Brand capital and firm value

We study the role of brand capital – a primary form of intangible capital – for firm valuation and risk in the cross section of publicly traded firms. Using an empirical measure of brand capital stock constructed from advertising expenditures accounting data, we show that: (i) firms with low brand capital investment rates have higher average stock returns than firms with high brand capital investment rates, a difference of 5.2% per annum; (ii) more brand capital intensive firms have higher average stock returns than less brand capital intensive firms, a difference of 5.1% per annum; and (iii) investment in both brand capital and physical capital is volatile and procyclical. A neoclassical investment-based model in which brand capital is a factor of production subject to adjustment costs matches the data well. The model also provides a novel explanation for the empirical links between advertising expenditures and stock returns around seasoned equity offerings (SEO) documented in previous studies.     

Managerial capital,occupational choice and inequality in a global economy

This study proposes a simple theory of trade with endogenous firm productivity, occupational choice and income inequality. Individuals with different managerial talent choose to become entrepreneurs or workers. Entrepreneurs enhance firm productivity by investing in managerial capital. The model generates three income classes: low‐income workers facing the prospect of unemployment, middle‐income entrepreneurs managing domestic firms and high‐income entrepreneurs managing global firms. Trade liberalization policies raise unemployment and improve welfare. A reduction in per‐unit trade costs raises top incomes and generates labour‐market polarization. A reduction in fixed exporting costs has an ambiguous effect on top incomes and personal income distribution. Policies reducing labour‐market frictions or the costs of managerial‐capital acquisition create more jobs and improve welfare. The income distributional effects of labour‐market policies depend on which policy is implemented.     

Can Production Subsidies Explain China's Export Performance? Evidence from Firm‐level Data*

This paper analyses the relationship between production subsidies and firms’ export performance using a very comprehensive and recent firm‐level database and controlling for the endogeneity of subsidies. It documents robust evidence that production subsidies stimulate export activity at the intensive margin, although this effect is conditional on firm characteristics. In particular, the positive relationship between subsidies and the intensive margin of exports is strongest among profit‐making firms, firms in capital‐intensive industries, and those located in non‐coastal regions. Compared to firm characteristics, the extent of heterogeneity across ownership structure (SOEs, collectives, and privately owned firms) proves to be relatively less important.     

Size and Determinants of Capital Structure in the Greek Manufacturing Sector

Increasing competition in the European Union (EU) and world markets affects the Greek manufacturing sector. Capital structure is essential for the survival, growth and performance of a firm. There has been a growing interest worldwide in identifying the factors associated with debt leverage. However, nothing has been done so far in contrasting small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and large sized enterprises (LSEs) on these aspects. SMEs are very important in the Greek manufacturing sector for employment and growth. Empirical studies show that capital structure and the factors affecting it vary with firm size. In this paper we investigate the determinants of capital structure of Greek manufacturing firms and formulate some policy implications that may improve the financial performance of the sector. Our study utilizes panel data of two random samples, one for SMEs and another for LSEs. The findings show that profitability is a major determinant of capital structure for both size groups. However, efficient assets management and assets growth are found essential for the debt structure of LSEs as opposed to efficiency of current assets, size, sales growth and high fixed assets, which were found to affect substantially the credibility of SMEs. In an era of increasing globalization, the findings imply that Greek SMEs should focus their efforts on (a) increasing their cash flow capacity through better assets management and achievement of higher exports and (b) ensuring good bank relations, but at the same time, turn to alternative forms of financing. Greek LSEs should adopt strategies that will lead to the improvement of their competitiveness and securing new forms of financing. Government policy measures aiming at structural changes and economic efficiency should be designed clearly depending upon its targets: SMEs need policies that will encourage information exchange and co‐operation in local and foreign markets and use of e‐business, as well as, financial assistance. On the other hand, LSEs should be supported by policies aimed at new high‐technology investments, entrance of new firms and foreign investments in the country, tax alleviation and increase of R&D and training expenditures. The upgrading and transparency of the capital market in Greece is expected to improve the capital structure of Greek manufacturing firms.     

Who Gains from Restructuring the Post‐Soviet Transition Economies,and Why?

