放松卖空管制与企业“ESG表现”：研究综述

近年来,ESG在全球范围内得到广泛关注,越来越多的投资者将企业“ESG表现”纳入投资决策,相关政策法规也要求企业披露ESG报告。卖空机制作为一种外部治理机制,可以通过影响企业的行为选择,进而影响企业的“ESG表现”。基于此,文章通过梳理相关文献,从中国资本市场放松卖空管制这一角度出发,探究放松卖空管制对企业ESG表现的作用机制和影响效果,有助于政策制定者全面地了解放松卖空管制的积极效果,同时也为促进企业履行社会责任提供了新思路。     

期指与融券：如何防控利益集团掠夺？——“适当的制度”比“适当的投资者”更重要

对资本市场具有深远意义的融资融券和股指期货终于破冰，“单边市”已久的A股很快就会有沽空机制，从而有助于夯实善资本市场基础，完善价格发现功能，平抑市场波动。然而，期指和融资融券似乎是贵族俱乐职员才能玩的资本游戏。     

融资融券对公司盈余管理影响的研究综述

本文借助放松卖空管制在中国部分试点这一"准自然试验",系统性地总结和分析了融资融券对盈余管理影响的相关文献,相关研究表明融资融券在中国具有一定的公司治理作用,通过事前威慑和事后惩罚两种治理效应对上市公司的盈余管理产生约束作用。因此,为了促进我国金融市场的发展,应该逐步放松卖空管制,不仅有利于提升公司财务信息的质量,从根本上保护投资者利益,还能弥补公司存在的内外部治理缺陷。     

资本市场对公司治理的作用机理及若干实证检验

本文从资本市场与公司治理的关系入手研究资本市场对公司治理的作用。资本市场的融资机制，使投资者有权选择投资的对象，从而改善和提高公司的治理结构；资本市场的价格机制，可使出资者了解公司经营信息，降低了股东对管理层的监控信息成本，降低了公司治理的成本；资本市场的并购机制，可以强制性纠正公司治理的低效率。本文还用中国上市公司的实际情况验证了资本市场对公司治理的作用机理及其有效性。     

期指与融券:如何防控利益集团掠夺?

对资本市场具有深远意义的融资融券和股指期货终于破冰,单边市已久的A股很快就会有沽空机制,从而有助于夯实善资本市场基础,完善价格发现功能,平抑市场波动。然而,期指和融资融券似乎是贵族俱乐部成员才能玩的资本游戏。较高加入门槛的初衷是为了保护中小     

企业碳信息披露的迎合行为：识别、溢价损失与作用机制

作为显示企业减碳行动的重要途径，碳信息披露有利于利益相关者掌握碳排放信息，但在缺乏统一披露框架和有效监管的情况下，企业有动力夸大碳减排信息以迎合“双碳”战略导向。本文关注到企业对外披露的减碳信息与实际减碳行动之间的差别，对碳信息披露的迎合行为开展研究。理论层面，构建企业碳信息披露决策模型，讨论“言过其实”的迎合行为对碳信息披露溢价的影响，从投资者信心和债务融资水平两个角度考察溢价损失的作用机制。实证层面，以2012—2020年发布企业社会责任报告的制造业上市公司为样本，构造迎合指数对碳信息披露的迎合行为加以识别，进而验证理论假说。结果发现：上市公司碳信息披露过程中的确存在迎合行为，此种“言过其实”的迎合行为会带来碳信息披露的溢价损失；降低投资者信心及债务融资水平，是碳信息披露“言过其实”造成溢价损失的作用机制；伴随地区人均碳排放、环境规制和投资者识别能力的不同，迎合行为的溢价损失效应有所差异；碳信息披露对同行业竞争对手存在负向溢出，能够降低竞争对手的股票回报率，迎合行为则对竞争溢出效应有抑制作用。本文的结论不仅为甄别企业碳信息披露真实性提供理论依据，而且为资本市场强化上市公司迎合行为的...     

