非金融企业影子银行化与盈余可持续性

基于我国非金融企业影子银行化趋势以及防范化解系统性金融风险的背景,从企业盈余可持续性的微观视角,选取2008—2018年A股非金融上市公司的经验数据,采用线性一阶自回归模型实证检验非金融企业影子银行化与盈余可持续性的关系。研究结果表明:企业脱离实业、从事偏离主业的影子银行业务降低了其盈余可持续性;非金融企业影子银行化通过挤出主业投资和提升财务风险而降低了盈余可持续性。进一步研究发现,良好的内部控制、较高的媒体关注和分析师关注以及高质量的注册会计师审计能够抑制非金融企业影子银行化对其盈余可持续性水平的负面作用。所得结论能够丰富非金融企业影子银行化和盈余可持续性的相关理论研究,并为我国“防风险”任务的完成和非金融企业高质量发展提供微观层面的经验证据。     

从微观视角理解经济“脱实向虚”——企业金融化相关研究述评

企业金融化是经济"脱实向虚"的微观表现形式。本文从微观企业视角,对关于企业金融化的前沿研究进行了梳理和述评,着重辨析了经济金融化与企业金融化的概念差异,划分了企业金融化的不同类型,并分析了企业金融化的不同成因及其对经济发展的不同影响。以分散风险、缓解融资约束为目的的企业金融化能够提升企业的经营效率,促进经济发展;因银行融资歧视形成的企业金融化和因资产价格泡沫形成的企业金融化会削弱金融稳定,阻碍经济发展。本文有助于研究者进一步从微观视角理解"脱实向虚",有针对性地研究不同类型的企业金融化,并提出差异化的政策建议。     

The Coevolution of Finance and Property Rights: Evidence from Transition Economies

The transition from communism to capitalism was necessarily accompanied by a sudden and abrupt increase in the financialization of society. This increase occurred in an environment that, even now, still has little experience with or expertise in financialization. Given that financialization occurred simultaneously with the growth and evolution of other political and economic institutions, the question arises: What was the effect on these other nascent institutions like property rights? This article empirically analyzes the relationship between financialization and property rights in transition countries. Using a unique monthly database of twenty transition countries over a period from 1989 to 2012, this article finds that the influence of financialization depends on which definition of “financialization” is used. In particular, increases in basic financial intermediation improved property rights. However, higher-order “financialization,” proxied here by the size of capital markets and the wages in the financial sector, appeared to have a negative impact on the development of broad-based property rights in transition.     

高管股权激励可以促进企业“脱虚向实”吗？——基于经济政策不确定性的调节效应

基于2011—2020年A股上市实体企业数据,研究高管股权激励对企业金融化程度的影响机制及其边界条件。结果表明：高管股权激励显著降低企业金融化程度;高管股权激励通过促进企业实体投资意愿降低企业金融化程度;经济政策不确定性越低,高管股权激励对企业金融化程度的降低效应越强。异质性分析发现,企业所在地区的技术市场和数字金融发展水平较高,高管股权激励对企业金融化程度的降低效应也较显著。研究结论对实体企业完善公司治理、优化投资决策,对政府及金融监管部门引导实体企业“脱虚向实”、促进实体经济高质量发展有一定启示。     

国内外大宗商品市场间信息溢出效应的实证研究——基于 DAG 方法与溢出指数模型

基于多维信息溢出视角,本文采用有向无环图和溢出指数方法,选取2006年6月2日至2015年12月25日的周度数据,从期货和现货两个层面实证分析国内外大宗商品市场间信息溢出效应及其动态变化趋势。结果显示,国内外大宗商品市场的收益率溢出指数呈现出先上升后下降的趋势,而波动率溢出指数则呈现明显的突变特征;国际大宗商品市场对中国大宗商品市场影响较大,在信息溢出方面处于主导地位,我国大宗商品市场的国际影响力相对较小,但呈现逐步增强的趋势;此外,国际大宗商品市场的金融属性强于我国,并且在2012年,我国大宗商品的去金融化趋势明显。     

Introduction to a Symposium on Global Finance and the Agri‐food Sector: Risk and Regulation

