环境信息披露与外商直接投资结构优化
|
摘要
作为国际投资领域的前沿问题之一,理解信息对于外商直接投资(FDI)的影响至关重要,然而由于"信息"因素具有难以被捕捉、识别以及内生性等问题,使得对二者之间进行因果推断变得格外困难。鉴于此,本文以中国2007年出台的环境信息披露制度作为一个天然外生冲击,并基于2004—2013年286个地级市与2004—2010年微观企业数据构造准自然实验,使用双重差分法和三重差分法系统评估信息披露对该地区FDI流入的影响。结果发现:环境信息披露显著阻碍了地区整体FDI的流入,并且存在着明显的时滞及长期性;同时,阻碍作用在地区外资饱和度与环境规制强度上呈现出递增规律,即随着外资饱和度与规制强度的提高,环境信息披露对地区FDI的阻碍作用也将越强;此外,环境信息披露对流入本地的FDI具有显著性影响,增强了污染型企业的市场退出与清洁型企业的投资增加,促进外资结构的生态转型与优化。本文基于环境信息披露对外资企业成本、投资、创新和转移等潜在影响机制的考察来对以上现象进行合理解释,并利用工具变量、反事实分析等稳健性检验方法对实证结果进行验证。研究结论对于当前环境治理与进一步利用外资提供了现实可行路径,并为外资结构转型提供了新的思路。
As one of the frontier issues in the field of international trade and investment, understanding the impact of information flow on FDI inflows is crucial. However, due to the fact that the "information" factor is difficult to be captured and identified, as well as other endogenous problems, it is difficult to achieve causal inference between the two. However, the environmental information announcement system promulgated by China in 2007 has provided an excellent opportunity and condition for exploring the impact of local information announcement on FDI inflows as a natural exogenous impact. In this paper, a quasi-natural experiment is constructed using data from 286 Chinese prefecture-level cities from 2004 to 2013 and micro-enterprise levels from 2004 to 2010. The effect of local information announcement on FDI inflows in the region is estimated using the DID and DDD methods. As a result, it was found that the disclosure of environmental information hinders local FDI inflows, and this effect has obvious time lag and long-term nature; this hinderance effect shows an increasing law on the saturation of foreign capital in the region and the intensity of environmental regulation. That is, with the increase of the degree of saturation and regulation of foreign capital, the environmental information publicity has a stronger impediment to regional FDI; At the same time, this impact can significantly cause the adjustment of FDI location, which can promote the strategic adjustment of local FDI inflows, causing the market withdrawal of polluting industries and attracting the entry of clean industries, so as to achieve the optimization and substitution effect of the industry's ecological structure. This paper explains the underlying impact mechanism of information announcement on the cost, investment, innovation, and transfer of foreign-funded enterprises, and uses a large number of robustness tests such as instrumental variable and counterfactual methods to consolidate and confirm the above results. The research conclusions provide a realistic and feasible path for current environmental governance and further utilization of foreign capital, and lay a new way of thinking for the transformation of foreign capital structure.
As one of the frontier issues in the field of international trade and investment, understanding the impact of information flow on FDI inflows is crucial. However, due to the fact that the "information" factor is difficult to be captured and identified, as well as other endogenous problems, it is difficult to achieve causal inference between the two. However, the environmental information announcement system promulgated by China in 2007 has provided an excellent opportunity and condition for exploring the impact of local information announcement on FDI inflows as a natural exogenous impact. In this paper, a quasi-natural experiment is constructed using data from 286 Chinese prefecture-level cities from 2004 to 2013 and micro-enterprise levels from 2004 to 2010. The effect of local information announcement on FDI inflows in the region is estimated using the DID and DDD methods. As a result, it was found that the disclosure of environmental information hinders local FDI inflows, and this effect has obvious time lag and long-term nature; this hinderance effect shows an increasing law on the saturation of foreign capital in the region and the intensity of environmental regulation. That is, with the increase of the degree of saturation and regulation of foreign capital, the environmental information publicity has a stronger impediment to regional FDI; At the same time, this impact can significantly cause the adjustment of FDI location, which can promote the strategic adjustment of local FDI inflows, causing the market withdrawal of polluting industries and attracting the entry of clean industries, so as to achieve the optimization and substitution effect of the industry's ecological structure. This paper explains the underlying impact mechanism of information announcement on the cost, investment, innovation, and transfer of foreign-funded enterprises, and uses a large number of robustness tests such as instrumental variable and counterfactual methods to consolidate and confirm the above results. The research conclusions provide a realistic and feasible path for current environmental governance and further utilization of foreign capital, and lay a new way of thinking for the transformation of foreign capital structure.
