联系我们

论文查询结果	返回搜索

论文编号：	15447
作者编号：	1120191056
上传时间：	2025/6/11 17:27:43
中文题目：	不确定性对企业投资的双刃影响——企业内外部制度作为影响机制
英文题目：	The Double-Edged Impact of Uncertainty on Corporate Investment —— Coping Strategies from Internal and External Institutional Mechanisms
指导老师：	黄福广
中文关键字：	不确定性；投资水平；Oi-Hartman-Abel效应；内部资本市场；投资者互动平台
英文关键字：	Uncertainty；Investment Level；Oi-Hartman-Abel Effect；Internal Capital Market；Interactive Investor Platform
中文摘要：	不确定性始终是商业世界的常态，伴随着新冠疫情的跌宕、俄乌战争的起落、特朗普政府的重新上台，不确定性的重要性再次得到凸显。在企业的投资实践中，以新古典投资理论与Tobin Q理论为基础的经典NPV法则由于缺乏对未来不确定性收益与成本的充分刻画，常常让位于管理者的“直觉”和“战略”考量，甚至一些企业更依赖于回收期规则而非NPV法则（Graham et al., 2015; Graham, 2022）。这些非正式的投资决策方式很大程度反映了管理者对未来不确定因素的判断，不确定性也因此成为理解企业投资行为的重要因素。Jorgenson指出，投资研究中最重要的未解问题是将不确定性整合到投资理论和计量经济学中。 从理论上来看，不确定性对企业投资水平的影响存在两种“相反”的可能性。基于风险溢价与实物期权理论的观点认为，不确定性会抑制并推迟企业投资；增长期权理论与Oi-Hartman-Abel效应的分析表明，不确定性可能促进企业的投资与增长。然而在实证研究中，大量文献讨论了不确定性对企业投资水平的抑制作用（Bontempi et al., 2010; Gulen and Ion, 2016; 谭小芬和张文婧，2017），却忽视了不确定性不仅包含“坏情景”，同时隐藏着“好情景”的可能性（Segal, 2015）。不确定性对最优投资水平的抑制中存在着帕累托改进空间。事实上，Knight在1921年即指出“不确定性是企业利润的来源”，这充分表明不确定性中蕴含着可供挖掘的投资机会，企业可能在不确定性中保持增长。甚至企业的存在正是为了应对和承担不确定性。 本文的研究分为两个部分，分别讨论了企业的内、外部制度在应对不确定性中的作用。第一部分讨论内部资本市场的影响，这是企业的内部制度构成，第二部分讨论投资者互动平台的作用，这是企业的外部制度环境。本文认为，这两种制度都赋予了企业多方面的“灵活性”，从而帮助企业更好地在不确定性中发展、增长，实现帕累托改进。在第一部分中，本文从三个理论视角出发，认为内部资本市场可以通过以下机制削弱“投资-经济政策不确定性（EPU）”负敏感性。（1）从金融摩擦的角度来看，经济政策不确定性会使得金融机构收紧信贷，内部资本市场则能够缓解企业的融资约束，从而避免企业因外部融资成本的提高而大幅削减投资。（2）从实物期权效应来看，内部资本市场可能避免投资不可逆性所造成的资源浪费与资金损失。具体地，内部资本市场的信息与知识优势可以帮助企业更好地化解与应对不确定性，业务相关的成员公司为资产的转让提供了额外的二次流转市场，此外，集团内部的多元化业务结构能够对冲成员企业的特异风险，对单一投资失败有更强的包容性。（3）从Oi-Hartman-Abel效应来看，内部资本市场不仅拥有生产经营的灵活性，还拥有融资结构上的灵活性，这可以帮助企业及时调整生产与投资的策略、规模，更好地抓住不确定性中的投资机会。综合来看，内部资本市场能够帮助企业缓解融资约束、降低不可逆性投资的负面影响、同时提升企业的生产与投资灵活性，激发正向的Oi-Hartman-Abel效应，最终削弱“投资-EPU”负敏感性。通过双向固定效应模型，本文证实了内部资本市场在缓解“投资-EPU”负敏感性中的作用，并通过倾向得分匹配法、熵平衡法、工具变量法等方法缓解了内生性问题的干扰，同时通过替换投资水平、EPU的度量与更换模型设计保证基准结论的稳健性。参考魏明海和万良勇（2006），本文根据内部资本市场与上市公司的相对位置，将其划分为上位内部资本市场与下位内部资本市场。在机制分析中本文发现，上位内部资本市场在缓解融资约束与缓解投资不可逆性影响的机制中发挥主要作用，而在激发Oi-Hartman-Abel效应的机制中，上位内部资本市场与下位内部资本市场均能够发挥作用。在异质性分析中本文发现，在企业家控制权水平更高、独立董事网络中心度更高的企业中，内部资本市场对“投资-EPU”负敏感性的削弱效果会得到增强，尤其对上位内部资本市场而言。而从经济后果来看，内部资本市场不仅提高了企业面对政策波动时的投资水平，还最终实现了更优的投资绩效，表现为内部资本市场同时削弱了“ROA-EPU”负敏感性。 在第二部分中，本文利用投资者互动平台中的互动信息作为外生冲击，讨论需求不确定性的缓解对上游企业投资行为的影响。通过堆叠型DID模型，本文证实相较于客户企业未使用投资者互动平台的企业，客户企业受到投资者提问的供应商企业拥有更高的投资水平。通过替换因变量、控制组、处理组、进行安慰剂检验，该基准结论保持稳健。在机制分析中，本文进一步印证了信息与投资机会、监督与信任两个影响机制，首先，客户企业的投资者互动内容有助于供应商企业缓解需求端的不确定性并基于先验知识“读懂”潜在投资机遇。其次，客户企业投资者互动平台的互动可以增强市场监督、并改善关系信任，从而提升供应商企业的投资意愿。在异质性分析中本文发现，对于管理层较年轻、企业成立较久、供应链集中度较高、行业竞争激烈的企业而言，客户企业投资者互动对供应商企业投资水平的促进作用更加突出。此外，客户企业投资者互动进一步提升了供应商企业的技术效率，说明供应商企业投资水平的提升具有投资理性。 针对本文的核心问题“不确定性‘如何’影响企业投资”，本文的两个部分从不同角度切入，作出了回答。这两个部分在不确定性的类型、与应对不确定性的方式上均存在互补关系。内部资本市场帮助企业“适应”不确定性，投资者互动平台帮助企业“改变”不确定性，二者分别塑造了企业的内、外部制度环境，并作为后置因素与前置因素影响了企业在不确定性中的投资行为。本文的研究主要有以下几点创新：（1）本文拓展了奈特不确定性产生利润的观点，为理解“不确定性对企业投资的影响”提供了企业组织层面的中间作用机制。依照奈特的观点，企业通过承担不确定性获取利润，企业的组织形态因此应当在不确定性对投资活动的影响中扮演重要角色。对于“投资-EPU”敏感性的决定因素，现有研究大多基于实物期权和风险溢价理论，从资产可逆性（Gulen and Ion, 2016）、政治关联（Pham, 2019）、融资约束（Wang et al., 2014）的角度展开讨论，并未充分考虑既定组织形态的作用。本文将内部资本市场纳入到“不确定性影响企业投资行为”的逻辑链条中，为宏观变量对微观企业投资行为的影响提供了来自企业组织形态的作用基础。（2）多数不确定性领域的研究强调了不确定性对企业投资增长的“负面影响”，本文则为不确定性“积极作用”，即Oi-Hartman-Abel效应的发挥提供了进一步的理论机制与实证证据。对于Oi-Hartman-Abel效应的发生情景，现有研究主要关注了劳动这种可变投入变量所起到的作用（Lee and Shin, 2000; Wang et al., 2024; Li et al., 2019）。本文的研究表明，内部资本市场使得企业具有融资与生产上的灵活性，同样能够激发Oi-Hartman-Abel效应。（3）本文强调不确定性的情景对于发挥内部资本市场“光明面”的重要性，拓展了Mathew and Robinson（2008）的理论观点，从而为内部资本市场的存在意义提供了进一步支持。在早期的研究中，学者们虽然认可灵活的资本配置所具有的价值，但在理论构建与实证检验中均忽视了“不确定的环境”在凸显灵活性价值时所发挥的作用，导致内部资本市场的“光明面”在日常情景中被其“黑暗面”所掩盖，集团组织的存在价值因此受到质疑。“不确定性情景可以凸显内部资本市场的竞争优势”这一观点，虽然在Mathew and Robinson（2008）的理论模型中提出，但相关的实证检验并未充分展开，本文对此观点进行了拓展，并提供了进一步支持性证据。（4）已有文献充分探讨了投资者互动平台对平台中企业的投融资行为、资本市场表现、投资者关系的影响，但该领域的讨论并未涉及其他重要的利益相关者如供应商、贷款人、劳动力市场、审计师、董事会和其他缔约方。根据Blankespoor（2022）的综述，信息处理成本对其他利益相关者的影响同样值得关注，本文讨论了投资者互动平台在供应链上的溢出效应，弥补了该部分的研究不足。
