Financing constraints, irreversibility, and investment dynamics

We develop a model of an industry with many heterogeneous firms that face both financing constraints and irreversibility constraints. We use this model to examine the cyclical behavior of aggregate fixed investment, variable capital investment, and output in the presence of persistent idiosyncratic and aggregate shocks. Our model yields three main results. First, the effect of the irreversibility constraint on fixed capital investment is reinforced by the financing constraint. Second, the effect of the financing constraint on variable capital investment is reinforced by the irreversibility constraint. Finally, the interaction between the two constraints is key for explaining why input inventories and material deliveries of US manufacturing firms are so volatile and procyclical, and also why they are highly asymmetrical over the business cycle.     

The odd notion of “reversible investment”

Irreversible investment and the attendant concept of real-option value have been well discussed. Complete reversibility has been frequently invoked but less studied, especially for the case of lumpy investment typically considered in capital budgeting. We examine a simple lumpy investment problem for the full range, from complete irreversibility to completely reversibility, with a focus on the latter. The optimal stopping rules under complete reversibility are to invest when the project generates enough net cash flow to cover Jorgenson’s opportunity cost of investment and to disinvest when it does not. Given the static nature of these rules, net present value as a timing criterion under reversibility is not pertinent. Investments that are partially reversible have much in common with completely irreversible investments but nothing in common with completely reversible investments. The case of reversible investment provides a foil for understanding that the distinguishing feature of investment as treated in corporate finance is that it entails at least some irreversibility.     

The irreversibility premium

When investment is irreversible, theory suggests that firms will be “reluctant to invest.” This reluctance creates a wedge between the discount rate guiding investment decisions and the standard Jorgensonian user cost (adjusted for risk). We use the intertemporal tradeoff between benefits and costs of changing the capital stock to estimate this wedge, which we label the irreversibility premium. Estimates are based on panel data for the period 1980-2001. The large dataset allows us to estimate the effects of limited resale markets, low depreciation rates, high uncertainty, and negative industry-wide shocks on the irreversibility premium. Our estimates provide a readily interpretable measure of the importance of irreversibility and document that the irreversibility premium is both economically and statistically significant.     

The interrelationship between price and output decisions and investment decisions: Microfoundations and aggregate implications

This paper develops a model of firm behavior in which both price and output decisions and investment decisions are made. The model permits an analysis of the dynamics of inventory and capital accumulation on price and output behavior. There are two main results: (1) Short-run price and output levels will differ from long-run levels as desired stocks of inventory and capital diverge from actual levels. (2) The size of the elasticities of price and output to changes in demand and cost variables depends on the speed with which gaps between desired and actual stocks are closed through investment.     

Optimal investment and production decisions and the value of the firm

We explore the effects of uncertainty on a firm that can respond by modifying its investment or production schedule (or both simultaneously) to variations in output price. Investment may increase capacity and/or reduce costs. We consider a firm with finite resources.Our model uses option theory instead of the more traditional net present value framework. One of the early papers using this approach is Brennan and Schwartz (1985) in which an investment project to extract a finite natural resource is valued. In that paper, the value of the firm is a function of two state variables, the finite resource to be extracted (output to be produced in the future) and the commodity spot price. In order to maximize firm value, the manager can respond by modifying one control variable, the production level. In our model we handle instead three state variables (spot price, resources, accumulated investment) and two control variables (production rate and investment rate), and solve numerically.We obtain both the value and the optimal policy of a firm that has investment projects that increase capacity and/or reduce costs and illustrate optimal policies as resources and available investments decrease over the life of the firm. Firms may start by only investing, then invest and produce, to end only producing.We thank Scott Wo, the referee and the editor for their comments and suggestions. Cortázar and Lowener acknowledge the financial support from FONDECYT and FONDER.     

Putty-clay technology and stock market volatility

Firms' first-order conditions imply that stock returns equal investment returns from the production technology. Much applied work uses the adjustment cost technology, which implies that the realized return is high when the investment-capital ratio is high. This paper derives, for an arbitrary stochastic discount factor, the investment return implied by the putty-clay technology. The combination of capital heterogeneity and irreversibility creates a novel channel for return volatility. The investment return is high when the ratio of investment to gross job creation is low. Empirically, the putty-clay feature helps account for U.S. stock market data.     

Energy Price Shocks and the Macroeconomy: The Role of Consumer Durables

We create a model with a distinction between investment in consumer durables and capital goods, as well as energy use by households and firms, to evaluate the importance of energy price shocks for output fluctuations. Simulation results indicate that this economy has a smaller proportion of output fluctuations attributable to energy price shocks than one without durable goods and household energy use. We show that an energy price hike is absorbed by reducing investment in durables more than in fixed capital. This rebalancing effect cushions the hit to future production. Thus, productivity shocks remain the prime driver for output fluctuations.     