To explore the mixed economic results and huge distributional changes experienced by post‐Soviet economies, I set up a series of theoretical and numerical simulation models using an approach based upon heterogeneous firms, where ‘reform’ means closure of inefficient capacity. In the presence of significant costs to new firm entry and international capital mobility, restructuring and privatisation can lead to falls in GDP and real wages, while capital is transferred abroad. This situation can occur even under perfect competition, but is worse when industrial production is concentrated and trade costs are high. By contrast, workers can gain when costs of establishing new firms are low, and/or when the inefficient industries are capital‐intensive. For countries with high costs of firm set‐up and of trade, capital controls may be justified to protect wages.     

Does social capital determine innovation? To what extent?

This paper deals with two questions: Does social capital determine innovation in manufacturing firms? If it is the case, to what extent? To deal with these questions, we review the literature on innovation in order to see how social capital came to be added to the other forms of capital as an explanatory variable of innovation. In doing so, we have been led to follow the dominating view of the literature on social capital and innovation which claims that social capital cannot be captured through a single indicator, but that it actually takes many different forms that must be accounted for. Therefore, to the traditional explanatory variables of innovation, we have added five forms of structural social capital (business network assets, information network assets, research network assets, participation assets, and relational assets) and one form of cognitive social capital (reciprocal trust). Based on the survey data administered from April to June 2000 to 440 manufacturing firms of diverse industries in a region in the southwest of Montréal, we have found that 68.5% of the firms have developed product or process innovations during the 3 years preceding the survey. Assuming that innovation is not a discrete event but a complex process, we have modeled the decision to innovate as a two-stage decision-making process: in the first stage, the firms deal with the decision about whether to innovate or not whereas, at the second stage, the firms that have decided to innovate must make a decision about the degree of radicalness of the innovation to undertake. In a context where empirical investigations regarding the relations between social capital and innovation are still scanty, this paper makes contributions to the advancement of knowledge in providing new evidence regarding the impact and the extent of social capital on innovation at the two decision-making stages considered in this study. Regarding the decision to innovate or not that firms must initially make, we have provided strong evidence that diverse forms of social capital influence this decision and, more importantly, that marginal increases in social capital, especially in social capital taking the forms of participation assets and relational assets, contribute more than any other explanatory variable to increase the likelihood of innovation of firms. As for the decision to be made at the second stage concerning the magnitude of radicalness to bring in the development of new product or process innovations, this paper contributes to the advancement of knowledge by supplying the strongest evidence that diverse forms of social capital determine the radicalness of innovation, and more importantly, that social capital taking the form of research network assets contributes more than any other explanatory variable to explain the radicalness of innovation. The second variable that exerts the strongest impact on the radicalness of innovation is the number of different advanced technologies employed by firms for production.     

Intra‐firm trade,exporting, importing,and firm performance

Abstract This paper examines firm heterogeneity in terms of size, wages, capital intensity, and productivity between domestic and foreign‐owned firms that engage in intra‐firm trade, firms that export and import, firms that import only, and firms that export only. As previously documented, heterogeneity between different groups of trading firms is substantial. Taking into account intra‐firm trade in addition to exporting and importing yields new insights into the productivity advantage previously established for exporting firms. The results presented here show that this premium accrues only to exporters that also import and to exporters that also engage in intra‐firm trade, but not to firms that export only. Using simultaneous quantile regressions, the paper illustrates that heterogeneity within different groups of trading firm is equally large. Some of this within‐group heterogeneity can be attributed to differences in trading partners.     

Impact of Knowledge Capital on the Production of Hungarian Firms

Several studies identified a positive relationship between a firm’s knowledge assets and its productivity. Knowledge assets are usually considered as the level of human and technological capital of the firm. Knowledge assets of the firm may also increase by the so-called spillover effect, especially in less developed host economies of foreign direct investment, which means diffusion of the technology, knowledge and managerial skills from foreign companies to local ones. Beyond the impact of the human and technological capital of firms, this paper also examines the effect of spillover of knowledge on the firms’ performance in Hungary within a linear regression model. The model is based on individual data of Hungarian enterprises, examining the change in performance as the difference of the variables between 1996 and 2014. The paper shows that knowledge assets (concerning human capital) basically determine the firms’ production in Hungary from 2000. The effect of research and development activity was not significant in the investigated period. Foreign shares in the industries’ total equity (proxy for spillover effect) have a weak and, after 2005, a negative influence on performance. The spillover effect in the Hungarian economy was not demonstrated by the regression model.     