英文摘要：	Uncertainty remains a constant in the business world. The fluctuations of the COVID-19 pandemic, the ebbs and flows of the Russia-Ukraine war, and the return of the Trump administration have once again highlighted the critical importance of uncertainty. In corporate investment practice, the classical Net Present Value (NPV) rule, grounded in neoclassical investment theory and Tobin's Q theory, frequently gives way to managerial intuition and strategic considerations due to its insufficient characterization of uncertainy’s costs and benefits. Some firms even rely more on the payback period rule than the NPV rule (Graham et al., 2015; Graham, 2022). These informal investment decision-making approaches largely reflect managers' judgments regarding future uncertain factors, making uncertainty a crucial element in understanding corporate investment behavior in practice. As Jorgenson noted, the most significant unresolved issue in investment research is the integration of uncertainty into investment theory and econometrics. Theoretically, the impact of uncertainty on corporate investment levels presents two opposing possibilities. Perspectives based on risk premium and real options theory posit that uncertainty suppresses and delays corporate investment. Conversely, analyses based on growth options theory and the Oi-Hartman-Abel effect suggest that uncertainty may stimulate corporate investment and growth. However, empirical research predominantly documents a negative effect of uncertainty on investment levels (Bontempi et al., 2010; Gulen and Ion, 2016; Tan and Zhang, 2017), often neglecting that uncertainty encompasses not only "bad scenarios" but also the potential for "good scenarios" (Segal, 2015). The suppression of optimal investment levels by uncertainty harbors potential for Pareto improvement. Indeed, Knight (1921) argued that "uncertainty is the source of firm profits", which highlighted that the investment opportunities embedded within uncertainty enable firms to grow. The very existence of firms can be seen as a response to managing and bearing uncertainty. This study comprises two parts, examining the roles of firms' internal and external institutions in coping with uncertainty. Part I investigates the influence of the internal capital market (ICM), constituting a firm's internal institutional framework. Part II explores the role of interactive investor platforms, representing a firm's external institutional environment. I posit that both institutions confer multi-faceted "flexibility" upon firms, facilitating better development, growth, and Pareto improvement under uncertainty. In Part I, drawing on three theoretical perspectives, this study argues that ICMs can mitigate the negative sensitivity of investment to Economic Policy Uncertainty (EPU) through the following mechanisms: (1) Financial Frictions Perspective: EPU induces credit tightening by financial institutions. ICMs alleviate