会计学院知识库

  “产权论”和“竞争论”是理论界关于国企效率低下问题的两大观点，其不同点在于，“产权论”是由于代理问题引起经理人的权力寻租，而“竞争论”是由于预算软约束这一天然屏障引发经理人的道德风险问题，但归根结底均表现为经营者的决策失误，由此导致国有企业经营不善、效率低下。2010中央政府专门针对国有企业印发关于企业内部“重”“大”事项的决策意见，通过对国有企业相关事项的决策原则及程序进行规定，将国有企业内部重大事项的决策程序化和制度化以及国企领导的决策行为规范化，是国有企业加强监督管理以及建立并完善治理结构的重要举措。《意见》颁布实施10年以来，主要探讨该《意见》的实施功能并对其进行相应的政策分析，仅少数学者实证检验集体决策意见的经济后果。风险承担是企业投资决策的重要环节之一，因此从企业风险承担角度出发，实证检验“三重一大”集体决策意见的实施效果。

   本文采用沪深A股上市公司的数据，以2007-2016年为样本观测区间，构建政策效应评估模型（DID），从风险承担的角度出发，实证检验集体决策意见的颁布实施对国有企业是否具有治理效应，试图评价其实施效果。研究发现，“三重一大”集体决策意见的实施能在短期内显著提高国有企业风险承担水平，但其对国有企业风险承担水平的治理效应在长期内存在减弱迹象。进一步研究发现，不同的内外部治理环境下，《意见》实施的治理效应不同，具体来说，《意见》实施的治理效应在治理环境较差企业的增量效应更明显，而在治理环境较好企业的增量作用不明显，《意见》实施的治理效应与企业的内外部治理存在一定的替代效应。

  本文的研究从理论层面来说，不仅为“三重一大”集体决策制度的实施效果提供经验证据，也丰富了企业风险承担影响因素的研究；从实践层面来说，为国企进一步贯彻落实“决策意见”提供参考依据和改进方向，同时从完善决策机制视角为国企深化改革提供新的路径。

  The two major viewpoints about the inefficiency of state-owned industries in the theoretical circle are the theory of property rights and the theory of competition. The difference lies in that "property right theory" is the manager's power rent-seeking caused by agency problem, while "competition theory" is the manager's moral hazard caused by the natural barrier of soft budget constraint. But in the final analysis, both of them are the managers' decision-making mistakes, which leads to the firms are not well managed and inefficient. In 2010, the central government specially issued the decision-making opinions on Further Promoting the Implementation of the "major" and the "big" matters within the state-owned industries. By stipulating the principles and procedures for the decision-making of the "major" and the "big" matters of that firms, the central government made the decision-making procedure and institutionalization and standardized the decision-making behavior of the leaders, which is the key to strengthen the supervision and management of the corporations as well as to establish and to improve the governance structure. Since the promulgation and implementation of the opinions for nearly 10 years, this paper mainly discusses the implementation function of the opinions and the function of this policy. Few scholars empirically test the economic consequences of decision-making opinions. Risk taking is one of the important links in enterprise investment decision-making. Therefore, from the perspective of enterprise risk taking, this paper empirically tests the implementation effect of "three majors and one big" collective decision-making opinions.

  This paper takes Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2007 to 2016 as the object, constructs a double difference model, empirically tests whether the promulgation and implementation of collective decision-making opinions has governance effect on state-owned enterprises from the perspective of risk-taking, and tries to evaluate its implementation effect. It is found that the implementation of "three majors and one big" collective decision-making opinions can significantly improve the risk-taking level of state-owned enterprises in the short term, but its governance effect on the risk-taking level of state-owned enterprises show signs of weakening in the long run. Further research finds that the governance effect of the implementation of the opinions is different under different internal and external governance environments. Specifically, the incremental effect of the implementation of the opinions is more obvious in the enterprises with poor governance environment, while the incremental effect is not obvious in the enterprises with better governance environment. There is a certain substitution effect between the governance effect of the implementation of the opinions and the internal and external governance of the enterprises .

  From the theoretical level, this paper not only provides empirical evidence for the implementation effect of the collective decision-making system on the "three majors and one big", but also enriches the research on the influencing factors of enterprise risk-taking; from a practical perspective, it provides reference basis and improvement direction for the further implementation of "decision-making opinions" by state-owned enterprises, and provides new ways for the deepening reforms of state-owned enterprises.