收稿日期: 2019-11-30
网络出版日期: 2019-12-31
基金资助
国家自然科学基金资助项目(71302050);国家自然科学基金资助项目(71772113)
Corporate disclosure Nash equilibrium of public companies
Received date: 2019-11-30
Online published: 2019-12-31
旨在探讨信息披露如何约束上市公司, 为解释以前文献的争议提供思路. 通过建立不同类型企业在融资过程中的博弈模型, 考虑专业投资者的比例, 对该模型中纯战略 Nash 均衡和混合战略 Nash 均衡展开分析, 以揭示信息披露如何在保障资本市场正常运作中不可或缺. 研究表明, 懂得依据公司质量进行投资的专业投资者比例越小, 强制信息披露带来的社会总收益增加越大; 特别地, 当专业投资者小于一定比例时, 强制信息披露是维持市场稳定的必要机制, 能有效避免市场的失灵. 强制信息披露带来的社会总收益增加在以下情况中更大: 投资回报率差异显著, 投资规模较大, 融资成本较高, 市场对于不披露信息惩罚较大.
马嘉萌, 郭苏稼, 李远勤 . 公众企业信息披露的 Nash 均衡[J]. 上海大学学报(自然科学版), 2019 , 25(6) : 1034 -1040 . DOI: 10.12066/j.issn.1007-2861.2117
This study explores the mechanism of corporate disclosure governing corporate decisions andin doing so, explains the mixed evidence observed in previous literature. By establishing game theory models of corporate finance and considering the percentage of professional investorsin a company, this study analyses pure strategy Nash equilibrium and mixed strategy Nash equilibrium.It also reveals how information disclosure is indispensable in ensuring the smooth operation of capital markets. The study finds that a smaller proportion of professional investors is associated with greater total social benefit as a result of mandatory corporate disclosure. When the proportion of professional investors is below a certain threshold, mandatory disclosure is necessary to maintain market stability and avoid market failure. Compulsory disclosure causes a greater increase in total social benefit in the following cases: significant differences in return on investment, a larger investment scale, higher financing costs, and a greater non-disclosure penalty.
| [1] | 金智 . 新会计准则、会计信息质量与股价同步性[J]. 会计研究, 2010(7):19-26. |
| [2] | 宋献中, 胡珺, 李四海 . 社会责任信息披露与股价崩盘风险——基于信息效应与声誉保险效应的路径分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017(4):161-175. |
| [3] | Dhaliwal D, Li O Z, Tsang A , et al. Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: the initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting[J]. The Accounting Review, 2011,86(1):59-100. |
| [4] | 王雄元, 高曦 . 年报风险披露与权益资本成本[J]. 金融研究, 2018(1):174-190. |
| [5] | 田利辉, 王可 . 社会责任信息披露的"掩饰效应"和上市公司崩盘风险——来自中国股票市场的 DID-PSM 分析[J]. 管理世界, 2017(11):146-157. |
| [6] | 夏宁, 杨硕 . 异质性机构投资者持股水平与审计收费[J]. 审计研究, 2018(2):72-79. |
| [7] | 方军雄, 伍琼, 傅颀 . 有限注意力、竞争性信息与分析师评级报告市场反应[J]. 金融研究, 2018(7):193-206. |
| [8] | 吴悠悠 . 散户、机构投资者宏微观情绪: 互动关系与市场收益[J]. 会计研究, 2017(11):86-97. |
| [9] | 周绍妮, 张秋生, 胡立新 . 机构投资者持股能提升国企并购绩效吗?——兼论中国机构投资者的异质性[J]. 会计研究, 2017(6):67-74. |
| [10] | 李增福, 林盛天, 连玉君 . 国有控股、机构投资者与真实活动的盈余管理[J]. 管理工程学报, 2013(3):35-44. |
| [11] | 陆瑶, 朱玉杰, 胡晓元 . 机构投资者持股与上市公司违规行为的实证研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2012(1):13-23. |
| [12] | 杨海燕, 韦德洪, 孙健 . 机构投资者持股能提高上市公司会计信息质量吗?——兼论不同类型机构投资者的差异[J]. 会计研究, 2012(9):16-23. |
| [13] | 牛建波, 吴超, 李胜楠 . 机构投资者类型、股权特征和自愿性信息披露[J]. 管理评论, 2013(3):48-59. |
| [14] | 张志红, 宋艺, 王楠 . 信息披露频率对非专业投资者盈利预测影响的实验研究[J]. 会计研究, 2018(2):34-40. |
| [15] | Elyasiani E, Wen Y, Zhang R . Institutional ownership and earning management by bank holding companies[J]. Journal of Financial Research, 2017,40(2):147-178. |
| [16] | Bird A, Karolyi S A . Do institutional investors demand public disclosure?[J]. Review of Financial Studies, 2016,29(12):3245-3277. |
| [17] | Boone A, White J T . The effect of institutional ownership on firm transparency and information production[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2015,117(3):508-533. |
| [18] | Ayers B C, Ramalingegowda S, Yeung E . Hometown advantage: the effects of monitoring institution location on financial reporting discretion[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2011,52(1):41-61. |
| [19] | Bushee B, Noe C F . Corporate disclosure practices, institutional investors, and stock return volatility[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2000,38(S1):171-202. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |