, such as government opposition, public blacklash and government default risk, are all important factors affecting cross-border M&A. In fact, although China's economic and trade exchanges with other countries continue to deepen, the host government may still refuse China's investment on the guise of economic or military security due to various factors such as ideological differences and competition of national interests. Cross-border M&A are related to how firms can utilize their resource endowments, improve production efficiency, expand market share, strengthen technological innovation, and thereby promote China's industrial transformation and develioment, and climb up the global value chain. Therefore, it is of great practical significance to study cross-border M&A.
The contributions of this paper are as follows. Firstly, in recent years, many new phenomena and changes related to the global economy and polity have emerged, which means that the existing trend, objective laws and world order are at risk of being broken down and rebuilt, and also challenge the existing empirical laws and empirical conclusions are also being challenged. Secondly, the measurement of bilateral relations has always been a difficult problem in academia. This paper uses the GDELT news database to construct a monthly index that includes government and non-government entities to comprehensively measure bilateral relations, integrating government interaction and non-governmental exchanges into a unified framework,This clarifies the two action mechanisms of the government and the private sector, so as to reveal the “black box” of how international relations affect firms' outbound M&A. Finally, this paper emphasizes the perspective of bilateral interaction in the field of cross-border M&A research, and further examine the impact of active and passive international relations,the uncertainty of international relations on cross-border M&A, the moderating effect of public opinion and the helerogeneity effect of institutions, time periods and geographic locations, ennching research conclusions in related fields.
This paper constructs a monthly measurement index of international relations and uses panel data from 2015 to 2022 to examine the impact of international relations on cross-border M&A. The conclusions are as follows: Firstly, after controlling for factors such as macroeconomic, bilateral trade, and unobservable exogenous shocks, the deterioration of bilateral relations between China and host countries will have a significantly negative impact on the amount, number, and completion of cross-border M&A by Chinese firms. After replacing the core explanatory variables, changing the sample country group, considering sample selection bias and endogeneity issues, this basic conclusion remains robust. Meanwhile, event data includes both the active and passive parties involved in the event. Through analysis, it was found that compared to events actively facilitated by China, events facilitated by domestic entities in the host country have a more significant impact on cross-border M&A by Chinese firms. Secondly, the uncertainty of international relations will significantly affect cross-border M&A activities, evidenced by the decrease in the amount, transaction frequency, and completion rates of Chinese firms' cross-border M&A as the uncertainty of international relations increases. Thirdly, the increase in news media coverage of conflict will amplifu investors' perception of international relations, thereby strengthening the inhibitory effect of deteriorating bilateral relations on cross-border M&A activities. Fourthly,international conflicts can increase the likelihood of investment being opposed by the government and the public respectively by suppressing high-level interactions at the government level and reducing public goodwill at the civilian level, thereby restraining cross-border M&A. Fifthly, from the perspective of institutional, temporal and geographic heterogeneity, the inhibitory effect of the intensification of international conflicts on cross-border M&A activities is more pronounced in countries with lower economic freedom, before the COVID-19 pandemic and in non-Belt and Road countries.
On this basis, this paper puts forward the following suggestions. First,as government actions occvpu major part of bilateral relations and play an important role in guiding non-governmental exchanges, we should actively bvild global partnerships and create new opportunities for joint development. Second, non-governmental exchanges are an effective complement to government exchanges and will also affect bilateral relations independently. We should seize the initiative of international public opinion and enhance non-governmental exchanges and cooperation. Third, a stable economic cooperation regime will make cross-border M&A less sensitive to fluctuations in bilateral relations. We should deepen the Belt and Road cooperation and establish investment frameworks. Fourth, the heterogeneity of economic institutions will affect the effect of bilateral relations on cross-border M&A. We should strengthen national political risk prevention and safeguard Chinese firms' overseas investment.