引文
[1]李哲.“多言寡行”的环境披露模式是否会被信息使用者摒弃[J].世界经济,2018,(12):167-188.
[2]李坤望,蒋为,宋立刚.中国出口产品品质变动之谜:基于市场进入的微观解释[J].中国社会科学,2014,(3):80-103.
[3]龙小宁,万威.环境规制、企业利润率与合规成本规模异质性[J].中国工业经济,2017,(6):155-174.
[4]史贝贝,冯晨,张妍,杨菲.环境规制红利的边际递增效应[J].中国工业经济,2017,(12):40-58.
[5]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.
[6]许和连,成丽红,孙天阳.制造业投入服务化对企业出口国内增加值的提升效应---基于中国制造业微观企业的经验研究[J].中国工业经济,2017,(10):62-80.
[7]Alfaro,L.,A.Chanda,S.Kalemli-Ozcan,and S.Sayek.FDI and Economic Growth:The Role of Local Financial Markets[J].Journal of International Economics,2004,64(1):89-112.
[8]Alfaro,L.,A.Chanda,S.Kalemli-Ozcan,and S.Sayek.Does Foreign Direct Investment Promote Growth?Exploring the Role of Financial Markets on Linkages[J].Journal of Development Economics,2010,91(2):242-256.
[9]Blonigen,B.A.Firm-specific Assets and the Link between Exchange Rates and Foreign Direct Investment[J].American Economic Review,1997,87(3):447-466.
[10]Cai,X.,Y.Lu,M.Wu,and L.Yu.Does Environmental Regulation Drive away Inbound Foreign Direct Investment?Evidence from a Quasi-natural Experiment in China[J].Journal of Development Economics,2016,(123):73-85.
[11]Cheng,L.K.,and Y.K.Kwan.What are the Determinants of the Location of Foreign Direct Investment?The Chinese Experimence[J].Journal of International Economics,2002,51(2):379-400.
[12]Chung,S.Environmental Regulation and Foreign Direct Investment:Evidence from South Korea[J].Journal of Development Economics,2014,(108):222-236.
[13]Copeland,B.R.,and M.S.Taylor.North-South Trade and the Environment[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(3):755-787.
[14]Earnhart,D.H.,M.Khanna,and T.P.Lyon.Corporate Environmental Strategies in Emerging Economies[J].Review of Environmental Economics and Policy,2014,8(2):164-185.
[15]Glass,A.J.,and K.Saggi.Intellectual Property Rights and Foreign Direct Investment[J].Journal of International Economics,2002,56(2):387-410.
[16]Greenaway,D.,and R.Kneller.Firm Heterogeneity,Exporting and Foreign Direct Investment[J].Economic Journal,2007,117(517):134-161.
[17]Hanna,R.U.S.Environmental Regulation and FDI:Evidence from a Panel of U.S.-based Multinational Firms[J].American Economic Journal:Applied Economics,2010,2(3):158-89.
[18]Hauffer,A.,and I.Wooton.Country Size and Tax Competition for Foreign Direct Investment[J].Journal of Public Economics,1999,71(1):121-139.
[19]Head,K.,and J.Ries.Inter-city Competition for Foreign Investment:Static and Dynamic Effects of China’s Incentive Areas[J].Journal of Urban Economics,1996,40(1):38-60.