Equilibrium Investment Strategies and Output Price Behavior: A Real-Options Approach

The effects of competitive interactions on investment decisionsand on the dynamics of the price of a nonstorable commodityare studied in a model of incremental investment with time tobuild and operating flexibility. I find that an increase inuncertainty may encourage firms to increase their capacity.Furthermore, I show that it may be optimal to invest in additionalcapacity during periods in which part of the operational capacityis not being utilized. The impact of competition on the propertiesof the endogenous output price is dramatic. For example, I findthat price volatility may be increasing in the number of competitorsin the industry.     

On the Interaction of Real and Financial Decisions of the Firm Under Uncertainty

This study analyzes the interaction between the optimal level of investment and debt financing. For this purpose, a model is structured in which a firm, facing an uncertain price, has to decide on its optimal level of investment and debt. The amount of investment sets a limit on output whose optimal level is determined after price is realized. The debt involved is risky (there exists a possibility of bankruptcy). The analysis proves that investment and its optimal financing have to be simultaneously determined and that a negative relationship exists between operating and financial leverage. We also demonstrate that as the tax rate increases, optimal capacity decreases and optimal leverage increases. An analysis of the impact of changes in the expected price shows that under some conditions, an increase in expected price would lead to an increase in optimal investment (firm size) and a decrease in optimal debt.     

创业板公司创投股东减持行为及收益特点研究

本文对截至2011年3月底的创业板公司创投股东的减持行为及其收益情况进行实证研究。研究发现,超过一半解禁项目的创投股东开始逐步退出,投资收益巨大。创投股东减持行为及收益随创投类型、投资时间、投资成本的不同而存在明显差异,减持收益率小于以市场价格计算的账面收益率。分析表明,解禁后创投股东减持力度较大,符合其退出套现的盈利模式。其中,券商直投的快进快出行为值得关注,而投资较晚、成本较高的创投机构减持意愿较高。另外,用账面收益来衡量创投机构的投资业绩有较大误差。     

Oil Price Uncertainty

The theories of investment under uncertainty and real options predict that uncertainty about, for example, oil prices will tend to depress current investment. We reinvestigate the relationship between the price of oil and investment, focusing on the role of uncertainty about oil prices. We find that volatility in oil prices has had a negative and statistically significant effect on several measures of investment, durables consumption, and aggregate output. We also find that accounting for the effects of oil price volatility tends to exacerbate the negative dynamic response of economic activity to a negative oil price shock, while dampening the response to a positive oil price shock.     

Investment Timing for Dynamic Business Expansion

We investigate the timing of business expansion. With an indefinite sequence of growth opportunities that have constant returns to scale, current investment neither displaces nor impairs future returns. In a dynamic setting with expansion restricted to a fraction of firm size, the endogenously determined cost of capital uniformly exceeds the value maximizing return threshold for expansion. Taking this into account, a manager accelerates investment to facilitate larger and more valuable future investments when earnings stochastically improve. This result is the opposite of deferral that the investment literature recommends due to irreversibility. This means that the managerial application of the cost of capital as an expansion hurdle rate is improperly conservative.     

Price‐cap regulation and the scale and timing of investment

This article shows how scale economies affect regulated firms’ investment behavior and welfare‐maximizing regulation of price and quantity. Regulated firms invest in smaller, more frequent, increments than social planners, with greater investment distortions the greater the economies of scale. Regulators cap prices at lower levels than planners when economies of scale are moderate, and at higher levels when they are substantial. When quantity is also regulated, the average cost of building capacity increases but the price cap decreases. Immediately after firms make their initial investment, regulators want to transfer surplus from customers to shareholders by raising the price cap to induce additional investment.     

The Quantitative Importance of News Shocks in Estimated DSGE Models

We estimate a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model with several frictions and both unanticipated and news shocks, using quarterly U.S. data from 1954 to 2004 and Bayesian methods. We find that unanticipated shocks dominate news shocks in accounting for the unconditional variance of output, consumption, and investment growth, interest rate, and the relative price of investment. The unanticipated shock to the marginal efficiency of investment is the dominant shock, accounting for over 45% of the variance in output growth. News shocks account for less than 15% of the variance in output growth. Within the set of news shocks, nontechnology sources of news dominate technology news, with wage markup news shocks accounting for about 60% of the variance share of both hours and inflation. We find that in the estimated DSGE model (i) the presence of endogenous countercyclical price and wage markups due to nominal frictions substantially diminishes the importance of news shocks relative to a model without these frictions, and (ii) while there is little change in the estimated contributions of technology news when we restrict wealth effects on labor supply, the contributions of nontechnology news shocks are relatively more sensitive.     

