上市公司控制性家族的隧道行为研究
详细信息    本馆镜像全文|  推荐本文 |  |   获取CNKI官网全文
摘要
基于近年逐渐增多的控制性家族通过关联交易挖掘隧道剥削小股东的现实,本文选取截至2004年底全部沪深两市的民营家族上市公司280家作为研究对象,在合谋理论的支撑下,构建了家族主义、控制形式和信任格局的三维度框架,分析控制性家族股东与经理合谋对上市公司进行隧道行为的动机和影响因素。研究区分了“资本家控制型”(CFB)和“企业家控制型”(EFB)两种不同样本,发现资本家控制的上市公司金字塔结构层级、控制权与现金流权偏离系数均高于企业家控制的公司,因而其隧道行为倾向也较EFB明显,但企业价值却低于EFB。
     理论模型分析发现:健全的法律环境和完善的公司治理机制可以减少家族掏空上市公司的隧道挖掘行为,家族控股股东的持股比例的增加与隧道行为强度呈现先上升后下降的倒U型关系,而家族的隧道行为强度直接关系到其能够从资本市场上获得的资金规模大小。
     实证研究结果显示:资本家家族的隧道行为动机和强度远远高于企业家家族,企业家家族有大股东的监督倾向。资本家家族倾向于通过构建多层控制链实施隧道行为;企业家家族成员在上市公司任职有利于形成合谋挖掘隧道转移资源;控股股东以企业集团方式存在的公司遭受了更加严重的掏空;家族控制的上市公司中独立董事没有发挥有效的监督作用;总经理持股比例与隧道行为强度呈现U型关系,存在“监管激励效应”及“合谋掏空效应”。
     在理论、实证研究及监管博弈分析的基础上,提出本文的政策建议:在中国未来的证券市场改革过程中,要避免中小股东利益被侵害现象的发生,就应当在各级证券监管机构实行领导问责制,增加其在监管过程中失职失误给自己带来的损失;同时健全市场监管机制和外部治理机制,实施上市公司的分类分级管理,把有限的监管资源集中用在那些隧道行为动机强的公司;加大家族违规的成本和惩处力度,增加其违规从事隧道行为的潜在成本,压制其投机心理,规范控制权市场,增强股权制衡度:进一步完善上市公司稽查制度,使民营家族上市公司在公开、公正、有序的市场环境中健康成长。
In recent years, with the increase of family-controlled holding companies, some cases emerge frequently, in which the interests of small shareholders are deprived because of assets transferring. These family-controlled holding companies aim to gather fortune by means of digging tunnel through affiliated transactions. In the paper; we choose the whole body of 280 private listed companies by the end of 2004 as research subjects. Under the support of collusion theory, we establish a three-dimensional framework which includes familism, control form and trust pattern, and then analyse the motives and factors of the tunneling behavior to the listed companies by the controlled family shareholders in collusion with the managers. The research, which distinguishes Capitalists-controlled (CFB) from Entrepreneurs -controlled (EFB), finds out that the levels of the pyramid structure, Control and Cash flow coefficient of deviation of Capitalists-controlled listed companies are higher than those controlled by entrepreneurs. Therefore Capitalists-controlled listed companies have more obvious tendency towards tunneling behavior than EFB. But the enterprise values of the former are lower than the latter.
     The results of regression analysis on family occupying of listed companies' capital show: capitalist-families incline to conduct tunnel behavior by the means of establishing multi-layer control chain; members of the entrepreneur-families working in listed company is conducive to the formation of collusion, digging tunnel and transferring resources; companies whose controlling shareholders exist in the form of enterprise groups suffer from being emptied more seriously; in family-controlled listed companies, independent directors have not played an effective supervisory role; the equity ratio of general manager and intensity of the tunneling behavior show U-shaped relationship, "the incentive effects of regulation" and "collusion draining effect" existing.