[20]Head,K.,and T.Mayer.Market Potential and the Location of Japanese Investment in the European Union[J].Review of Economics and Statistics,2004,86(4):959-972.
[21]Holladay,J.S.,M.Mohsin,and S.Pradhan.Emissions Leakage,Environmental Policy and Trade Frictions[J]Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2018,(88):95-113.
[22]Millimet,D.L.,and J.Roy.Empirical Tests of the Pollution Haven Hypothesis When Environmental Regulation is Endogenous[J].Journal of Applied Econometrics,2016,31(4):652-677.
[23]Moser,P.,and A.Voena.Compulsory Licensing:Evidence from the Trading with the Enemy Act[J].American Economic Review,2012,102(1):396-427.
[24]Sandbroke,R.,and P.Mehta.FDI and Environment-Lessons from the Mining Sector[A].OECD.Rapporteurs report from the OECD Global Forum on International Investment[C].Paris:OECD Publishing,2002.
[25]Shroff,N.,R.S.Verdi,and G.Yu.Information Environment and the Investment Decisions of Multinational Corporations[J].Accounting Review,2014,89(2):759-790.
(1)Hanna(2010)利用DID研究了美国《清洁空气修正案》(CAAA)对于管制企业海外资产与FDI流动性的影响;Chung(2014)利用韩国的证据发现,环境规制越松弛的污染行业,其对外贸易与投资也将会增加;Cai et al.(2016)则主要利用中国“两控区”的环境政策,通过DDD方法分析了该政策对于FDI流入的影响,发现两控区的规制政策越紧,FDI的流入则会越少;Millimet and Roy(2016)的研究也表明了相似的观点,即规制政策的严厉程度与重污染行业的FDI流动呈反向作用。
(1)见中华人民共和国生态环境部网站(http://www.zhb.gov.cn/gkml/zj/jl/200910/t20091022_171845.htm)。
(2)例如,1990年欧盟的90/313/EEC指令宣布环境信息获取自由;1995年印度尼西亚实施了“污染控制、评价与分级项目”(PROPER);2001年日本实施了污染物排放与转移登记政策等。
(3)以上数据来源于中国公众环境研究中心(Institute of Public and Environment Affairs,IPE)的《环境信息公开艰难破冰---污染源监管信息公开指数(PITI)暨2008年度113个城市评价结果》(http://wwwoa.ipe.org cn/Upload//2010-09/2029b0a7e3754216a111e578d7d3e066.pdf)。
(4)包括110个“国家环保重点城市”及三个非国家环保重点城市(东莞、盐城与鄂尔多斯),其中,4个直辖市,25个省会城市,5个计划单列市,76个其他环保重点城市以及3个非环保重点城市。2013-2014年,该指数发布的城市数量增至120个,但本文仍以113个初始城市名单作为分析基础。
(1)此处省略了本文所构建的异质性与动态效应模型设定,详细模型设定请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(2)本文对外资企业的分析仅限于中国工业企业数据库中的中外合资经营企业、中外合作经营企业、外资(独资)企业、外商投资股份有限公司、合资经营企业、合作经营企业、港澳台独资企业、港澳台商投资股份有限公司。
(1)考虑到原始数据以美元计价,故而以平均汇率调整为人民币计价;同时使用资产价格投资指数予以平减,最终得到地区外商实际投资总额和地区人均外商实际投资额,并以其对数形式作为衡量指标。
(2)此处省略了本文所选取变量的描述性统计,详细结果请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal org)公开附件。
(3)污染型行业具体包括:金属制品业、非金属矿物制品业、黑色金属矿采选业、黑色金属冶炼及压延加工业、有色金属冶炼及压延加工业、有色金属矿采选业、燃气生产和供应业、木材加工及木竹藤棕草制品业、化学纤维制造业、化学原料及化学制品制造业、其他制造业、煤炭开采和洗选业、造纸及纸制品业、橡胶和塑料制品业、石油加工炼焦及核燃料加工业、电力热力生产和供应业;其余行业则为清洁型行业。
