FINANCE,DISTRIBUTION AND THE ECONOMIC OBJECTIVE OF FINANCIAL COOPERATIVE INSTITUTIONS

This paper proposes a model where the structure rather than the size of the financial sector explains its influence on income distribution. Because of information asymmetries, a financial sector dominated solely by profit‐maximizing financial intermediaries will increase income and wealth inequality as it gives preferential access to credit for high‐income agents, whereas a diversified inclusive financial sector with alternative models of finance, like cooperatives, will reduce the inequality gap. No full convergence in income distribution can be realized through finance only and there is still a need for redistribution policies. Accordingly, an objective function for cooperative financial institutions should define a desired pricing behaviour that can increase the income of members at a rate higher than the average growth rate of the economy.     

Financialization of Housing in Brazil: New Frontiers

The financialization of housing has been increasingly identified as an important driver of social and economic change in contemporary capitalism. Focusing on the Brazilian context, this article considers the extent to which recent changes in housing regulations, policies and markets confirm or challenge narratives about the financialization of housing in the international academic debate. I argue that while many of the trends stressed in the literature are apparent, more extreme processes of financialization within the Brazilian housing sector remain limited––not only because of institutional and regulatory constraints, path dependence or political resistance, but also because of fundamental structural conditions of Brazil's position as a peripheral economy. Three different but mutually reinforcing processes are scrutinized in order to evaluate the financialization of housing and its limits in Brazil: the re‐regulation of the real estate financial sector initiated in the 1990s; the changing funding patterns among real estate companies since the mid‐2000s; and the increasing commodification of housing induced by a large‐scale and heavily subsidized housing program launched in 2009.     

The Variegated Financialization of Housing

There is a small but growing literature on the financialization of housing that demonstrates how housing is a central aspect of financialization. Despite the varied analyses of the financialization of housing and the importance of housing to financialization, the relations between housing and financialization remain under‐researched and under‐theorized. The financialization of housing is not really a specific form of financialization, transcending as it does a number of different forms of financialization. Housing systems, in particular, vary widely across the globe, which implies that housing financialization will be inherently variegated, path‐dependent and uneven. In this introduction to the symposium, I will discuss how the articles to follow contribute to the literature on the financialization of housing. Housing has entered a post‐Fordist, neoliberal and financialized regime. Increasingly, both mortgaged homeownership and subsidized rental housing are there to keep financial markets going, rather than being facilitated by those markets. There is little evidence that the global financial crisis has resulted in any de‐financialization of housing. There are common trajectories within uneven and variegated financialization, rather than radically different and completely unrelated forms of housing financialization.     

管理者金融危机经历影响企业金融化水平吗？——基于中国上市公司的实证研究

文章以我国2008—2017年非金融上市公司为样本，结合“烙印理论”，考察了管理者金融危机经历对非金融企业金融化水平的影响，研究发现：管理者的金融危机经历对其所在企业的金融化水平具有显著的正向影响，在一系列的稳健性检验后，该结论依然成立。且该效应在融资约束严重的企业和制度环境较好地区的企业中更加显著，而在金融危机期间遭受财务困境的企业中受到明显抑制。拓展的研究表明，经历过金融危机的管理者持有金融资产的动机并不单一，但获利动机更强烈。最后文章还发现，管理者的获利动机和管理者自信可能是金融危机经历影响企业金融化水平的关键作用机制。文章从企业微观层面拓展了非金融企业金融化水平的影响因素研究，并对企业管理者经历对非金融企业金融化的影响及作用机制研究进行了一定的探索。     

Financialization and Society’s Protective Response: Reconsidering Karl Polanyi’s Double Movement

Financialization challenges Karl Polanyi’s thesis of double movement, the thesis that efforts to extend the market evoke efforts to protect humans, nature, and means of production from market forces. Financialization refers to the increased power of financial institutions. The government protects the incomes and assets of financial institutions, but it does little to protect the incomes and assets of households, which are necessary for people to afford healthcare, education, emergencies, retirement, and so on. Polanyi criticized nineteenth-century civilization for transforming land, labor, and the means of production into commodities, using economic insecurity to motivate humans. The development of intangible property allowed business to expand the market in two ways: (i) restricting output to drive up profits and (ii) liquefying consumer assets to provide credit to consumers to increase spending. The implications of that process manifested themselves in the financial crisis of 2008. Market capitalism represented the attempt to organize commodities based on economic rationality. Similarly, the twentieth- and twenty-first-century capitalism represents the effort to “rationally” organize society according to the value of intangible assets. Both efforts failed, indicating the continued relevance of Polanyi’s thesis.     