融资约束下研发创新对IPO 市场表现的影响 ——基于创业板公司的实证研究

本文基于 2009～2017年创业板上市公司 IPO 数据，考察公司研发创新对IPO市场表现的影响， 以及该影响机制在 IPO 前面临不同融资约束程度的公司中是否有所差异；依据我国IPO制度变迁背景， 对自2014 年起实施的首日交易价格管制后的样本，采用其破板日（上市后首个非涨跌停板日） 而非上市首日数据衡量， 以体现真实的市场股价反应。 研究表明： 以研发投入与专利产出衡量公司研发创新时， 两者均对 IPO 市场表现具有总体促进作用；公司在 IPO前面临的融资约束较高时，短期会对 IPO市场表现出一定放大作用，长期则表现为抑制作用并随时间推移逐渐减弱。本文由资本市场宏观环境出发并落脚于微观企业的研发创新行为及其表现， 为 IPO制度改革的深化及企业研发决策选择等提供借鉴参考。     

MD&A创新描述与公司未来创新绩效——基于文本分析的经验证据北大核心

“管理层讨论与分析”(Management’s Discussion and Analysis,MD&A)直接关系到投资者的决策准确性。MD&A中的创新描述与创新投入是否“言行一致”,能否预测企业未来创新绩效,仍是影响投资者决策的重要问题。本研究以2007~2020年沪深两市A股上市公司14年间16422个非平衡面板数据为样本,首先实证分析MD&A中创新描述与公司创新投入关系,进而检验创新描述对公司未来创新绩效的预测作用。研究发现:(1)创新描述与企业当期创新投入显著正相关,能如实反映企业的创新投入;(2)创新描述能正向预测企业下一年度的专利申请数,但难以预测下一年度的专利授权数,其对企业未来创新绩效的预测作用存在局限。研究结论从文本信息的角度丰富了企业创新绩效的预测方式,有效减轻上市公司内外信息不对称的问题,同时也进一步验证加强“管理层讨论与分析”信息披露内容监管的必要性。     

跨国研发下国有企业的最优技术选择策略

随着技术保护主义与“逆全球化”趋势不断增强，国有企业的技术选择将对本国产业链供应链的稳定性产生重大影响。本文构建了国际混合寡头竞争模型，考察同时存在国内国外技术交易渠道下国有企业的最优技术选择策略。研究发现，国有企业最优技术国产化比重随专利价值的提升而增加。当专利价值较低时，国有企业应当同时使用本国与国外的技术以平衡研发效率与专利使用成本，即“国际分散选择”；当专利价值足够大时，为避免国外企业拒绝授权带来的供应链产业链冲击，国有企业应实现产品技术的完全国产化，即“本土集中选择”。偏离最优技术选择策略，国有企业采用先进技术可能降低整体社会效益，特别是国有企业完全依赖国外技术的选择会降低本国产业链供应链的创新效率与利润水平，损害社会福利。进一步，本文通过比较静态分析发现，在专利价值足够高时，为推动国有企业加快实现选择技术的完全国产化，应在产品市场上鼓励跨国研发企业间竞争以提高整体创新动力，同时在技术交易渠道上鼓励跨国研发企业深度合作以提高整体创新效率。本文揭示了技术市场中国有企业的策略性技术选择的影响机制，为提高产业链供应链韧性提供了新的分析视角与政策启示。     

省电网公司直接融资方案设计

公司直接融资是相对于传统的银行贷款间接融资方式,由公司在资本市场上通过发行股票、债券、信托或衍生金融产品直接筹集资金的融资形式。针对省电网公司目前存在的资本结构简单、资产负债率较高、资本金需求缺口大、资金占用时间长的特点,利用当前我国资金充裕的资本市场进行直接融资,是优化企业资本结构、有效控制财务风险、降低资金成本的有效手段。股本融资政策依据:国家电网公司章程第五条规定,“经国务院批准,公司进行国家授权投资的机构和国家控股公司的试点”。《公司法》第148条:“国家授权投资的机构可以依法转让其持有的股份,也…     

