高管持股门槛下的技术创新的就业效应

发布时间：2018-05-25 08:30

本文选题：技术创新 + 就业效应　；参考：《重庆大学》2016年博士论文

【摘要】：就业问题长期以来一直是经济学研究的焦点之一。作为劳动大国的中国,在近几年人口红利逐步消失的过程中,就业问题逐渐成为影响整体经济长期稳定发展的核心问题之一。同时,中国正努力通过技术创新促进产业结构升级,提高产品附加值,提升国际竞争优势,为跻身技术创新强国而夯实基础。技术创新对就业的影响由此引起了广泛的争论。在大量的实证研究中,既有结果显示技术创新摧毁了大量传统的就业岗位造成对就业的破坏,也有研究支持技术创新在破坏旧工作的同时也创造了新的工作形成“就业补偿”。作为承载就业的微观主体,中国企业正发生着制度变迁的改革,改革过程中一系列“委托-代理”问题也逐步浮现出来,结果使得技术创新的就业效应更加复杂。本文以2009-2013年中国沪、深A股上市238家公司作为样本,在YS Katsoulacos(1986)提出的过程创新和产品创新的就业效应由“替代效应”和“福利效应”构成的理论指导下,借鉴Garcia(2002)对技术创新就业效应的测度模型,分析在Morck等(1988)提出的利益趋同效应和管理防御效应发生作用的区间,中国企业技术创新的就业效应的具体变化。首先,在传统理论将技术创新划分为过程创新和产品创新的基础上,本文进一步借鉴福利经济学中脆弱性的概念将企业的技术创新活动界定为技术创新投入、创新绩效和创新绩效脆弱性三个层次。通过对三者的现状观察发现,当前中国企业技术创新面临的最重要的问题不是技术创新投入与创新绩效的增长,而是创新绩效水平脆弱的问题。大部分企业的创新绩效水平是脆弱的,创新匮乏是造成企业创新绩效水平脆弱的主要原因。由于缺乏响应创新风险的能力使得企业创新绩效脆弱的状况正在恶化。尽管部分企业短期内摆脱了创新匮乏状态却因为创新绩效水平脆弱而陷入了“创新匮乏陷阱”。其次,在对企业技术创新三个层次进行分析的基础上,本文运用Hansen(1999)的门槛面板回归模型,引入高管持股比例作为门槛变量分别对不同企业性质、行业的企业其技术创新对就业产生的创造效应与破坏效应的非线性影响开展实证分析。结果发现:对于企业技术创新投入而言,在企业制度变迁过程中,无论是国有企业还是非国有企业,其就业效应随着高管持股比例的增加表现为先创造后破坏的就业效应。两者的差异在于非国有企业的就业创造程度要高于国有企业,就业破坏程度要低于国有企业。由于行业属性的差异使得制造企业技术创新投入的就业效应表现为先破坏后创造,而非造企业技术创新投入的就业效应则表现为先创造后破坏。与企业创新投入不同,创新绩效的就业效应随着高管持股比例的增加表现出双重门槛效应。其中,国有企业创新绩效的就业效应表现为先破坏后创造再破坏的变化趋势,非国有企业创新绩效的就业效应则表现为先创造后破坏随后破坏程度减小的变化趋势。行业属性的差异使得制造企业创新绩效整体的就业效应要弱于非制造企业。企业创新绩效脆弱性对就业的影响表现为先创造后破坏的双重门槛效应。在就业破坏的过程中,管理防御效应的作用淡化了创新绩效脆弱性对就业的破坏程度。最后,本文进一步将企业创新绩效脆弱性分解为创新匮乏和创新风险两个部分进一步分析其就业效应,实证结果表明:作为创新绩效脆弱性的组成部分,随着高管持股比例的增加,创新匮乏对就业的影响表现为先创造后破坏再创造的就业效应。企业性质差异造成的创新匮乏就业效应的差异在于,在高管持股比例较高的区间,同样受到管理防御效应的影响,国有企业创新匮乏的就业效应表现为破坏效应而非国有企业表现为创造效应。行业差异造成的创新匮乏就业效应的差异在于,随着高管持股比例的增加,制造企业创新匮乏对就业的影响表现为先创造后破坏的就业效应,而非制造企业表现为先破坏后创造的就业效应。基于对风险的谨慎态度,创新风险的就业效应呈先破坏后创造,并且在破坏效应区间,利益趋同效应放大了破坏的作用。企业性质不同造成的创新风险就业效应的差异主要表现高管持股比例较低区间就业效应方向和影响程度两方面的差别。行业属性对创新风险就业效应差异的影响并不显著。
[Abstract]:Employment has long been one of the focus of economic research. As a great working country, in the process of the gradual disappearance of the demographic dividend in recent years, the employment problem has gradually become one of the core issues affecting the long-term and stable development of the whole economy. At the same time, China is working hard to promote industrial structure upgrading and increase production through technological innovation. The effect of technological innovation on employment has been widely debated. In a large number of empirical studies, the results show that technological innovation destroys a large number of traditional jobs, and also has research support for technological innovation. At the same time, the old work has created new work to form "employment compensation". As the microcosmic body of carrying out employment, Chinese enterprises are undergoing the reform of institutional change. In the process of reform, a series of "principal-agent" problems have emerged gradually. The result makes the employment effect of technological innovation more complicated. This article is in 2009-2013 years. In China and Shanghai, 238 companies listed in Shenzhen stock market are listed as samples. Under the guidance of the theory of "substitution effect" and "welfare effect", the employment effect of process innovation and product innovation proposed by YS Katsoulacos (1986) is guided by the "substitution effect" and "welfare effect". This paper draws on the measurement model of Garcia (2002) on the effect of technological innovation employment, and analyzes the benefit convergence effect proposed by Morck (1988) in Morck and so on. And the specific changes in the employment effect of Chinese enterprises' technological innovation. Firstly, on the basis of the traditional theory that the technological innovation is divided into process innovation and product innovation, this paper further draws on the concept of vulnerability in the welfare economics to define the technological innovation activities of the enterprise as the investment of technological innovation. There are three levels of innovation performance and innovation performance vulnerability. Through the observation of the status quo of the three, the most important problem in the current Chinese enterprises' technological innovation is not the growth of technological innovation investment and innovation performance, but the fragile innovation performance level. The innovation performance level of most enterprises is fragile, and the lack of innovation is made. The weakness of enterprise innovation performance is deteriorating because of the lack of ability to respond to innovation risk. Although some enterprises are getting rid of the