Why does China protect its labour‐intensive industries more?*

China's tariff structure favours labour‐intensive sectors, and this is at odds with traditional theory of comparative advantage. The paper argues that tariffs in China are a mechanism for protecting technology‐backward domestic – especially state‐owned enterprises (SOEs) from competition technology‐advanced foreign enterprises producing in China. With relatively integrated labour markets and cross‐firm technology differences, SOEs’ subsistence is supported by subsidized credit and limited access of foreign firms’ local production to tariff‐protected domestic markets. Labour market integration and capital subsidies increase the relative cost of labour in SOEs compared to their foreign competitors, hurting more domestic firms in industries that use labour more intensively. Restrictions to FIEs’ (foreign‐invested enterprises) access to tariff‐protected product markets, which protect more labour‐intensive industries, compensate for the greater cost disadvantage of SOEs in labour‐intensive sectors.     

Regional variation in the capital structure adjustment speed of listed firms: Evidence from China

This paper investigates whether in China, a country large in size, geographically diverse and imbalanced in regional economic development, variation in firm capital structure¹ is systematically related to regional economic environment. In addition, we examine whether during macroeconomic recovery there is significant difference in the speed of adjustment in capital structure of firms located in different regions. The empirical analyses are based on 783 firms listed on Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges during a sample period of year 2000 through 2014. Using GMM and Logit QMLE, we found strong evidence that the regional variation in the capital structure of listed firms is linked to growth indicator (the Market-to-Book value, MB), EBIT ratio, size of the firm and tangible assets (the value of Net Property, Plant and Equipment, PPE). In the process of economic recovery, there was apparent regional variation in the speed of adjustment in capital structure, i.e. the fastest adjustment in capital structure was found in East China while that of West China followed and that of Mid China the slowest, that is to say within a given period the leverage ratio of listed firms in East China rises or falls faster than in the other two regions.     

Taxation and Capital Structure Choice: The Role of Ownership

Applying firm fixed‐effects estimations to European firm‐level data, I analyze how ownership structure affects the relationship between taxation and capital structure. I find that an increase in the corporate tax rate affects the debt‐to‐assets ratio positively, and that this effect is stronger for firms with concentrated ownership. These results hold independently of whether firms are standalone or subsidiaries, and are also valid if subsidiaries are divided into those that are foreign‐owned and those domestically owned. Lastly, ownership plays a role even when controlling for other potentially important determinants of the relation between corporate taxation and capital structure.     

从控制到协调：企业治理目标的演进

企业的治理目标可以理解为企业的价值取向,即企业应该为谁服务,为谁而存在？企业治理目标也体现在维护企业内创造价值的关键性资源的完整性,并通过价值分配来激励这些关键性资源。传统的物质资本密集型企业其关键性资源具有产权特性,控制企业产权便可以维持企业的价值创造能力,同时也可以获得相应的价值分配权,因此物质资本密集型企业的治理目标便是控制企业的关键性物资资本,并为其服务。而在人力资本密集型企业中,创造价值的关键性资源无法通过产权加以控制,需要凭借关系型契约来协调。此时,只有妥善协调企业内的关键性资源,才能维持企业的价值创造能力,所以人力资本密集型企业的治理目标由控制转变为协调企业内的关键性资源。企业家通过关系型契约协调关键性人力资本的关键是让人力资本感知与企业合作的收益要大于不合作的收益,切实保证人力资本有权参与分享与企业合作所产生的收益,从而提高关系型契约自我实施的能力。     

Productivity,capital intensity,and ISO 14001 adoption: Theory and evidence

The determinants of ISO 14001 adoption have been considered to fall into two categories: external pressure from environment‐oriented stakeholders or customers and internal need due to expected future benefits. In this study, we further elaborate the mechanism underlying firms’ adoption of the standard by investigating the inter‐relationship among firms’ productivity, capital intensity, and decision making regarding adoption. Applying a general equilibrium model, we show that under optimal conditions, highly productive firms can benefit more from adoption. Moreover, technological advancements potentially drive up firms’ capital intensity and this positively affects their incentive for adoption. The empirical practice using firm‐level data in Vietnam verifies our predictions with robustness. In addition, we find that the phenomenon outlined above becomes even more obvious in the manufacturing sectors.     

Regulatory quality,financial integration and equity cost of capital

We study the impact of international financial integration on firm‐level equity cost of capital in the presence of regulatory differences. International financial integration reduces the domestic cost of capital in the presence of well‐defined regulations that make it easier for foreign firms to overcome information asymmetry. We study this relationship for 55 countries for the period 2002 to 2014. Using multilevel mixed estimations, we find a negative relationship between cost of capital and both financial openness and regulatory quality. However, economies with better regulatory quality have a positive relationship between financial openness and cost of capital. Our results inform policy on the cost of higher level of regulations on firms’ equity cost of capital, especially when an economy has a high level of financial openness.     

