中国股权结构对公司绩效的影响

本文以净资产收益率和主营业务资产收益率为被解释变量，以股权结构为解释变量，系统考察了股权结构封上市公司绩效的影响。在对行业、公司规模、资本结构等经济因素加以控制後，使用在深圳证券交易所的公司的2003年截面数据进行分析。我们的分析和假设检验表明：在不考虑行业因素的情况下，国有股比例封公司绩效有负面影响，股权集中度和法人股比例有正面影响，流通股比例没有显着正面影响；考虑了行业的因素，国有股、法人股的预期影响只在竞争性很强的行业成立。深入研究法人股对公司绩效的影响，发现它们之间呈一种U型曲线关系，国内其他学者所发现的倒U型曲线并没有出现。法人股股东持股比例在30％附近时，公司绩效最差。     

辽宁上市公司股权结构与经营绩效的实证分析

本文以辽宁在上海和深圳证券交易所挂牌的57家上市公司为研究对象，以2001～2003年的年报数据作为样本，从实证分析的角度，对辽宁上市公司的股权结构和经营业绩以及股权结构对经营业绩的影响进行了分析，得出了一些有意义的结论。     

试论上市公司财务报表披露期间的信息不对称

本文度量了样本股票在年报公布过程中的信息不对称程度,并选取了股权结构、经营业绩和交易信息等若干类解释变量,运用多元线性逐步回归方法,对影响年报披露过程中信息不时称程度的因素进行了实证研究.经验结果显示,股权结构和成交量等变量对年报披露过程中的信息不对称程度具有显著解释力,而经营业绩等变量不显著.     

房地产行业上市公司股权结构与公司业绩关系的实证分析

在现代股份公司中,普遍存在所有权与经营权分离的问题,公司的管理经营权实际被经理人所控制,在关于如何对管理层进行有效监控与激励的讨论中,学界普遍认为公司股权结构对公司的经营与监督等有较大影响,进而影响公司的业绩。通过固定效应模型分析了2006—2016年间中国房地产行业103家上市公司的面板数据,从股权集中度与股权属性两个股权结构维度研究上市公司股权结构对公司业绩的影响。实证结果表明,流通股A股比例与公司业绩呈正相关,法人持股比例与业绩负相关,管理层持股与公司业绩无显著性相关,高股权集中度对公司业绩无显著影响。     

股权分置改革过程中的信息不对称

文章度量了样本股票在股权分置改革过程中的信息不对称程度,并选取了股权结构、经营业绩和对价水平等若干类解释变量,运用多元线性逐步回归的方法,对影响股改过程中信息不对称程度的因素进行了实证研究。经验结果显示,股权结构、成交量和对价水平等变量对股改过程中的信息不对称程度具有显著解释力,经营业绩等变量不显著。另外,样本股票信息不对称程度的估计结果显示,随着整个股改进程的推进,信息不对称程度有下降的趋势。     

论上市公司股权结构与经营绩效的关系

本文以国有股比重、流通A股比重、第一大股东持股比重以及第一、第二大股东持股比重之比作为公司股权结构变量,以净资产收益率与市净率作为公司经营绩效变量,以中国信息技术行业的上市公司为样本,对其股权结构与经营绩效关系进行了实证研究.该研究结果表明,国有股比重与上市公司的经营绩效负相关,流通A股比重及大股东治理与上市公司的经营绩效均无显著相关性.本文的实证研究为中国上市公司实行国有股减持、股权结构多元化以及加强中小股东公司治理功能提供经验证据.     

股权分置改革过程中的信息不对称

文章度量了样本股票在股权分置改革过程中的信息不对称程度,并选取了股权结构、经营业绩和对价水平等若干类解释变量,运用多元线性逐步回归的方法,对影响股改过程中信息不对称程度的因素进行了实证研究.经验结果显示,股权结构、成交量和对价水平等变量对股改过程中的信息不对称程度具有显著解释力,经营业绩等变量不显著.另外,样本股票信息不对称程度的估计结果显示,随着整个股改进程的推进,信息不对称程度有下降的趋势.     