corporate financing constraints, preventing large investment reduction due to increased external financing costs. (2) Real Options Effect: ICMs can mitigate resource wastage and capital losses arising from investment irreversibility. Specifically, ICMs' informational and knowledge advantages aid in navigating uncertainty; related member firms provide secondary markets for asset transfers; and the diversified business structure within the group hedges idiosyncratic risks and offers greater tolerance for individual investment failures. (3) Oi-Hartman-Abel Effect: ICMs possess flexibility not only in production but also in financing structure. This enables timely adjustment of production and investment strategies and scales, allowing firms to seize investment opportunities arising from uncertainty. Collectively, ICMs help alleviate financing constraints, reduce the negative impacts of irreversible investment, enhance production and investment flexibility, and stimulate the positive Oi-Hartman-Abel effect, ultimately weakening the negative investment-EPU sensitivity. Using a two-way fixed effects model, this study confirms the role of ICMs in mitigating the negative investment-EPU sensitivity. Endogeneity concerns are addressed via propensity score matching, entropy balancing, and instrumental variable approaches. Robustness is ensured by employing alternative measures of investment level and EPU, and different model specifications. Following Wei and Wan (2006), ICMs are classified into Upper-Tier ICMs and Lower-Tier ICMs. Mechanism analysis reveals that Upper-Tier ICMs primarily drive the financing constraint alleviation and irreversibility mitigation channels, while both tiers contribute to stimulating the Oi-Hartman-Abel effect. Heterogeneity analysis shows that the mitigating effect of ICMs, particularly Upper-Tier ICMs, is stronger in firms with higher entrepreneur control rights and higher independent director network centrality. Regarding economic consequences, ICMs not only increase investment levels during policy fluctuations but also lead to superior investment performance, evidenced by a simultaneous weakening of the negative ROA-EPU sensitivity. In Part II, utilizing interactive information from investor platforms as an exogenous shock, this part examines how demand uncertainty reduction affects upstream supplier investment. An analysis based on stacked Difference-in-Differences (DID) model demonstrates that supplier firms whose customers receive investor questions on these platforms exhibit higher investment levels compared to suppliers whose customers do not use the platforms. Robustness checks include alternative dependent variables, control groups, treatment groups, and placebo tests. In mechanism analysis, this study further confirms two channels: (1) Information and Investment Opportunities: Investor interactions of customers help suppliers mitigate demand uncertainty and identify potential investment opportunities based on prior knowledge. (2) Monitoring and Trust: Investor interactions of customers enhance market monitoring and improve relational trust, boosting supplier investment willingness. