Does SOE Reformation Inhibit the Formation of Zombie Firms: Take External Regulation as an Example

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the firm-level micro-data, this paper takes the establishment of the SASAC in 2003 as a quasi-natural experiment, and uses the difference-in- difference method to investigate the impact of external regulation on the formation of zombie firms. The study finds that: (1)External regulation significantly inhibits the formation of zombie firms, and this conclusion passes a variety of robustness tests. (2)The mechanism inspection finds that: firstly, external regulation inhibits the formation of zombies by improving the return on assets, production efficiency, innovation ability and interest payment of firms; secondly, from a dynamic perspective, external regulation reduces zombie firms by inhibiting the formation of new zombies and promoting the exit and resurgence of existing zombies; finally, external regulation further suppresses the formation of zombie firms by acting on the SOE restructuring. (3)The impact of external regulation on the formation of zombie varies by industry and region. Specifically, external regulation has a greater inhibitory effect on the zombies in low-competition industries, upstream industries, and in the central and eastern regions of China. (4)External regulation improves the resource reallocation between firms by inhibiting the formation of zombie firms, thereby improving the efficiency of industry resource allocation. The conclusions of this article have some enlightenment on how to dispose of state-owned zombies through non-market methods. The government should continue to strengthen external regulation of state-owned firms, invigorate the state-owned economy, and promote the clearing of state-owned zombies.

Key words: SOE Reformation, External Regulation, Zombie Firms, Resource Allocation

摘要：

本文基于企业微观数据,以2003年国资委成立作为准自然实验,使用倍差法考察国资委成立带来的外部监管增强对僵尸企业形成的影响。研究结果发现,外部监管显著抑制了僵尸企业的形成,且这一结论通过多种稳健性检验。进一步的机制检验结果显示,外部监管通过提高企业资产收益率、生产效率、创新能力和实际利息支付抑制了僵尸企业的形成;从动态视角看,外部监管通过抑制新僵尸企业的形成、促进现有僵尸企业的退出和复活减少了国有僵尸企业;外部监管通过提高国企改制成效进一步抑制了僵尸企业的形成。外部监管对低竞争程度行业、上游行业和东中部地区国有企业僵尸化的抑制作用更大。外部监管通过抑制僵尸企业的形成改善了企业间的资源再配置效应,从而提高了行业资源配置效率。本文的研究结论对如何通过非市场方式处置国有僵尸企业具有一定的启示,政府应继续加强对国有企业的外部监管,搞活国有经济,促进国有僵尸企业的出清。

关键词: 国企改革, 外部监管, 僵尸企业, 资源配置

CLC Number:

F421.1

ZHANG Junmei, XU Jiayun. Does SOE Reformation Inhibit the Formation of Zombie Firms: Take External Regulation as an Example[J]. Collected Essays on Finance and Economics, 2022, 38(3): 102-112.

张俊美, 许家云. 国企改革抑制僵尸企业的形成吗——以外部监管为例[J]. 财经论丛, 2022, 38(3): 102-112.