lack of innovation in the short term, they are trapped in the "innovation deficient trap" because of the fragile innovation performance level. Secondly, the technological innovation of enterprises is three. On the basis of the analytic hierarchy process, this paper uses the threshold panel regression model of Hansen (1999) and introduces the proportion of senior executive stock as a threshold variable to the different enterprise nature, and the nonlinear influence of the technological innovation on the creation effect and the damage effect of employment. The results are as follows: for enterprise technology In the process of innovation investment, the employment effect of both state-owned enterprises and non-state-owned enterprises in the process of enterprise system changes, the employment effect of the employment effect with the increase of the proportion of executive stock is first created and then destroyed, the difference lies in that the employment creation degree of non-state-owned enterprises is higher than that of the state-owned enterprises, and the degree of employment destruction is lower than that of the state-owned enterprises. The employment effect of the manufacturing enterprise's technological innovation input is manifested by the first damage creation, while the employment effect of the technological innovation investment is first created after the creation, and the employment effect of the innovation performance shows a double threshold with the increase of the proportion of executive stock ownership. Among them, the employment effect of the innovation performance of the state-owned enterprises is the change trend after the first destruction, and the employment effect of the innovation performance of the non-state-owned enterprises is manifested by the change trend after the first creation and the decrease of the subsequent destruction degree. The difference of the industry attribute makes the overall employment effect of the innovation performance of the manufacturing enterprises weaker than that of the enterprises. Non manufacturing enterprises. The impact of enterprise innovation performance vulnerability on employment is the double threshold effect of first creation and post destruction. In the process of employment destruction, the role of management defense effect desalination the damage degree of innovation performance vulnerability to employment. Finally, this paper further decomposes the vulnerability of enterprise innovation performance into innovation scarcity and creation. The two parts of new risk further analyze their employment effect. The empirical results show that as the component of the vulnerability of innovation performance, with the increase of the proportion of executive stock, the impact of innovation scarcity on employment is the employment effect after the creation of the first creation, and the difference in the employment effect of innovation scarcity, which is caused by the difference of the nature of the enterprise, lies in the difference in the effect of the employment effect. In the range of higher proportion of executive stock, the effect of management defense effect is also influenced by the management defense effect. The employment effect of the lack of state-owned enterprises is manifested by the destructive effect, but not the creation effect of the state-owned enterprises. The difference of the employment effect caused by the innovation shortage caused by the industry difference lies in the lack of innovation of the manufacturing enterprises with the increase of the proportion of high managerial ownership. The influence of employment is manifested by the employment effect of first creation and destruction, but not the employment effect created by the failure of the manufacturing enterprise. Based on the prudent attitude to the risk, the employment effect of the innovation risk is created first, and in the destruction effect interval, the benefit convergence effect magnifies the effect of the destruction. The different nature of the enterprise is caused by the different nature of the enterprise. The difference in the employment effect of innovation risk mainly shows the difference between the two aspects of the low interval employment effect and the degree of influence. The effect of the industry attribute on the difference of the employment effect of innovation risk is not significant.
【学位授予单位】：重庆大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：F273.1;F272.92

【参考文献】