我国上市公司的股权结构与股利政策

主要分析了股权结构对公司股利政策的影响。在对我国上市公司的股权结构和股利政策的关系进行实证研究之后，得出了上市公司的现金股利与国有股的比例正相关的结论，并用股利分配代理成本理论和股利顾客效应理论对这一结论做了解释。     

中国上市公司“高送转”股利政策分析——基于股权结构的视角

股利政策的重要性对于上市公司不言而喻,但近年来我国上市公司热衷于＂高送转＂的股利政策,这对上市公司的持续发展和证券市场稳定造成了极大的影响。以＂高送转＂为研究对象,从股权结构的角度分析其影响因素和方式。选取我国历年A股上市公司的股利政策进行分析,从股权角度阐述股权结构对＂高送转＂股利政策的可能影响。将2010年我国A股上市公司作为样本进行实证分析,得出股权结构对＂高送转＂股利政策的具体影响情况和方式。     

实际控制人持股水平、行业竞争性与企业绩效

本文利用我国A股上市公司2008-2012年的数据,研究了实际控制人持股水平、行业竞争性与企业绩效的关系.研究发现,在竞争性行业中,实际控制人持股比例对企业绩效的影响是显著为正的,而在非竞争性行业中,实际控制人持股比例对企业绩效的影响是不显著的;分所有制来看,在竞争性行业中,民营控股企业实际控制人持股水平的激励效应要大于国有控股企业;把国有控股企业分为中央控股企业和地方控股企业,则这两类企业中实际控制人持股比例对企业绩效的影响也因行业竞争性不同而不同.基于本文的研究结果,应该加强非竞争性行业的竞争性以激发市场和企业的活力;还应该对国有控股企业进行股权结构改革,吸引包括民营资本在内的多种类型的投资者投资于国有企业.     

The impact of privatization on firm performance in a transition economy

The Vietnamese privatization programme, launched in 1992, differs from the usual Western privatization programmes in terms of the residual percentage of shares owned by the state and the portion of shares owned by insiders. This begs the question whether these differences influence the effects of the programme on firm performance. This study measures the impact of privatization on firm performance in Vietnam by comparing the pre‐ and post‐privatization financial and operating performance of 121 former state‐owned enterprises (SOEs). We find significant increases in profitability, sales revenues, efficiency and employee income. Results of applying the ‘difference‐in‐difference’ (DID) method, wherein a control group of firms is used to pick up the influence of other determinants of firm performance, suggest that the performance improvements may indeed be associated with equitization. Regression analyses reveal that firm size, residual state ownership, corporate governance and stock market listing are key determinants of performance improvements.     

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.     

You are suffocating me: Firm-level analysis of state-owned enterprises and private investment

Literature on whether government spending crowds out or crowds in the private sector is large, but still without an unambiguous conclusion. Using firm-level data from Ukraine, this paper provides a granular empirical investigation to disentangle the impact of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) on private firm investment in Ukraine—a large transition economy. Controlling for firm characteristics and systematic differences across sectors, the results indicate that the SOE concentration in a given sector has a statistically significant negative effect on private fixed capital formation, and that the impact of SOEs is stronger in those industries in which SOEs have a more dominant presence. These findings imply that private firms operating in sectors with a high level of SOE concentration invest systematically less than businesses that are not competing directly with SOEs.     

国有企业支付了更高的职工工资吗?

对职工个人层面的研究表明,股权性质显著影响职工平均工资,但已有文献对于企业层面上股权性质如何影响职工平均工资尚缺乏深入探讨。以1999—2009年间我国A股上市企业为样本,本文深入考察了国有股权性质对职工平均工资的影响。研究结果表明,从整体上看,样本期间国有企业支付了更高的职工工资,而且这一结论在控制了行政垄断、企业规模和职工教育背景等因素之后依然成立。进一步区分国有企业控制级别和职工工资类别后发现,与非国有企业相比,国有企业普通职工工资显著更高。其中,中央政府控制的国有企业普通职工工资显著高于地方政府控制的国有企业,而地方政府控制的国有企业又显著高于非国有企业;国有企业高管薪酬与非国有企业并无显著差异,但中央政府控制的国有企业高管薪酬显著高于地方政府控制的国有企业和非国有企业。上述研究结论有助于理解转轨经济背景下国有股权性质对职工工资的影响,丰富了职工工资的相关研究,并对推进我国国有企业工资体制改革具有借鉴意义。     

Industry and Labour: Class Struggle at Work and Monopoly Capitalism; Social Standing in America: New Dimensions of Class; Class Structure and Social Mobility in Poland

A very well-established economic literature maintains that state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are inefficient as compared to privately owned ones (POEs). In this paper, I argue that SOEs' inefficiency is not due to state ownership per se, but is rather caused conditions other than ownership, to which SOEs often — though not necessarily always — relate. In particular, I focus on dynamic efficiency — specifically, the production of technological innovation — of SOEs in manufacturing industries, where SOEs should contend with POEs in a competitive environment. I suggest that targeted measures, which are aimed at increasing managers' commitment to long-term investment strategies and at reducing corruption and political interference — albeit complex and difficult to implement — can be much more (positively) impactful on long-run technical progress than the simple privatization of companies. This leaves room for exploration and implementation of policies that might reconcile state ownership and market competition in industrial sectors.     