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that the positive effect on supplier investment is more pronounced for firms with younger managers, longer establishment history, higher supply chain concentration, and intense industry competition. Furthermore, investor interactions of customers also enhance suppliers' technical efficiency, signifying rational investment. Addressing the core question of "how" uncertainty affects corporate investment, the two parts of this paper provide answers from different perspectives. These two parts exhibit complementarity in terms of the types of uncertainty and the approaches to coping with it. ICMs help firms "adapt" to uncertainty, while investor platforms help "alter" it. They shape a firm's internal and external institutional environments, respectively, and act as mediating and antecedent factors influencing investment behavior under uncertainty. This study offers several key innovations: (1) Extending Knight's View: Providing an organizational-level mechanism linking uncertainty to investment, bridging Knight's profit-from-uncertainty thesis with firm structure. Existing determinants of investment-EPU sensitivity (e.g., asset reversibility (Gulen and Ion, 2016), political connections (Pham, 2019), financing constraints (Wang et al., 2014)) largely overlook the role of organizational form. This study incorporates ICMs into the logical chain of "uncertainty affecting corporate investment behavior", establishing an organizational basis for the impact of macro variables on micro-level corporate investment. (2) Uncertainty's Positive Role: Providing further theoretical and empirical support for the positive Oi-Hartman-Abel effect. While prior research focused on the role of variable labor input in enabling this effect (Lee and Shin, 2000; Wang et al., 2024; Li et al., 2019), this study demonstrates that ICM-provided financing and production flexibility can also stimulate it. (3) Contextualizing ICM Value: Emphasizing the critical role of uncertainty in revealing the "bright side" of ICMs, extending Mathews and Robinson (2008). While early research acknowledged the value of flexible capital allocation, it largely neglected the role of an "uncertain environment" in highlighting this value during both theoretical construction and empirical testing. This led to the "bright side" of ICMs being overshadowed by their "dark side" in routine scenarios, casting doubt on the existence meaning of business groups. Although the proposition that "uncertainty highlights ICM competitiveness" was theoretically modeled by Mathews and Robinson (2008), related empirical validation was insufficient. This study expands upon this proposition and provides further supportive evidence. (4) Spillover Effects of Interactive Investor Platforms: Addressing a gap identified by Blankespoor (2022) by demonstrating supply chain spillover effects (to suppliers) of interactive investor platforms. Existing literature has extensively examined the impact of these platforms on the investment/financing behavior, capital market performance, and investor relations of the firms using the platform. However, discussions in this field have not extended to other crucial stakeholders such as suppliers, lenders, the labor market, auditors, boards of directors, and other contracting parties. As Blankespoor (2022) notes in her review, the impact of reduced information processing costs on these other stakeholders is equally worthy of attention. This study fills this research gap by focusing on the spillover effect along the supply chain.
查看全文：	预览  下载(下载需要进行登录)