(1)应有样本量为544,但本文剔除了已经停刊、报社不在所辖地区以及中央出版的报纸类型共157种,除停刊报纸之外,本文分别通过报纸主办单位的官网来搜集相关报纸信息,其中部分官网未告知报纸来源地,本文通过联系电话座机号推断而得;剔除由中央发行报纸的原因在于,中央发行报纸的面向群体为全国人民,因此并不能反映某一地区信息流动的通达性;同时部分报社来源地与所辖地并不相符,例如《经济观察报》《财会信报》《财经时报》等。
(2)详见中国国家发展和改革委员会官网文件(http://qhs.ndrc.gov.cn/dtjj/201008/t20100810365271.html)。
(3)区域限批,是指如果一家企业或一个地区出现严重环保违规的事件,环保部门有权暂停这一企业或这一地区所有新建项目的审批,直至该企业或该地区完成整改。流域限批是指某个河流流域限制新的污染企业数量。具体的相关政策内容详见中国生态环境部官网文件(http://www.mep.gov.cn/gkml/zj/wj/200910/t20091022172370.htm?COLLCC=4176127656&,以及人民网的相关报道:http://www.people.com.cn/GB/32306/33232/5944432.html)。
(4)详见中国国家发展和改革委员会官网文件(http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201201/t20120113456506html)。
(5)本文所报告的结果均省略了控制变量,详细结果请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)感谢审稿人的相关意见。有关地区外资饱和度与下文中规制强度对于FDI异质性影响的进一步讨论,请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)本文省略了所有稳健性检验的结果,请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)区域限批和流域限批的试点样本主要来自龙小宁和万威(2017)的研究成果,与之不同的是本文主要在市级层面进行分析。即使某个城市仅有一个县实施区域限批或流域限批,则该县所属的地级市也将被剔除,具体包括:唐山市、吕梁市、六盘水市、莱芜市、巢湖市、芜湖市、白银市、兰州市、巴彦淖尔市、渭南市、河津市、临汾市、周口市、蚌埠市、邯郸市、濮阳市、聊城市、泸州市、晋州市、石家庄市、衡水市、新乡市、开封市、上海市、北京市、霍州市、长治市、运城市、汾阳市、辽阳市、清远市、茂名市。
(1)详细结果请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)具体细节详见人民网(http://theory.people.com.cn/n/2015/1123/c40531-27843619.html)。
[2]李坤望,蒋为,宋立刚.中国出口产品品质变动之谜:基于市场进入的微观解释[J].中国社会科学,2014,(3):80-103.
[3]龙小宁,万威.环境规制、企业利润率与合规成本规模异质性[J].中国工业经济,2017,(6):155-174.
[4]史贝贝,冯晨,张妍,杨菲.环境规制红利的边际递增效应[J].中国工业经济,2017,(12):40-58.
[5]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.
[6]许和连,成丽红,孙天阳.制造业投入服务化对企业出口国内增加值的提升效应---基于中国制造业微观企业的经验研究[J].中国工业经济,2017,(10):62-80.
[7]Alfaro,L.,A.Chanda,S.Kalemli-Ozcan,and S.Sayek.FDI and Economic Growth:The Role of Local Financial Markets[J].Journal of International Economics,2004,64(1):89-112.
[8]Alfaro,L.,A.Chanda,S.Kalemli-Ozcan,and S.Sayek.Does Foreign Direct Investment Promote Growth?Exploring the Role of Financial Markets on Linkages[J].Journal of Development Economics,2010,91(2):242-256.
[9]Blonigen,B.A.Firm-specific Assets and the Link between Exchange Rates and Foreign Direct Investment[J].American Economic Review,1997,87(3):447-466.
[10]Cai,X.,Y.Lu,M.Wu,and L.Yu.Does Environmental Regulation Drive away Inbound Foreign Direct Investment?Evidence from a Quasi-natural Experiment in China[J].Journal of Development Economics,2016,(123):73-85.