     The policy recommendations of the paper are based on the analysis of the game model: a sound legal environment and a good corporate governance mechanism could decrease the possibility that families empty listed companies through tunneling behavior. The increase of the family controlling shareholder equity ratio and the intensity of the tunneling behavior show inverted-U relationship first decreased and then increased. The regulatory strategy of securities regulatory authorities and family irregularities cost show reverse relations, and so do the family irregularities strategy and the reputation of securities regulatory authorities. Therefore, in the prospective process of reforming China's stock market, if we want to avoid undermining the interests of small shareholders, we should implement leadership accountability system on securities regulatory authorities at all levels, in case of loss. At the same time, we must perfect market regulation mechanism and external mechanisms of corporate governance while enhancing the cost and intensity of penalty of family irregularities. And we should also increase potential costs of tunneling behavior so as to suppress their speculation. Efforts must be made to standardize control of the market and build up equity degrees. Furthermore, listed companies inspection system need to be perfected. Thus, private listed companies could grow healthily in an open, fair, and orderly market environment.
引文
1 具体情况参见《京华时报》2005年01月13日的报道《港联交所谴责顾雏军 称格林柯尔关联交易违规》。
    2 具体情况参见《证券时报》2004年6月21日的报道《统计显示德隆黑洞吞噬市值近200亿》。
    3 黎来芳.《商业伦理、诚信义务与不道德控制——鸿仪系掏空上市公司的案例研究》.《会计研究》,2005年第11期,p8.
    4 参见Claessens, Stijn, Simeon Djankov and Larry H. P. Lang, "The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations", Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58(1/2).81-112. Faccio M. and L.H.P. Lang, The Ultimate Ownership of Western European Corporations, Journal of Financial Economics, 2002, 65, 365-395. La Porta, Rafael, Florencil Lopez- de-Silanes, Andrew Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, "Corporate Ownership around the World", Journal of Finance, 1999, 54(2), 471-517.
    5 Pagano, Marco and Ailsa Roell, "The Choice of Stock Ownership Structure: Agency Costs, Monitoring, and the Decision to Go Public", Quarterly Journal of Ecnomics, 1998, 113(1), 187-225. Johnson, Simon, Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes and Andrew Shleifer, "Tunneling", American Economi Review Papers and Proceedings, 2000, 90(2), 22-27.
    6 Shleifer, Andrei and Robert W. Vishny, "A Survey of Corporate Governance", Journal of Finance, 1997, 52(2). 737-783.
    7 Barclay, Michael and Clifford Holderness, "Private Benefits from Control of Public Corporation", Journal of Financial Ecnomics, 1989, 23(2), 371-395. Zingales, Luigi, "The Value of the Voting Right: A Study of the Milan Stock Exchange experience", Review of Financial Studies, 1994, 7(1),125-148. La Porta, Rafael, Florencil Lopez- de-Silanes, Andrew Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, "Corporate Ownership around the Word", Journal of Finance, 1999, 54(2), 471-517.
    8 Bergstrom, C., and K. Rydqvist, Ownership of Equity in Dual-Class Firms. Journal of Banking and Finance 1990, 14, 255-269. Gadhoum, Family Control and Grouping: Possible Expropriation via Dividends, University of Quebec, Working Paper 14-2000, Aug. Bae, Kee-Hong, Jun-Koo Kang and Jin-Mo Kim, "Tunneling or Value Addition? Evidence from Mergers by Korean Business Groups", Journal of Finance, 2002, 57(6), 2695-2740. Bertrand, Marianne, Paras Mehta and Sendhil Mullainathan, "Ferreting out Tunneling: An Application to Indian Business Group", Quarterly Journal of Ecnomics, 2002, 117(1), 121-148.