Multinational Production, Absorptive Capacity, and Endogenous R&D Spillovers

Do R&D spillovers have an impact on whether firms choose to go multinational or not? We present a three‐stage Cournot duopoly model, which identifies under what conditions firms choose to service a foreign market through exports or localized production. The establishment of a foreign subsidiary improves the ability to learn from foreign R&D since spillovers are strongly moderated by geographical distance. We explicitly model the concept of absorptive capacity, where gains from spillovers are determined by own R&D investments. With exogenous R&D investments, the absorptive capacity effect contributes to increase the gains from going multinational when the firm is R&D‐intensive. However, if R&D investments are endogenous, only medium‐sized absorptive capacity effects will result in firms going multinational. Furthermore, higher spillover rates do not necessarily drive down R&D and profits for the multinational firm. This stands in contrast to models that ignore absorptive capacity effects.     

How does ownership structure affect capital structure and firm value?Recent evidence from East Asia1

The present paper examines the effects of ownership structures on capital structure and firm valuation. It argues that the effects of separation of control from cash flow rights on capital structure and firm value also depend on the separation of control from management as well as on legal rules and enforcement defining investors’ protection. We obtain firm‐level panel data (three stage least squares, 3SLS) estimates from four of the East Asian countries worst affected by the last crisis. There is evidence that the general wisdom that higher control than cash flow rights may lower firm value may be reversed among owner‐managed family firms in the sample countries.     

The capital structure and investment of regulated firms under alternative regulatory regimes

This paper explains how regulated firms choose their capital structure and examines the effects of this choice on investment and on regulated prices. It is shown that in equilibrium, firms have an optimal debt level and that given this debt level, the regulated price is set high enough to ensure that firms never become financially distressed. The analysis of the equilibrium yields testable hypotheses concerning the effects of changes in cost parameters and in the regulatory climate on the equilibrium investment level, capital structure, and regulated price. The analysis also shows that a regulatory restriction on the ability of the firm to issue securities may have an adverse effect on investment and consequently may harm consumers.     

Intangible capital,corporate valuation and asset pricing

Recent studies have found unmeasured intangible capital to be large and important. In this paper we observe that by nature intangible capital is also very different from physical capital. We find it plausible to argue that the accumulation process for intangible capital differs significantly from the process by which physical capital accumulates. We study the implications of this hypothesis for rational firm valuation and asset pricing using a two-sector general equilibrium model. Our main finding is that the properties of firm valuation and stock prices are very dependent on the assumed accumulation process for intangible capital. If one entertains the possibility that intangible investments translates into capital stochastically, we find that plausible levels of macroeconomic volatility are compatible with highly variable corporate valuations, P/E ratios and stock returns. We thank Ellen McGrattan, Edward Prescott, Rene Stulz and an anonymous referee for their helpful comments as well as workshop participants at FAME, the 5th Conference of the Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, the European Central Bank, Columbia Business School Finance Free Lunch and the University of Zürich. This research has benefited from financial support from the National Center for Competence in Research “Financial Valuation and Risk Management”. The National Centers of Competence in Research are managed by the Swiss National Science Foundation on behalf of the Federal Authorities.     

Capital markets and capital allocation: Implications for economies in transition*

Recent work showing that a sounder financial system is associated with faster economic growth has important implications for transition economies. Stock prices in developed economies move in highly firm‐specific ways that convey information about changes in firms’ marginal value of investment. This information facilitates the rapid flow of capital to its highest value uses. In contrast, stock prices in low‐income countries tend to move up and down en masse, and thus are of scant use for microeconomic capital allocation. Some transition economy markets are coming to resemble those of developed economies, others those of low‐income countries. Stock return asynchronicity is highly correlated with the strength of private property rights in general and public shareholders’ rights in particular. Other recent work suggests that small entrenched elites in low‐income countries preserve their sweeping control over the corporate sectors of their economies by using political influence to undermine the financial system and deprive entrants of capital. The lack of cross‐sectional independence in some transition economies’ stock returns may be a warning of such economic entrenchment. Sound property rights, solid shareholder rights, stock market transparency, and capital account openness appear to check this, and thus contribute to efficient capital allocation and economic growth.