中央环保督察与企业过度金融化： 资本逐利抑或环境治理

中央环保督察是近年来我国环保领域采取的重要改革措施,不仅有利于提高环境治理效力,而且也会对微观企业的资源配置决策产生影响。基于2012—2020年我国沪深A股上市工业企业数据,采用多期双重差分法实证检验中央环保督察对企业过度金融化的影响。研究发现,中央环保督察对企业过度金融化具有抑制作用。影响机制检验发现,中央环保督察通过提高企业绿色投资进而会抑制企业过度金融化。异质性分析表明,中央环保督察对企业过度金融化的抑制作用在融资约束程度高、高管无公职经历的企业以及处在公众环境关注度较高地区的企业更强。经济后果检验表明,中央环保督察通过抑制企业过度金融化提升了企业绩效。研究结论探析了宏观环境政策对微观企业资源配置决策的影响及作用机理,对实现环境治理和经济发展的双赢具有一定的现实意义。     

企业金融化、内部控制与审计质量

企业金融化在资本市场与金融市场领域的研究比较深入,但学者对企业金融化在审计领域的研究关注较少。以2010—2018年我国A股上市公司为研究样本,实证检验企业金融化对审计质量的影响以及内部控制对两者关系的调节作用。研究发现,企业金融化与审计质量显著负相关,内部控制能显著抑制企业金融化对审计质量的负向影响。进一步研究发现:审计业务复杂程度和审计风险在企业金融化对审计质量的影响中发挥显著的中介效应,即企业金融化通过增加业务复杂程度和审计风险,从而降低审计质量;来自四大的审计师具有更强的专业胜任能力和独立性,且连续审计中,其能更好地利用内部控制以应对企业金融化带来的风险;内部控制五要素中内部监督能显著抑制企业金融化对审计质量的负向影响,而内部环境、风险评价、信息沟通、控制活动均未能显著抑制企业金融化对审计质量的负向影响。研究结论丰富了企业金融化与审计质量领域的相关文献,拓展了企业金融化经济后果的理论边界,同时也为推行建立健全良好的内部控制制度提供了经验证据。     

Automation,Financialization, and Institutional Change: Challenges for Progressive Policy

Abstract:

This article argues that the issue of “technological unemployment” resulting from automation is the result of ceremonial encapsulation within the process of progressive institutional adjustment. While institutions of production have adjusted to account for new technological developments, institutions of distribution have not. As discussed here, the main cause of this lack of adjustment is a financialized economy, in which shareholder returns motivate and dominate economic decision making and activity. As a result, gains and benefits from technological advances exacerbate existing income inequality and reduces the power of labor. I discuss this issue in detail before explaining how progressive policies that divorce private wage-labor from access to the system of social provisioning may serve to smooth this process of institutional adjustment caused by the introduction of automated processes.     

企业并购能否抑制经济“脱实向虚”——基于产业优化发展的视角

近年来,我国经济面临着严峻的“脱实向虚”问题,微观层面表现为实体企业金融化现象日益凸显,不仅影响我国经济的高质量发展,而且导致金融领域的风险集聚。因此如何抑制经济“脱实向虚”一直受到社会各界的广泛关注。本文以2009—2018年中国沪深A股非金融类、非房地产类上市公司为样本,采用倾向性得分匹配双重差分法,从产业优化发展的视角出发,实证检验企业并购对实体企业金融化的抑制影响及作用机制,并采用三重差分法检验境内并购和海外并购对于实体企业金融化抑制作用的差异。研究发现：企业并购对于企业的短期金融化行为和长期金融化行为均有抑制作用,且海外并购的抑制作用更强;境内并购主要通过“规模经济和范围经济效应”和“产业链协同互补效应”抑制企业金融化,海外并购主要通过“产业链协同互补效应”和“技术协同效应”抑制企业金融化。本文研究表明企业并购可以通过促进产业的健康可持续发展,提升产业对资本的吸引力,从而从根本上治理经济“脱实向虚”问题。     

中国经济金融化与城镇化的空间计量分析——基于直接效应与间接效应分解

在理论分析经济金融化影响城镇化机制的基础上,运用我国省际面板数据建立空间计量模型,并采用直接效应和间接效应分解的方法来探寻经济金融化对本区域和邻近区域城镇化发展的影响效应及特征。研究发现,经济金融化对本区域城镇化的影响存在着倒"U"型的非线性转换特征。当经济金融化水平未达到倒"U"型曲线的顶点以前,对该区域城镇化的影响效应显著为正;而其跨越"U"型曲线的顶点后,对该区域城镇化发展的负面效应便开始显现。但值得注意的是,其对邻近区域城镇化影响的非线性特征并不显著,而是存在显著的、线性的负向关系,会制约邻近区域城镇化的发展。此外,工业化和农业人力资本两个控制变量对本区域和邻近区域的城镇化影响效应均显著为正。