    9 亚洲家族控制银行的情形非常普遍。以菲律宾的陈永栽大家族(Lucio Tan)为例,他与菲律宾政府相互联合得到了“菲律宾国家银行”,而他把该银行放在金字塔的最下层。在控制银行后,“菲律宾国家银行”立刻成为他的私人关联银行。他要求该行贷款1520万美元及8000万美元给他两家金字塔上层公司——“亚洲酿酒”和“菲律宾航空公司”。其他亚洲家族剥削银行的事件不胜枚举。印度尼西亚当局规定银行不能核准超过10%净资本金的贷款予关联企业,但1995年“安瑞可银行”(Bank Anrico)对其关联企业放贷了1925%净资本金的款项。1998年印尼“拿撒林”(Sjamsul Nursalim)家族命令其控股的“但根银行”(Bank Dagang Nasional Indonesia)将其76%的贷款贷给关联企业,而其中96%的贷款后来变成了坏账。1998年,“菲律宾东方银行”(Orient Bank)破产后,监管部门发现75%的银行贷款均贷给了控股家族公司董事及其朋友。而且亚洲家族公司常常会利用关联交易拿关联银行的钱投资于风险大的项目,通过玩弄金字塔结构而滥借狂借,坑害银行及小股民。引自郎咸平:《从大历史动荡看中国今天需要怎样的公司治理》,载于《新财富》2002年第11期,45-64页。
    10 参见 苏启林等,《中美私营家族企业比较》,《中国国情国力》2003年第9期;苏启林,《上市公司家族控制与公司治理:基于契约理论的研究》,暨南大学博士学位论文,2004年。
    11 参见 苏启林、朱文,《上市公司家族控制与企业价值》,《经济研究》2003年第8期;王明琳、周生春,《控制性家族类型、双重三层委托代理问题与企业价值》,《管理世界》2006年第8期。
    12 参见 陈晓、王琨,《关联交易、公司治理与国有股改革——来自我国资本市场的实证证据》,《经济研究》2005年第4期;刘俏、陆洲,《公司资源的“隧道效应”——来自中国上市公司的证据》,平新乔、宋敏、张俊喜主编:《治理结构、证券市场与银行改革》,北京大学出版社,2003年。
    13 参见 高雷、何少华、黄志忠,《公司治理与掏空》,《经济学季刊》,2006年7月。
    14 本文与苏启林(2004)和王明琳(2006)的研究对象相同,所以家族上市公司的选样主要借鉴了二者的研究标准。
    15 中间公司不一定只有一个,且家族或自然人有可能通过多层金字塔结构控制多个中间公司。
    16 需要指出的是:职工持股会、管理层收购等形式的控制不属于本文的研究对象,这些只是改制造成的私有化,并不具备一般家族企业的特征。与苏启林(2004)的界定不同,若第二大股东与第三大股东累加持股数超过第一大股东,且都为家族股东时,也属于本文的研究对象。
    17 对家族类上市公司做出实证研究的典型代表为苏启林(2004)和王明琳(2006),他们的研究样本数分别为122家和212家。
    1 A. Zarkada- Fraser and M. Skitmore, Decisions with Moral Content: Collusion, Construction Management & Economics, 2000, 18: 101-111.
    2 Tirole, J., Hierarchies and Bureaucracies: On the Rule of Collusion in Organization, Journal of Law, Economic & Organization, 1986, 2: 181-214. Tirole J., Collusion and the Theory of Organizations, Advances in Economic Theory, Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press. Kofman, F. & J. Lawarree, Collusion in Hierarchical Agency, Econometrica, 1993, 61: 629-656. LaffontJ1&Tirole J, Cost Padding, Auditing and Collusion Annales F Economie et de Statistique, 1992.
    3 Hindriks, J., Kee. M., Muthoo. A, Corruption, Extortion and Evasion, Journal of Public Economics, 1999, 74: 395-430.
    4 详见:赵文华、安立仁、席酉民,《一个新的代理问题——串谋行为》,《西北大学学报》,1998年第3期,34-38页;赵文华、安立仁、席酉民,《国有企业中的串谋问题分析》,《中国软科学》,1998年第8期,91-94页。陈志俊、邹恒甫,《防范串谋的激励机制设计理论研究》,《经济学动态》,2002年第10期,52-58页;张卫国等,《组织中的非正式行为问题——串谋行为和权力滥用》,《探索》,2005年第1期,80-84页。赵文华,《国外代理理论中串谋问题的研究进展及中国的特殊性》,《广东社会科学》,2005年第6期,159-165页;罗建兵,《合谋理论研究述评》,《经济学动态》,2005年第10期,94-99页。
    5 Berle, A., and G. Means, The Modern Corporation and Price Property. Macmillan, New York, 1932.
    6 详见:Jesen & Meckling,《企业理论:管理行为、代理成本与所有权结构》,《所有权、控制权与激励——代理经济学文选》,上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1998年。
    7 Holmstrom, Bengt. Moral Hazard in Teams, Bell Journal of Economics. 1982, 13, 324-340.
    8 参见: Holmstrom, B., and Tirole, J. The Theory of the Firm. Handbook of Industrial Organization, 1989, vol.1 Handbooks in Economics, no. 10, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 61-133.