系统市场中企业策略性排他行为分析

本文将系统竞争和组件竞争结合起来，分析系统市场中的企业策略性行为及其对市场竞争和创新的影响。在系统市场上．开放的系统竞争结构是较优的，但是企业并不一定会选择与社会福利目标相一致的组织形式．而是更多地基于策略性需要来进行选择。在系统市场中．创新主导企业有激励通过策略性地选择许可比例来操纵市场竞争。在邻近市场结构中．在位创新垄断企业有激励通过排他性行为将关键技术市场的垄断势力延伸到邻近竞争市场．这些市场封锁行为通常会严重地伤害市场竞争，并阻碍技术创新。     

When do strategic alliances inhibit innovation by firms? Evidence from patent pools in the global optical disc industry

Research and development (R&D) consortia are specialized strategic alliances that shape the direction and scope of firm innovation activities. Little research exists on the performance consequences of participating in R&D consortia. We study the effect of patent pools, a unique form of R&D consortia, on firm performance in innovation. While prior research on alliances generally implies that patent pools enhance firm innovation, our study finds the opposite. Analyzing data on systemic innovation in the global optical disc industry, we find that patent pool formation substantially and significantly decreases both the quantity and quality of patents subsequently generated by licensors and licensees relative to the patenting activity of nonparticipants. Our empirical findings suggest that patent pools actually inhibit, rather than enhance, systemic innovation by participating firms. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Impact of Product Portfolio Strategy on Financial Performance: The Roles of Product Development and Market Entry Decisions

Innovation is one of the most important issues facing business today. The major difficulty in managing innovation is that managers must do so against a constantly shifting backdrop as technologies, competitors, and markets constantly evolve. Managers determine the product portfolio through key decisions about product development and market entry. Key strategic questions are what portfolio strategies provide the greatest reward. The purpose of this study is to understand the relative financial values of each component of a product portfolio. Specifically, the paper examines the short‐term and long‐term financial impacts of product development strategy and market entry strategy. These strategies reflect two critical tensions that must be balanced in product portfolio decision making and essentially determine a firm's product portfolio. In doing so, the paper also investigates how a firm's capabilities drive each component of a product portfolio. From the empirical analyses in the context of the biomedical device industry, the paper found important insights regarding product portfolio strategies. First, a large product portfolio helps a firm's financial performance. In particular, the pioneering new products have strongest impacts on short‐term performances, and nonpioneering mature products do not provide significant contribution. Second, the results indicate a persistent first‐mover advantage. The first‐to‐market new products yield not only an immediate effect, but also persistent long‐term effects, suggesting that it is important to be first in the market even though there may be short‐term losses. Third, the results suggest the need to balance between “mature” and “new” products. Also, firms need to balance “first‐to‐market” and “late‐entered” products. Because a new or pioneering product requires more resource, it may hurt other products in the portfolio. Thus, without support from mature or follower products, new products and pioneering products alone may not increase firm sales or profit. Fourth, from a long‐term perspective, the paper found that the financial market only rewards a firm's overall capability to deliver new products first in the marketplace. Thus, short‐term performance is mainly driven by product‐level innovativeness, whereas firm‐level innovativeness enhances forward‐looking long‐term performance. Fifth, the paper also found that pioneering new products are driven by integrating both primary and complementary technological capabilities. And nonpioneering new products are mainly driven by the capabilities in primary technology domain. These results provide important insight into the relative value and timing of return on investment in radical versus incremental innovation and alternative market entry strategies. By understanding the performance trade‐offs of these different factors in the short and long term, one can develop better guidelines for optimizing innovation strategies, and their dependence on both external and internal environmental conditions.     