[11]Cheng,L.K.,and Y.K.Kwan.What are the Determinants of the Location of Foreign Direct Investment?The Chinese Experimence[J].Journal of International Economics,2002,51(2):379-400.
[12]Chung,S.Environmental Regulation and Foreign Direct Investment:Evidence from South Korea[J].Journal of Development Economics,2014,(108):222-236.
[13]Copeland,B.R.,and M.S.Taylor.North-South Trade and the Environment[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(3):755-787.
[14]Earnhart,D.H.,M.Khanna,and T.P.Lyon.Corporate Environmental Strategies in Emerging Economies[J].Review of Environmental Economics and Policy,2014,8(2):164-185.
[15]Glass,A.J.,and K.Saggi.Intellectual Property Rights and Foreign Direct Investment[J].Journal of International Economics,2002,56(2):387-410.
[16]Greenaway,D.,and R.Kneller.Firm Heterogeneity,Exporting and Foreign Direct Investment[J].Economic Journal,2007,117(517):134-161.
[17]Hanna,R.U.S.Environmental Regulation and FDI:Evidence from a Panel of U.S.-based Multinational Firms[J].American Economic Journal:Applied Economics,2010,2(3):158-89.
[18]Hauffer,A.,and I.Wooton.Country Size and Tax Competition for Foreign Direct Investment[J].Journal of Public Economics,1999,71(1):121-139.
[19]Head,K.,and J.Ries.Inter-city Competition for Foreign Investment:Static and Dynamic Effects of China’s Incentive Areas[J].Journal of Urban Economics,1996,40(1):38-60.
[20]Head,K.,and T.Mayer.Market Potential and the Location of Japanese Investment in the European Union[J].Review of Economics and Statistics,2004,86(4):959-972.
[21]Holladay,J.S.,M.Mohsin,and S.Pradhan.Emissions Leakage,Environmental Policy and Trade Frictions[J]Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2018,(88):95-113.
[22]Millimet,D.L.,and J.Roy.Empirical Tests of the Pollution Haven Hypothesis When Environmental Regulation is Endogenous[J].Journal of Applied Econometrics,2016,31(4):652-677.
[23]Moser,P.,and A.Voena.Compulsory Licensing:Evidence from the Trading with the Enemy Act[J].American Economic Review,2012,102(1):396-427.
[24]Sandbroke,R.,and P.Mehta.FDI and Environment-Lessons from the Mining Sector[A].OECD.Rapporteurs report from the OECD Global Forum on International Investment[C].Paris:OECD Publishing,2002.
[25]Shroff,N.,R.S.Verdi,and G.Yu.Information Environment and the Investment Decisions of Multinational Corporations[J].Accounting Review,2014,89(2):759-790.
(1)Hanna(2010)利用DID研究了美国《清洁空气修正案》(CAAA)对于管制企业海外资产与FDI流动性的影响;Chung(2014)利用韩国的证据发现,环境规制越松弛的污染行业,其对外贸易与投资也将会增加;Cai et al.(2016)则主要利用中国“两控区”的环境政策,通过DDD方法分析了该政策对于FDI流入的影响,发现两控区的规制政策越紧,FDI的流入则会越少;Millimet and Roy(2016)的研究也表明了相似的观点,即规制政策的严厉程度与重污染行业的FDI流动呈反向作用。