    9 参见: Fama, Eugene F., and Jensen, Michael C., Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm, Journal of Political Economy, 1980, 88, No.2: 288-307. Hart, O. An Economist's Perspective on the Theory of the Firm, Columbia Law Review, 1989, 89:1757-1774.
    10 详见: La Porta, Rafael, Florencil Lopez- de-Silanes, Andrew Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, "Corporate Ownership around the World", Journal of Finance, 1999, 54(2), 471-517.
    11 Lee Y S., Rosenstein S., Wyatt J G. The value of financial outside directors on corporate boards[J]. International Review of Economic and Finance, 1999(8):421-431.
    12 La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A, Vishny R W. Law and Finance[R]. NBER Working paper, 5661, 1996, 1-45.
    13 详见: Faccio M. and L.H.P. Lang, The Ultimate Ownership of Western European Corporations, Journal of Financial Economics, 2002, 65, 365-395.
    14 参见: Claessens, Stijn, Simeon Djankov and Larry H. P. Lang, "The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations", Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58(1/2).81-112.
    15 详见:冯根福,《关于健全和完善我国上市公司治理结构几个关键问题的思考》,《当代经济科学》,2001年第6期;冯根福、韩冰、闫冰,《中国上市公司股权集中度变动的实证分析》,《经济研究》2002年第8期。
    16 参见:孙永祥,《公司治理结构:理论与实证研究》,上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2002年;唐宗明、蒋位,《中国上市公司大股东侵害度实证分析》,《经济研究》,2002年第4期。
    17 参见: Baron D. & Besanko D. Regulation, Asymmetric Information and Auditing, Rand Journal of Economics, 1984, 15, 447-470. Bohn H. Monitoring Multiple Agents: The Role of Hierarchies, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1987, 8 279-305. Demski J. S., Sappington D. & Spiller P. T. Managing Supplier Switching. Rand Journal of Economics, 1987, 18(1), 77-97.
    18 虽然他也指出了监督者有可能与生产者合谋,会不如实地把观察到的信号汇报给上级或委托人,但他没有进行具体研究。
    19 参见: Tirole J. Hierarchies and Bureaucracies: On the Role of Collusion in Organizations. Journal of Laws, Economics, and Organization, 1986, 2: 181-124. Kofman, F. & J. Lawarree, Collusion in Hierarchical Agency, Econometrica, 1993, 61: 629-656. Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Collusion under Asymmetric Information, Econometrica, 1997, 65, 875-911. Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Collusion and Delegation, Rand Journal of Economics, 1998, 29: 280-305. Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Mechanism Design with Collusion and Correlation, Econometrica, 2000, 68: 309-342.
    20 赵文华.《国外代理理论中串谋问题的研究进展及中国的特殊性》.《广东社会科学》,2005年第6期,p161.
    21 罗建兵(2005)对Laffont关于“软信息”条件下的监管合谋分析框架做了综述,详见《经济学动态》2005年第10期,p95-96.
    22 详见: Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Collusion and Delegation, Rand Journal of Economics, 1998, 29: 280-305.
    23 参见: Shleifer, Andrei, State versus Private Ownership, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1998, 12(4):133-150.
    24 参见: Rafael P L.Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes,Andrei Shleifer and Robert Vishny. Investor Protection and Corporate Governance. Journal of Financial Economics,2000,(58):32-37. Bertrand, Marianne, Paros Mehta and Sendhil Mullainathan, Ferreting out Tunneling: An Application to Indian Business Groups, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2002, 117(1), 121-148.
    25 参见: La Porta, Rafael, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrew Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, Law and Finance, Journal of Political Economy, 1998,106(6), 231-269. Morck, Randall, David Stangeland, and Bernard Yeung, Inherited Wealth, Corporate Control and Economic Growth: The Canadian Disease, in Randall. K. Morck, ed.: Concentrated Corporate Ownership(University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2000, 3.).
    26 同24.
    27 参见: Johnson, Simon, Peter Boone, Alasdair, Breach, and Eric Fiedman, Corporate Governance in the Asian Financial Crisis, 1997-1998, Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58: 1-2, 141-186.
    28 详见: La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Agency Problem and Dividend Policies around the World, Journal of Finance, 2000a, 55: 1-33. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Investor Protection and Corporate Governance, Journal of Finance Economics, 2000b, 58: 3-27.