Figures/Tables 7

References 32

[1]	聂辉华, 江艇, 张雨潇, 方明月. 我国僵尸企业的现状、原因与对策[J]. 宏观经济管理, 2016, (9):63-68.
[2]	Peek J., Rosengren E. S. Unnatural Selection: Perverse Incentives and the Misallocation of Credit in Japan[J]. American Economic Review, 2005, 95(4):1144-1166. DOI URL
[3]	Ahearne A. G., Shinada N. Zombie Firms and Economic Stagnation in Japan[J]. International Economics and Economic Policy, 2005, 2(4):363-381. DOI URL
[4]	Shen G., Chen B. and Zombie Firms and Over-capacity in Chinese Manufacturing[J]. China Economic Review, 2017, No. 44, pp.327-342. DOI URL
[5]	Andrews D., Petroulakis F. Breaking the Shackles: Zombie Firms, Weak Banks and Depressed Restructuring in Europe[R]. European Central Bank, 2019.
[6]	谭语嫣, 谭之博, 黄益平, 胡永泰. 僵尸企业的投资挤出效应: 基于中国工业企业的证据[J]. 经济研究, 2017, (5):175-188.
[7]	中国社会科学院工业经济研究所课题组, 黄群慧, 黄速建. 论新时期全面深化国有经济改革重大任务[J]. 中国工业经济, 2014, (9):5-24.
[8]	盛丹, 刘灿雷. 外部监管能够改善国企经营绩效与改制成效吗?[J]. 经济研究, 2016, (10):97-111.
[9]	Fukuda S. I., Nakamura J. I. Why Did ‘Zombie’ Firms Recover in Japan?[J]. World Economy, 2011, 34(7):1124-1137. DOI URL
[10]	蒋灵多, 陆毅. 最低工资标准能否抑制新僵尸企业的形成[J]. 中国工业经济, 2017, (11):118-136.
[11]	Borio C. E. V., Hofmann B. Is Monetary Policy Less Effective When Interest Rates are Persistently Low?[Z]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2017.
[12]	蒋灵多, 陆毅, 陈勇兵. 市场机制是否有利于僵尸企业处置: 以外资管制放松为例[J]. 世界经济, 2018, (9):121-145.
[13]	卢树立, 何振. 金融市场扭曲对僵尸企业形成的影响——基于微观企业数据的实证研究[J]. 国际金融研究, 2019, (9):87-96.
[14]	范子英, 王倩. 转移支付的公共池效应、补贴与僵尸企业[J]. 世界经济, 2019, (7):120-144.
[15]	黄雨秀. 政府管制与僵尸企业[D]. 南昌: 江西财经大学硕士学位论文, 2019.
[16]	方明月, 孙鲲鹏. 国企混合所有制能治疗僵尸企业吗?——一个混合所有制类啄序逻辑[J]. 金融研究, 2019, (1):91-110.
[17]	刘灿雷, 王若兰, 王永进. 国企监管模式改革的创新驱动效应[J]. 世界经济, 2020, (11):102-126.
[18]	聂辉华, 贾瑞雪. 中国制造业企业生产率与资源误置[J]. 世界经济, 2011, (7):27-42.
[19]	Caballero R. J., Hoshi T., Kashyap A. K. Zombie Lending and Depressed Restructuring in Japan[J]. American Economic Review, 2008, 98(5):1943-1977. DOI URL
[20]	宋立刚, 姚洋. 改制对企业绩效的影响[J]. 中国社会科学, 2005, (2):17-31.
[21]	李楠, 乔榛. 国有企业改制政策效果的实证分析——基于双重差分模型的估计[J]. 数量经济技术经济研究, 2010, (2):3-21.
[22]	王永钦, 李蔚, 戴芸. 僵尸企业如何影响了企业创新?——来自中国工业企业的证据[J]. 经济研究, 2018, (11):99-114.
[23]	Brandt L., Biesebroeck J. V., Zhang Y. Creative Accounting or Creative Destruction? Firm-level Productivity Growth in Chinese Manufacturing[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2012, 97(2):339-351. DOI URL
[24]	Lu Y., Yu L. Trade Liberalization and Markup Dispersion: Evidence from China’s WTO Accession[J]. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2015, 7(4):221-253.
[25]	Li P., Lu Y., Wang J. Does Flattening Government Improve Economic Performance? Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2016, No. 123, pp. 18-37. DOI URL
[26]	Nakamura J. Evolution and Recovery of Zombie Firms: Japan’s Experience. In: Japanese Firms during the Lost Two Decades[M]. Springer Briefs in Economics, 2017.
[27]	Bai C. E., Lu J., Tao Z. How Does Privatization Work in China?[J]. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2009, 37(3):453-470. DOI URL
[28]	王海成, 许和连, 邵小快. 国有企业改制是否会[J]. 世界经济, 2019, (3):94-117.
[29]	Kwon H. U., Narita F., Narita M. Resource Reallocation and Zombie Lending in Japan in the 1990s[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics, 2015, 18(4):709-732. DOI URL
[30]	Hsieh C. T., Klenow P. J. Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2009, 124(4):1403-1448. DOI URL
[31]	杨光, 孙浦阳, 龚刚. 经济波动、成本约束与资源配置[J]. 经济研究, 2015, (2):47-60.
[32]	Griliches Z., Regev H. Firm Productivity in Israeli Industry 1979—1988[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 1995, 65(1):175-203. DOI URL

变量	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Treat_i×T_t	-0.025^***(0.005)	-0.030^***(0.005)	-0.014^**(0.006)	-0.017^***(0.005)
tfp_it		-0.023^***(0.002)		-0.020^***(0.002)
size_it		-0.042^***(0.003)		-0.050^***(0.003)
age_it			0.056^***(0.004)	0.062^***(0.004)
kl_it		-0.004^**(0.002)		-0.003(0.002)
debt_it			0.117^***(0.010)	0.093^***(0.010)
export_it			0.007(0.004)	-0.003(0.004)
profit_it		-0.274^***(0.027)		-0.255^***(0.026)
常数项	0.280^***(0.001)	0.639^***(0.020)	0.079^***(0.011)	0.485^***(0.021)
企业固定效应	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
年份固定效应	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
R²	0.531	0.539	0.534	0.542

变量	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Treat_i×T_t	-0.025^***(0.005)	-0.030^***(0.005)	-0.014^**(0.006)	-0.017^***(0.005)
tfp_it		-0.023^***(0.002)		-0.020^***(0.002)
size_it		-0.042^***(0.003)		-0.050^***(0.003)
age_it			0.056^***(0.004)	0.062^***(0.004)
kl_it		-0.004^**(0.002)		-0.003(0.002)
debt_it			0.117^***(0.010)	0.093^***(0.010)
export_it			0.007(0.004)	-0.003(0.004)
profit_it		-0.274^***(0.027)		-0.255^***(0.026)
常数项	0.280^***(0.001)	0.639^***(0.020)	0.079^***(0.011)	0.485^***(0.021)
企业固定效应	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
年份固定效应	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
R²	0.531	0.539	0.534	0.542

变量	企业间效应			进入效应					退出效应
变量	(1)外部监管实施之前	(2)外部监管实施之后		(3)外部监管实施之前		(4)外部监管实施之后			(5)外部监管实施之前		(6)外部监管实施之后
js_jt	-0.015^***(0.004)	-0.009(0.005)	0.002(0.002)		-0.003(0.002)		0.003(0.002)			0.002(0.003)

变量	企业间效应			进入效应					退出效应
变量	(1)外部监管实施之前	(2)外部监管实施之后		(3)外部监管实施之前		(4)外部监管实施之后			(5)外部监管实施之前		(6)外部监管实施之后
js_jt	-0.015^***(0.004)	-0.009(0.005)	0.002(0.002)		-0.003(0.002)		0.003(0.002)			0.002(0.003)