Patent management in entrepreneurial SMEs: a literature review and an empirical study of innovation appropriation,patent propensity,and motives

Managers make a number of strategic choices when trying to capture returns from innovation investments, including what appropriation strategy to use and whether or not to patent, strategic choices that depend among other things on firm size. Previous literature, being reviewed in this paper, shows that the patent propensity is lower in small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) than in large firms and that patenting as means for appropriation is of less importance among SMEs. Chief executive officers (CEOs) and/or research and development (R&D) managers of 26 entrepreneurial SMEs have been interviewed to explain these differences and to provide insight on how patenting is used in SMEs. The patent competence was low among the studied SMEs, and internal patent resources were found to be important for effective and efficient use of the patent system, for application as well as monitoring and enforcement. While of limited perceived importance for protecting inventions in entrepreneurial SMEs, patents were used to attract customers and venture capital, which is of utmost importance for the survival and growth of these firms. Thus, patenting has an important role to play even in firms where the protective function of patents is secondary.     

Business group characteristics and affiliated firm innovation: The case of Taiwan

This paper investigates the relationship between business group factors and affiliated firm innovation in terms of patents granted. We examine the following factors for business groups: group affiliation, group diversification, inside ownership, and family ties. In emerging markets, business groups act not only as an internal capital market, but also as a platform for resource sharing among affiliates. We use Taiwan's business groups as a research sample to investigate how these group factors affect affiliated firms' innovation. The findings indicate that firms that are affiliated with business groups innovate better than their unaffiliated counterparts. Group diversification and family ties have positive effects on firm innovation, while inside ownership has no significant positive effect. Our study contributes to the innovation literature by shedding light on business group factors and firm innovation.     

Technology convergence capability and firm innovation in the manufacturing sector: an approach based on patent network analysis

As a consequence of the convergence between manufacturing technology and the foundation technologies of Industry 4.0, it is becoming more important for firms to formulate an innovation strategy for their technological capabilities. In this context, the present study measures firm‐level technology convergence (TC) capability using patent network analysis. A firm’s TC capabilities are measured using three centrality indices pertaining to a patent network, which is constructed based on the relationship between patents and their international patent classification. For the empirical analysis, panel regression is conducted to observe the effect of TC capabilities on innovation for the top 30 firms in four manufacturing industries. We find that the TC degree positively influences the firms’ overall innovation, namely their total number of patents, and negatively influences their convergent innovation, calculated as the ratio between the number of TC patents and the total number of patents, while the effect of TC betweenness is the opposite. These findings imply that while concentrating on similar technologies may promote quick technology application, it could hamper the enhancement of a TC’s potential. To promote TC, a firm should thus develop technologies more likely to be involved in TC.     

How to analyze technology lifecycle from the perspective of patent characteristics? the cases of DVDs and hard drives

This study aims to analyze the technology lifecycle from the perspective of the dynamics of patent characteristics; the dynamics of patent characteristics are proposed as an approach for characterizing technology lifecycle in this study. DVD and hard drive technologies, which have already experienced their complete technology lifecycles, were selected for analyzing their patent characteristics as a function of the different stages of their technology lifecycles to thus obtain the objective of this research. The results obtained in this study provide a channel to assess the nature of firms’ innovation strategies along technology lifecycles. It can be observed that (1) patents attempt to cite more prior patent or non-patent references at the latter stages to find more technological or scientific sources that can contribute to technological innovation, (2) most litigated patents are granted in the Growth stage, so it is expected that patents in the Growth stage should be more important and, thus, more relevant to dominant design than the patents granted in other stages.     

Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family

The sharp increase in SEP declarations and declaring firms emphasizes the necessity for understanding firms’ innovation investment behavior in standardization. This paper empirically investigates whether declared standard-essential patents (SEPs) and the declaring firm’s business model (operationalized as a firm’s location in the value chain) are associated with a firm’s innovation investment behavior. To this end, we measure firms’ innovation investment behavior through average total research and development (R&D) expenditures per filed patent family for publicly listed firms from 1999 to 2018. Our sample mainly includes major SEP family declarants. We rely on a binary business model taxonomy differentiating upstream and downstream firms. Within that setting, total R&D expenditures rise with increasing fragmentation of declared SEP families, suggesting that firms adjust their R&D investments to declaration developments in standard-setting organizations (SSOs). We also show that upstream firms have significantly lower total R&D expenditures than downstream firms, which could indicate structural differences in their intellectual property (IP) and R&D management processes. Our results can help SSOs and regulators better understand firms’ innovation investment behavior.     