    29 La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation, Journal of Finance, 2002, 57: 1147-1170.
    30 详见:李增泉、孙铮、王志伟,《“掏空”与所有权安排——来自我国上市公司大股东资金占用的经验证据》,《会计研究》2004年第12期。王琨、肖星,《机构投资者持股与关联方占用的实证研究》,《南开管理评论》,2005年第2期。唐清泉、罗当论、张学勤,《独立董事职业背景与公司业绩关系的实证研究》,《当代经济管理》,2005年第1期。罗党论、唐清泉,《独立董事制度实施效果分析——基于上市公司关联交易的证据》,《南方经济》2006年第9期。
    31 董志强、蒲勇健,《掏空、合谋与独立董事报酬》,《世界经济》,2006年第6期。
    32 高雷、何少华、黄志忠,《公司治理与掏空》,《经济学(季刊)》,2006年7月。
    33 刘俏、陆洲,《公司资源的“隧道效应”——来自中国上市公司的证据》,平新乔、宋敏、张俊喜主编:《治理结构、证券市场与银行改革》,北京大学出版社,2003年。
    34 平新乔、李自然,《上市公司信息披露中的勾结问题》,平新乔、宋敏、张俊喜主编:《治理结构、证券市场与银行改革》,北京大学出版社,2003年。
    35 刘峰,贺建刚,《股权结构与大股东利益实现方式的选择—中国资本市场利益输送的初步研究》,《第二届实证会计研究论文集》,2003年。
    36 肖虹,《控股股东关联交易利润操纵的制度约束》,《财会月刊》,2003年第3期。
    37 熊荣珍,《我国上市公司关联交易的规范》,《经济师》,2003年第12期。
    38 一般而言,家族控制的上市公司的管理层实际上也来自于家族内部或者为家族信任和操纵。所以,本文对合谋的研究可以近似地将管理层纳入到家族控股股东的联盟当中。
    1 付文阁.《中国家族企业面临的紧要问题》.北京:经济日报出版社,2004.42~52,58~6。
    2 [美]马斯穆托金融集团、雷蒙德研究所.《2002美国家族企业调查报告》,转引自《经济研究参考》2006年第83期,50页。
    3 苏启林.《家族企业》.经济科学出版社.2005年,第213页。
    4 英国家族持有公司占36.92%,爱尔兰公众持有公司占37.68%,远低于其他欧洲国家。
    5 这一比例是在控制权比例为20%的水平上得出的,如果将下限降至10%,此比例上升为18.34%。
    6 德国的贝塔斯曼公司的职业经理人想把公司发展为公开上市的跨国企业,此目标与家族维持控制公司的目标相悖,家族所有者担心家族的势力和影响力被削弱,最终进行了直接干预,阻止职业经理的目标实施。
    7 韩国的资本结构负债率很高,据统计,20世纪90年代,其最大的30家财团自有资本比例平均为18.2%,负债率达449%,是美国(160%)的2.8倍,日本(85%)的5.3倍。
    8 周晓桂.关系主义信任与中国家族企业成长.经济问题.2005年第3期。
    9 在家族企业发展的这一阶段,一般而言,都是家族绝对控股,不存在外部大股东,因而尚未发生与外部股东之间的代理关系,主要都是家族成员之间不同的股权带来的家族内部冲突。
    10 余立智.《家族企业的成长机理与变迁路径——一个分析框架及其对中国民营企业家族化问题的解释》.中国财政经济出版社,2004年,第161页。
    11 Mazzola, P., Marchisio, G.. The role of going public in family businesses'long-lasting growth: A study of Italian IPOs. Family Business Review, 2002,(15): 133-142.