|
|
Received: 11 March 2024
Published: 02 October 2024
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
鲍晓华和卢波,2022,《政治互信能否促进务实合作:基于全球价值链视角》,《财经研究》第4期,第109～123页。
|
| [2] |
陈定定,2016,《合作、冲突与过程建构主义——以中美新型大国关系的建立为例》,《世界经济与政治》第10期,第59～74页。
|
| [3] |
谷媛媛和邱斌,2017,《来华留学教育与中国对外直接投资——基于“一带一路”沿线国家数据的实证研究》,《国际贸易问题》第4期,第83～94页。
|
| [4] |
韩永辉、张帆、王贤彬和韦东明,2021,《双边政治关系与中国企业海外并购》,《经济科学》第5期,第37～51页。
|
| [5] |
江艇,2022,《因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应》,《中国工业经济》第5期,第100～120页。
|
| [6] |
邝艳湘和向洪金,2017,《国际政治冲突的贸易破坏与转移效应——基于中日关系的实证研究》,《世界经济与政治》第9期,第139～155页。
|
| [7] |
李少军,2002,《“冲突—合作模型”与中美关系的量化分析》,《世界经济与政治》第4期,第43～49页。
|
| [8] |
连增、李超和胡慧杰,2021,《国际友好城市与中资企业跨国并购——基于Zephyr全球并购分析交易库的实证研究》,《财贸经济》第10期,第147～164页。
|
| [9] |
梁育填、周政可和刘逸,2018,《东南亚华人华侨网络与中国企业海外投资的区位选择关系研究》,《地理学报》第8期,第1449～1461页。
|
| [10] |
刘晓光和杨连星,2016,《双边政治关系、东道国制度环境与对外直接投资》,《金融研究》第12期,第17～31页。
|
| [11] |
门洪华,2016,《日本变局与中日关系的走向》,《世界经济与政治》第1期,第72～90页。
|
| [12] |
潘镇和金中坤,2015,《双边政治关系、东道国制度风险与中国对外直接投资》,《财贸经济》第6期,第85～97页。
|
| [13] |
漆海霞,2018,《大数据与国际关系研究创新》,《中国社会科学》第6期,第160～171页。
|
| [14] |
孙灵希和储晓茜,2018,《跨国并购与绿地投资的逆向技术溢出效应差异研究》,《宏观经济研究》第10期,第141～153页。
|
| [15] |
王金波,2019,《双边政治关系、东道国制度质量与中国对外直接投资的区位选择——基于2005—2017年中国企业对外直接投资的定量研究》,《当代亚太》第3期,第4～28页。
|
| [16] |
王珏、李昂和周茂,2019,《双边政治关系距离对中国出口贸易的影响:基于联合国大会投票数据的研究》,《当代财经》第1期,第96～107页。
|
| [17] |
闫雪凌和林建浩,2019,《领导人访问与中国对外直接投资》,《世界经济》第2期,第147～169页。
|
| [18] |
杨连星、刘晓光和张杰,2016,《双边政治关系如何影响对外直接投资——基于二元边际和投资成败视角》,《中国工业经济》第11期,第56～72页。
|
| [19] |
翟崑和王丽娜,2016,《“一带一路”背景下的中国—东盟民心相通现状实证研究》,《云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》第6期,第51～62页。
|
| [20] |
张发林,2022,《中美关系的“冲突—合作”复合形态》,《国际展望》第6期,第32～50页。
|
| [21] |
周五七,2015,《“一带一路”沿线直接投资分布与挑战应对》,《改革》第8期,第39～47页。
|
| [22] |
Aleksanyan, M., Z. Hao, E. Vagenas-Nanos and P. Verwijmeren, 2021, “Do State Visits Affect Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions？” Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, pp.1～19.
|
| [23] |
Barbieri, K. and J. S. Levy, 1999, “Sleeping with the Enemy: The Impact of War on Trade”, Journal of Peace Research, 36(4), pp.463～479.
|
| [24] |
Biglaiser, G. and K. DeRouen Jr., 2007, “Following the Flag: Troop Deployment and U.S. Foreign Direct Investment”, International Studies Quarterly, 51(4), pp.835～854.
|
| [25] |
Büthe, T., and H. V. Milner, 2008, “The Politics of Foreign Direct Investment into Developing Countries: Increasing FDI through International Trade Agreements？”, American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), pp.741～762.
|
| [26] |
Chinn, M., and H. Ito, 2008, “A New Measure of Financial Openness”, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 10(3), pp. 309~322.
|
| [27] |
Du, J. and Y. Zhang, 2018, “Does One Belt One Road Initiative Promote Chinese Overseas Direct Investment？”, China Economic Review, 47, pp.189～205.
|
| [28] |
Glick, R. and A. M. Taylor, 2010, “Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(1), pp.102～127.
|
| [29] |
Keshk, O. M. G., B. M. Pollins and R. Reuveny, 2004, “Trade Still Follows the Flag: The Primacy of Politics in a Simultaneous Model of Interdependence and Armed Conflict”, The Journal of Politics, 66(4), pp.1155～1179.
|
| [30] |
Li, J., K. E. Meyer, H. Zhang and Y. Ding, 2018, “Diplomatic and Corporate Networks: Bridges to Foreign Locations”, Journal of International Business Studies, 49(6), pp.743～752.
|
| [31] |
Li, Q. and T. Vashchilko, 2010, “Dyadic Military Conflict, Security Alliances, and Bilateral FDI Flows”, Journal of International Business Studies, 41(5), pp.765～782.
|
| [32] |
Minor, M. S., 1994, “The Demise of Expropriation as an Instrument of LDC Policy, 1980-1992”, Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), pp.177～188.
|
| [33] |
Pollins, B. M., 1989, “Conflict, Cooperation, and Commerce: The Effect of International Political Interactions on Bilateral Trade Flows”, American Journal of Political Science, 33(3), pp.737～761.
|
| [34] |
Quer, D., E. Claver and L. Rienda, 2012, “Political Risk, Cultural Distance, and Outward Foreign Direct Investment: Empirical Evidence from Large Chinese Firms”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4), pp.1089～1104.
|
| [35] |
Zhang, J. and X. He, 2014, “Economic Nationalism and Foreign Acquisition Completion: The Case of China”, International Business Review, 23(1), pp.212～227.
|
|
|
|