Licensing Strategies in the Presence of Patent Thickets

Many key industries (e.g., biomedical, pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, and information technologies) are characterized by cumulative innovations, where the introduction of a new product or service often requires many complementary technologies. When these technologies are protected by intellectual property rights owned by many firms, patent thickets exist, which researchers have argued may hinder the development of cumulative innovations. Specifically, patent thickets may lead to excessive royalty burdens for potential licensees, which is called “royalty stacking,” and if such costs are passed on to consumers, prices of products based on cumulative technologies will be driven up, dubbed as “double marginalization.” The literature, however, does not address these issues under different forms of licensing contracts. This article develops a game‐theoretic model where a downstream firm seeks to license N patents that read on its product from upstream firms. It discusses a variety of licensing forms widely used in practice and attempts to discover whether royalty stacking and double marginalization occur under these forms of licenses. It also studies the impact of bargaining power between parties. It is found that when patent ownership becomes more fragmented, neither royalty stacking nor double marginalization occurs under profit‐based royalty, fixed fee, and hybrid licenses. Such problems occur only under pure quantity‐based or pure revenue‐based royalty licenses when the downstream firm's bargaining power is low. It is also shown that no matter how fragmented the ownership structure of patent is, hybrid licenses consisting of a fixed fee and a quantity‐ or revenue‐based royalty rate lead to the same market outcomes as a fully integrated firm that owns all the patents and the downstream market. This article has interesting implications for both research and practice. First, the results show that even under the same patent ownership structure, different forms of licenses lead to quite different market outcomes. Therefore, it is suggested that firms and policy makers pay more attention to contractual forms of licenses when trying to minimize the negative impact of patent thickets. Second, the extant literature has largely assumed that quantity‐based royalties are used, where double marginalization is the most severe. In practice, revenue‐based royalties are most common, under which double marginalization is much milder. Third, the results show that patent pools can be most effective in mitigating royalty stacking and double marginalization when quantity‐based or revenue‐based royalties are the sole or primary payment form, especially when downstream firms have low bargaining power.     

A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of R&D,Patents, and Product Innovation on Firm Performance

Because of increasing levels of competition and decreasing product life cycles, a firm's ability to generate a continuous stream of innovations may be more important than ever in allowing a firm to improve profitability and maintain competitive advantage This paper investigates several issues that are central to an examination of the innovation productivity in a firm. First, the relationship between a firm's commitment to research and development and its innovative outcomes is examined. Two innovative outcomes are analyzed: (1) invention, which focuses on the development of new ideas; and (2) innovation, the development of commercially viable products or services from creative ideas. Invention is measured by the number of patents granted, and innovation is assessed by the number of new product announcements. Second, because many inventions ultimately result in marketable innovations and because patents may provide protection for new products, the relationship between patents and product announcements is also investigated. Finally, the ability of a firm to benefit from its inventions and innovations is studied by examining their separate effects on firm performance, measured as return on assets (ROA) and sales growth. Drawing from a sample of 272 firms in 35 industries over 19 years, the results from a model of simultaneous equations provided support for some of the hypotheses, but several other surprising findings were found. As expected, R&D spending was positively related to patents. This finding is consistent with others who argue that internal research capabilities, particularly those with a strong basic research component, is key to enabling a firm to generate creative outputs. More surprising was the finding of increasing returns to scale to R&D spending. While this contradicts much of the existing research, it is consistent with economic arguments for the advantages of scale in innovation. Also interesting is the finding that, while a significant curvilinear relationship exists between R&D spending and product announcements, it is not the predicted inverse‐U but instead a U‐shaped relationship. Consistent with previous work, product announcements were found to be positively related to both performance measures. A negative relationship was found between patents and both ROA and sales growth. While these findings were unexpected, they are intriguing and call into question the value of patents as protection mechanisms. In addition, these results may be resulting from the rise of strategic patenting, where an increasing number of firms are using patents as strategic weapons. As expected, a positive relationship was found between patents and new product announcements.