Accounting Measurement Basis, Market Mispricing, and Firm Investment Efficiency

In this paper, we investigate how the accounting measurement basis affects the capital market pricing of a firm's shares, which, in turn, affects the efficiency of the firm's investment decisions. We distinguish two broad bases for accounting measurements: input‐based and output‐based accounting. We argue that the structural difference in the two measurement bases leads to a systematic difference in the efficiency of the investment decisions. In particular, we show that an output‐based measure has a natural advantage in aligning investment incentives because of its comprehensiveness. The (first‐)best investment is achieved when the output‐based measure is noiseless and manipulation free. In addition, under an output‐based measure, more accounting noise/manipulation always leads to more inefficient investment choices. Therefore, if an output‐based accounting measure is highly noisy and easy to manipulate in practice, the induced investment efficiency can be quite low. On the other hand, an input‐based accounting measure, while not as comprehensive, may induce more efficient investment decisions than an output‐based measure if some noise is unavoidable in either measure. The reason is twofold. First, input‐based measures may be associated with less noise and limited manipulation in practice. Second, and more importantly, we show that under an input‐based measure, a slight increase in accounting noise/manipulation may lead to more efficient investment choices. In fact, the (first‐)best result is achieved when the noise/manipulability is small but positive. In other words, for an input‐based measure, being less comprehensive makes small but positive accounting noise/manipulability desirable. Two extensions of the basic model are also explored.     

Investment Adjustment Costs: An Empirical Assessment

We evaluate the empirical evidence for costs that penalize changes in investment using U.S. industry data. In aggregate models, such investment adjustment costs have been introduced to help account for a variety of business cycle and asset market phenomena. So far no attempt has been made to estimate these costs directly at a disaggregated level. We consider an industry model with investment adjustment costs and estimate its parameters using generalized methods of moments. The findings indicate small costs associated with changing the flow of investment at the industry level. The weighted average of the industry elasticities with respect to the shadow price of capital, which depends inversely on the adjustment cost parameter, is eight times larger than the largest estimate reported in Levin et al. (2006) . We examine a variety of factors that may account for this discrepancy, but a substantial part of it remains unexplained. Our results therefore suggest that more caution is needed when giving policy advice that hinges on a structural interpretation of large investment adjustment costs.     

Stabilizing non-fundamental asset price movements under discretion and limited information

Inflation, output and interest rate stabilization are all potential central bank objectives. We explore whether monetary policy should respond to asset price fluctuations when they are driven by irrational expectational shocks to the future returns to capital. In our model, an optimistic shock to future returns generates both an increase in equity prices and physical investment. The increased investment is inefficient and, thus, a central bank optimally responds to this expectations shocks. This induces a trade-off between stabilizing nominal prices and non-fundamental asset price movements. We compare the optimal policy under different assumptions: full versus limited information and commitment versus discretion. If the central bank has limited information about whether an asset price movement has a fundamental or non-fundamental origin, then the central bank responds less aggressively to the non-fundamental exuberance shocks than under full information. Without commitment, a central bank responds more aggressively to non-fundamental exuberance shocks.     

Specific Knowledge and Divisional Performance Measurement

This classic by the formulators of agency cost theory discusses five common divisional performance measurement methods—cost centers, revenue centers, profit centers, investment centers, and expense centers—while providing a theory that attempts to explain when each of these methods is likely to be the most efficient. The central insight of the theory is that each method offers a different way of aligning decision-making authority with valuable "specific knowledge" inside the organization.
The theory suggests that cost and revenue centers work best in cases where headquarters has good information about cost and demand functions, product quality, and optimal output mix. Profit centers—defined as business units whose managers have responsibility for overall profits, but not the authority to make major capital spending decisions—tend to supplant revenue and cost centers when line managers have a significant informational advantage over headquarters and when there are few interdependencies (or "synergies") between divisions. Investment centers—profit centers in which unit managers are allowed to make major investment decisions—tend to prevail when the activity is capital-intensive and when it is difficult for headquarters to identify the value-maximizing investment strategy.
In evaluating the performance of profit centers, rate-of-return measures like ROA are likely to be effective when unit managers do not have major influence over the level of new investment. But, in the case of investment centers, Economic Value Added, or EVA, is likely to be the most effective single-period measure because it is designed to encourage only value-increasing investment decisions.     

Variety expansion,preference shocks,and financial intermediaries

We investigate the effect of lifetime uncertainty on economic growth by incorporating preference shocks into a variety-expansion model and comparing financial autarky and financial intermediaries. In this economy, long-term investment facilitates the promotion of R&D investment and the creation of new differentiated goods. Our results suggest that when risk aversion is high, an increase in number of differentiated goods slows down R&D investment through a decrease in the price index. Further, if the risk of early withdrawal and the liquidation cost of long-term investment are high, financial intermediaries have significant effects on the growth of variety.     

To Invest or not to Invest: A real options approach to FDIs and tax competition

Foreign investment decisions of firms are often characterized by investment irreversibility, uncertainty, and the ability to choose the optimal timing of foreign investments. We embed these characteristics into a real option theory framework to analyze international competition among countries to attract mobile investments when firms, after the investment is sunk, can shift profit to low tax countries by transfer pricing. We find that an increase in the uncertainty of profit income reduces the equilibrium tax rates, whilst lower investment costs or larger profits, counteracts the negative fiscal externality of tax competition leading to higher equilibrium tax rates. JEL Code H25