(1)见中华人民共和国生态环境部网站(http://www.zhb.gov.cn/gkml/zj/jl/200910/t20091022_171845.htm)。
(2)例如,1990年欧盟的90/313/EEC指令宣布环境信息获取自由;1995年印度尼西亚实施了“污染控制、评价与分级项目”(PROPER);2001年日本实施了污染物排放与转移登记政策等。
(3)以上数据来源于中国公众环境研究中心(Institute of Public and Environment Affairs,IPE)的《环境信息公开艰难破冰---污染源监管信息公开指数(PITI)暨2008年度113个城市评价结果》(http://wwwoa.ipe.org cn/Upload//2010-09/2029b0a7e3754216a111e578d7d3e066.pdf)。
(4)包括110个“国家环保重点城市”及三个非国家环保重点城市(东莞、盐城与鄂尔多斯),其中,4个直辖市,25个省会城市,5个计划单列市,76个其他环保重点城市以及3个非环保重点城市。2013-2014年,该指数发布的城市数量增至120个,但本文仍以113个初始城市名单作为分析基础。
(1)此处省略了本文所构建的异质性与动态效应模型设定,详细模型设定请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(2)本文对外资企业的分析仅限于中国工业企业数据库中的中外合资经营企业、中外合作经营企业、外资(独资)企业、外商投资股份有限公司、合资经营企业、合作经营企业、港澳台独资企业、港澳台商投资股份有限公司。
(1)考虑到原始数据以美元计价,故而以平均汇率调整为人民币计价;同时使用资产价格投资指数予以平减,最终得到地区外商实际投资总额和地区人均外商实际投资额,并以其对数形式作为衡量指标。
(2)此处省略了本文所选取变量的描述性统计,详细结果请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal org)公开附件。
(3)污染型行业具体包括:金属制品业、非金属矿物制品业、黑色金属矿采选业、黑色金属冶炼及压延加工业、有色金属冶炼及压延加工业、有色金属矿采选业、燃气生产和供应业、木材加工及木竹藤棕草制品业、化学纤维制造业、化学原料及化学制品制造业、其他制造业、煤炭开采和洗选业、造纸及纸制品业、橡胶和塑料制品业、石油加工炼焦及核燃料加工业、电力热力生产和供应业;其余行业则为清洁型行业。
(1)应有样本量为544,但本文剔除了已经停刊、报社不在所辖地区以及中央出版的报纸类型共157种,除停刊报纸之外,本文分别通过报纸主办单位的官网来搜集相关报纸信息,其中部分官网未告知报纸来源地,本文通过联系电话座机号推断而得;剔除由中央发行报纸的原因在于,中央发行报纸的面向群体为全国人民,因此并不能反映某一地区信息流动的通达性;同时部分报社来源地与所辖地并不相符,例如《经济观察报》《财会信报》《财经时报》等。
(2)详见中国国家发展和改革委员会官网文件(http://qhs.ndrc.gov.cn/dtjj/201008/t20100810365271.html)。
(3)区域限批,是指如果一家企业或一个地区出现严重环保违规的事件,环保部门有权暂停这一企业或这一地区所有新建项目的审批,直至该企业或该地区完成整改。流域限批是指某个河流流域限制新的污染企业数量。具体的相关政策内容详见中国生态环境部官网文件(http://www.mep.gov.cn/gkml/zj/wj/200910/t20091022172370.htm?COLLCC=4176127656&,以及人民网的相关报道:http://www.people.com.cn/GB/32306/33232/5944432.html)。
(4)详见中国国家发展和改革委员会官网文件(http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201201/t20120113456506html)。
(5)本文所报告的结果均省略了控制变量,详细结果请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)感谢审稿人的相关意见。有关地区外资饱和度与下文中规制强度对于FDI异质性影响的进一步讨论,请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)本文省略了所有稳健性检验的结果,请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)区域限批和流域限批的试点样本主要来自龙小宁和万威(2017)的研究成果,与之不同的是本文主要在市级层面进行分析。即使某个城市仅有一个县实施区域限批或流域限批,则该县所属的地级市也将被剔除,具体包括:唐山市、吕梁市、六盘水市、莱芜市、巢湖市、芜湖市、白银市、兰州市、巴彦淖尔市、渭南市、河津市、临汾市、周口市、蚌埠市、邯郸市、濮阳市、聊城市、泸州市、晋州市、石家庄市、衡水市、新乡市、开封市、上海市、北京市、霍州市、长治市、运城市、汾阳市、辽阳市、清远市、茂名市。
(1)详细结果请参见《中国工业经济》网站(http://www.ciejournal.org)公开附件。
(1)具体细节详见人民网(http://theory.people.com.cn/n/2015/1123/c40531-27843619.html)。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |