All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

Publish in OALib Journal
ISSN: 2333-9721
APC: Only $99

ViewsDownloads

Relative Articles

More...
Finance  2024 

实体企业金融化与债务融资成本——基于沪深两市制造业企业的实证分析
Financialization of Entity Enterprises and the Cost of Debt Financing—Research Based on Manufacturing Enterprises in Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Markets

DOI: 10.12677/FIN.2024.142047, PP. 432-442

Keywords: 实体企业,金融化,经营风险,债务融资成本
Entity Enterprise
, Financialization, Business Risk, Debt Financing Cost

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

本文基于2012到2021年沪深两市制造业企业数据,探究企业金融化对债务融资成本的影响及其影响路径,并进一步考察不同期限的金融资产配置对企业债务融资成本影响的差异性。研究结果表明:总体上,企业金融化程度的提升显著提高了其面临的债务融资成本。进一步来讲,企业长期金融资产配置增加会导致经营风险升高,进而引起债务融资成本上升;而短期金融资产的分配具有明显的“蓄水池”效应,通过降低企业的经营风险减少其债务融资成本。本文的研究拓展了实体企业金融化方面的研究视角,有助于更全面地认识实体企业金融化带来的影响,对引导企业合理配置金融资产、推动国内经济高质量发展具有一定的现实启示。
This study is based on manufacturing enterprise data from the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets from 2012 to 2021. It explores the impact of corporate financialization on the cost of debt financing and its influencing pathways. Furthermore, the study examines the differential effects of financial asset allocation with different time horizons on the cost of corporate debt financing. The research findings indicate that, overall, the increased level of corporate financialization significantly raises the cost of debt financing. Specifically, an increase in the allocation of long-term financial assets by enterprises leads to higher operational risks, subsequently causing an increase in the cost of debt financing. On the other hand, the allocation of short-term financial assets exhibits a distinct “reservoir” effect, reducing operational risks and, in turn, lowering the cost of debt financing. This study broadens the research perspective on the financialization of real enterprises, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of corporate financialization. It provides practical insights for guiding enterprises in rational financial asset allocation and promoting high-quality development in the domestic economy.

References

[1]  谢家智, 王文涛, 江源. 制造业金融化、政府控制与技术创新[J]. 经济学动态, 2014(11): 78-88.
[2]  胡奕明, 王雪婷, 张瑾. 金融资产配置动机: “蓄水池”或“替代”?——来自中国上市公司的证据[J]. 经济研究, 2017, 52(1): 181-194.
[3]  Stulz, R.M. (1996) Rethinking Risk Management. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 9, 8-25.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.1996.tb00295.x
[4]  苏坤. 实体企业金融化、货币政策与股价崩盘风险[J]. 云南财经大学学报, 2018, 34(9): 59-67.
[5]  黄贤环, 吴秋生, 王瑶. 金融资产配置与企业财务风险: “未雨绸缪”还是“舍本逐末” [J]. 财经研究, 2018, 44(12): 100-112+125.
[6]  Orhangazi, O. (2008) Financialisation and Capital Accumulation in the Non-Financial Corporate Sector: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation on the US Economy: 1973-2003. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 32, 863-886.
https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/ben009
[7]  盛明泉, 汪顺, 商玉萍. 金融资产配置与实体企业全要素生产率: “产融相长”还是“脱实向虚” [J]. 财贸研究, 2018, 29(10): 87-97+110.
[8]  王红建, 曹瑜强, 杨庆, 杨筝. 实体企业金融化促进还是抑制了企业创新——基于中国制造业上市公司的经验研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2017, 20(1): 155-166.
[9]  肖忠意, 林琳. 企业金融化、生命周期与持续性创新——基于行业分类的实证研究[J]. 财经研究, 2019, 45(8): 43-57.
[10]  史学智, 阳镇. 企业金融化与企业创新——基于产业政策视角的重新审视[J]. 科研管理, 2021, 42(4): 147-157.
[11]  于富生, 张敏. 信息披露质量与债务成本——来自中国证券市场的经验证据[J]. 审计与经济研究, 2007(5): 93-96.
[12]  孟晓俊, 肖作平, 曲佳莉. 企业社会责任信息披露与资本成本的互动关系——基于信息不对称视角的一个分析框架[J]. 会计研究, 2010(9): 25-29+96.
[13]  蒋琰. 权益成本、债务成本与公司治理: 影响差异性研究[J]. 管理世界, 2009(11): 144-155.
[14]  刘琳, 王金凤. 社会资本、公司透明度与债务融资成本[J]. 调研世界, 2022(11): 32-43.
[15]  张成思, 郑宁. 中国实体企业金融化: 货币扩张、资本逐利还是风险规避? [J]. 金融研究, 2020(9): 1-19.
[16]  白雪莲, 贺萌, 张俊瑞. 企业金融化与债务融资成本——来自中国A股上市公司的证据[J]. 金融论坛, 2021, 26(7): 39-49.
[17]  温忠麟, 张雷, 侯杰泰, 刘红云. 中介效应检验程序及其应用[J]. 心理学报, 2004(5): 614-620.
[18]  谢获宝, 丁龙飞, 廖珂. 海外背景董事与债务融资成本——基于董事会咨询和监督职能的中介效应[J]. 管理评论, 2019, 31(11): 202-211.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133

WeChat 1538708413