Post-privatization corporate governance and firm performance: The role of private ownership concentration,identity and board composition

We examine and analyze the post-privatization corporate governance of a sample of 52 newly privatized Egyptian firms over a period of 10 years, from 1995 to 2005. We look at the ownership structure that results from privatization and its evolution; the determinants of private ownership concentration; and the impact of private ownership concentration, identity and board composition on firm performance. We find that the state gives up control over time to the private sector, but still controls, on average, more than 35% of these firms. We also document a trend in private ownership concentration over time, mostly to the benefit of foreign investors. Firm size, sales growth, industry affiliation, and timing and method of privatization seem to play a key role in determining private ownership concentration. Ownership concentration and ownership identity, in particular foreign investors, prove to have a positive impact on firm performance, while employee ownership concentration has a negative one. The higher proportion of outside directors and the change in the board composition following privatization have a positive effect on firm performance. These results could have some important policy implications where private ownership by foreign investors seems to add more value to firms, while selling state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to employees is not recommended. Also, the state is highly advised to relinquish control and allow for changes in the board of directors following privatization as changing ownership, per se, might not have a positive impact on firm performance unless it is coupled with a new management style.     

股权集中度和股权制衡及其对公司经营绩效的影响

在对大股东的性质作出清晰界定的基础上,本文考察了中国上市公司的股权集中度和股权制衡情况及其对公司经营绩效的影响。研究发现:股权集中度和经营绩效之间有着显著的正向线性关系,而且这种关系在不同性质的控股股东中都是存在的。具体来说,在中央直属国有企业和私有产权控股的上市公司中股权集中度所表现的激励程度最高,地方所属国有企业控股的上市公司次之,而国有资产管理机构控股的上市公司最低。同时,过高的股权制衡程度对公司的经营绩效有负面影响。但是,不同性质外部大股东的作用效果有明显差别,而且其在不同性质控股股东控制的上市公司中的表现也不尽一致。     

Bank competition and the cost of debt: the role of state ownership and firm size

The argument on the puzzling relationship between bank competition and the cost of debt remains inconclusive as the effects of state ownership and firm size are intertwined. We find that bank competition is negatively associated with the cost of debt and observe that the negative effect of bank competition is stronger for state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and weaker for large-sized enterprises. Our findings accord with the market power hypothesis. State ownership strengthens the negative impact of bank competition on the cost of debt, but firm size tends to weaken it. SOEs and large-sized enterprises are associated with a lower cost of debt compared to non-SOEs and small- and medium-sized enterprises, respectively.     

企业改制模式和改制绩效——基于企业数据调查的经验分析

本文以上世纪90年代后半期的企业调查数据为基础,通过建立经济计量模型来研究公有企业的改制绩效,通过相应的技术处理消除企业的各种先天因素或改制前固有的优势,试图测试改制是否能够确实激发出显著的效率效应。分析发现,向私有产权方向改制的企业效率得到显著提高;不同的改制模式是改制绩效的重要决定因素,经营者持大股从效率上来讲是最优的改制方式,而平均分配的股份合作制的改制方式则具有较差的业绩效果。我们还讨论了其原因,以及为什么中国现阶段特定制度环境下最优的公司治理结构是大股东控股。我们认为给定当前制度背景下,最佳的改革方案之一是股权向经营者集中,股权合理定价。因为只有市场的初次分配是有效率的,才能得到收入再分配的源泉。在此基础上,国家可通过各种税收设计,进行较为公平合理的收入再分配。     

中国工业的结构调整、效率与劳动配置

本文利用 1 999— 2 0 0 1年最新的企业调查数据 ,分析了中国工业结构调整对其生产效率和就业吸纳的影响。研究表明 ,中国工业结构越来越符合中国的资源和要素禀赋 ,劳动力成本低廉的比较优势得到不断发挥。轻工业部门和劳动密集型产业的较快增长 ,不仅提高了中国工业的总体效率 ,而且为缓解目前日益严峻的失业问题发挥了重要作用。在振兴和改造传统的老工业基地过程中 ,应将大力发展轻工业部门和劳动密集型产业放在突出地位 ,通过深化国有企业产权制度改革和加快结构调整步伐 ,增强东部地区的工业经济活力和国际竞争力。