This symposium introduction brings together two debates; the debate on global food prices and speculation, and the debate on so‐called global ‘land investment’ or ‘land grabbing’. Both debates are examining two sides of the same phenomenon – the growing role of private financial investors in the global agri‐food value chains and the myriad consequences of it. The symposium moves beyond the identification of finance as an exogenous factor to the trends in the sector. It examines real‐life incarnations of finance in the sector by looking at investment arrangements, including connections with the state, and its (regional) variations. The symposium addresses three main themes. First, it explores the interplay of the state and private finance. It shows that the effect of regulation is limited in the face of increasingly mobile and complex investment flows. Second, it addresses the shifts and transfigurations of risk in the agri‐food sector due to financialization. Third, the symposium discusses to what extent, and how, the origins and identity of farmland investors still matters within an increasingly globalized financial sector. The paper concludes by identifying some related areas for further research.     

股权制衡度对公司金融化的影响——基于盈利能力的中介作用

以2018—2022年中国A股非ST非金融类上市公司的面板数据为基础,通过实证研究股权制衡度、盈利能力作用于公司金融化时遵循何种规律。结果表明,股权制衡度与公司金融化负相关,股权制衡度与盈利能力正相关,盈利能力在股权制衡度与公司金融化间存在部分中介效应。     

发展中国家金融化与中国的抵御探索

本文尝试在发展模式与外部经济依赖性相互作用的分析框架内来分析中国经济从抵御金融化到出现金融化趋势的过程。本文认为发展中国家金融化和频繁的债务金融危机源自本国发展模式与外部经济依赖性相互作用下金融扩张与生产性积累的背离。对于中国而言,在政府有效的产业政策和渐进的金融政策引导下形成的工业化主导的发展模式,能够不断解决经济发展矛盾,同时完备的工业体系和谨慎的金融开放政策减轻了中国对世界经济体系的依赖,使其得以抵御金融化和危机。但2008年全球金融危机后,中国发展模式面临新的矛盾并且对外部经济依赖性逐渐增强,出现了经济金融化的趋势,将对中国经济和金融体系的稳定性带来巨大的挑战。中国政府已经意识到金融化风险,在近年来出台了一系列政策,以期引导资金“脱虚向实”,并取得了一些成效,但金融化风险尚未根除,中国经济未来的发展仍需要政府制定行之有效的政策积极引导金融和实体经济的协调发展。     

Can Financialization Save Nature? The Case of Endangered Species*

The current biodiversity loss is dramatic. Over the past 50 years, more than 68% of the mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and fish on Earth have disappeared, putting the planet's survival and its inhabitants—including human beings—at risk. Financialization, or the transformation of nature into financial assets, is increasingly proposed as a solution to the biodiversity crisis. Proponents of financialization believe that assigning a monetary value to nature will incentivize human beings to protect habitats and their species. This article offers a four-mechanism model of nature's financialization, explaining why it is virtually impossible to financialize nature. We collected data through a unique two-stage data collection process, including a single case study and additional interviews with conservationists and conservation finance specialists. We analyzed the development of a calculative device, the “Index,” designed to assess the impact of conservation efforts on the survival of endangered species. Conservationists hoped to use the Index to calculate the financial return of a conservation impact bond, a financial instrument designed to finance conservation projects. However, they did not achieve their goal. We discuss the implications for the financialization and conservation literature and the role of accounting therein. We notably question previous accounts of financialization, including the need for financial numbers or financial actors. We ultimately show that a financialization project can transform practices toward financialization, even if the financialization process is not complete.     

Considerations on Inequality,Corporate Governance,and Financialization

Abstract

Disjunctures between corporate governance, increasingly dominated by financial considerations, and social inequality have been among the motor forces of current world-wide “populist” voter revolts. This article looks for clues for the relation between economic inequality, corporate governance, and financialization by re-examining the work of Karl Marx and of Adolphe Berle and Gardiner Means. Marx is widely considered, in Japan, to have pointed out that the division of profit into the wages of management and the profit of enterprise is considered as a path to the association. However, this general interpretation in Japan may not be sufficient for capturing capitalism’s contemporary reality. This presentation develops an alternative interpretation of this chapter by combining Marx’s explanation with the theory of the separation of ownership and management proposed by Berle and Means. We then explore causal relations among income inequality, corporate governance, and financialization.