    12 在香港上市的内地家族企业2001年平均净利润为26.48%,远高于在新加坡上市的家族企业的16.00%以及在NASDAQ上市的家族企业的7.65%,甚至高于上海、深圳市场上市的同行业家族企业的10.45%的水平。但上海、深圳上市的同行业家族企业市盈率2002年9月27日高达60.41倍,而在香港上市的内地家族企业市盈率则仅为22.61倍。据此推理,可能因为香港上市的市盈率低,所以其净利润率一定要高,而上海、深圳上市的市盈率高,净利润率可以比较低,因此其在两地市场筹集的资金规模差不多。
    1 徐晓东、陈小悦.《第一大股东对公司治理、企业绩效的影响》.《经济研究》,2003(2)
    2 徐晓东.《第一大股东的所有权对企业业绩和公司治理效力的影响研究》[学位论文].北京,清华大学经济管理学院,2003:52-57。
    3 王宣喻等在《中国工业经济》2006年第5期中《环境约束与家族企业上市时机选择》一文中建立了数理模型,表明家族企业治理结构的强制性变迁需要有相应的外部社会环境相配套,才不至于引起家族企业生产总剩余的损失,即家族企业上市时机的选择对于经营绩效的影响是很明显的。
    4 这里的推导过程本文借鉴了曾令琪(2005)《上市公司关联交易型“隧道挖掘”行为研究》25~26页中的模型。
    1 原文出自Whyte, Martin King, The Chinese Family and Economic Development: Obstacle or Engine?Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1996, Vol.45, 1-30.转引自 李新春、张书军主编:《家族企业:组织、行为与中国经济》,2005年,4-25页。
    2 王明琳、周生春,《控制性家族类型、双重三层委托代理问题与企业价值》,《管理世界》,2006年第8期,83-93,103页。
    3 详见:Baek, Jae-Seung, Jun-Koo Kang and Kyung Suh Park, Corporate Governance and Firm Value: Evidence from the Korean Financial Crisis, Journal of Financial Economics, 2004,71 (2), 265-313.苏启林、钟乃雄,《民营上市公司控制权形成及其影响研究》,《管理世界》,2005年第1期,131-136,145页。
    4 利他主义可以分为三种,一是先天性利他主义,即个体先天就具备的,可以通过基因遗传获得,是人类的本能;二是获致性利他主义,即群体基于宗教、党派等共同信仰产生,不需要任何回报;三是工具性利他主义,即将利他主义视为一种互惠交换,本质是开明的利己主义。家庭中的利他主义既可能是先天遗传的,也可能是基于共同的家庭信念(光宗耀祖等)而得到加强,还可能是为了扩大家族的工具性因素。
    5 Eshel I., Samuelson L., Skaked A. Altruists, egoists, and holligans in a local interaction model, American Economic Review 88(1), 1998.
    6 Stark O. & Falk I., Transfers, Empathy Formation, and reverse Transfers, American Economic Review 88(2), 1998.
    7 应焕红,《“家族制”与民营企业制度创新》,《浙江学刊》,2001年第5期,59-62页。
    8 王志明、顾海英.利他主义、代理问题及家族企业.社会科学战线,2004,(5),p43-44.
    9 自我控制问题(self-control problem)是基于人是非理性假设提出的一个命题,例如,人们普遍不欢迎别人指出其错误。尽管家族代理人是利他主义的,但他可能拒绝家族成员的良好建议,或者固执己见而引起决策失误。
    10 William S., Schulze, Michael H., Lubatkin & Richard N. Dino, Altruism, Agency, and the Competitiveness of Family Firms, Managerial and Decision Economics 23, 2002.
    11 王明琳、周生春.《控制型家族类型、双重三层委托代理问题与企业价值》.《管理世界》,2006,(8).
    12 朱卫平,《企业家本位论——中小企业所有权制度安排研究》,经济科学出版社,2004年,245页。
    13 参见 王明琳、周生春.《家族金字塔控股结构存在原因探析》.《外国经济与管理》,2006,(2).
    14 Platteau(1994)基于有限群体道德和一般性道德两种形态的道德,将信任定义为两类,即特殊信任和一般信任。所谓特殊信任是指对有共同经历、相互熟悉或有特殊关系的人的信任,而一般信任指对一般人的信任,两者共同构成了人际信任。
    15 樊景立、郑伯壎,《华人组织的家长式领导:一项文化观点的分析》,《本土心理学研究》,2000年第6期。
    16 郑伯壎,《差序格局与华人组织行为》,《本土心理学研究》,1995年第3期。
    17 Teoh, Siew Hong, Ivo Welch, and T.J. Wong, 1998a, Earnings management and the long-run market erformance of initial public offerings, Journal of Finance 53,1935-1974.
    18 Teoh, S. H., T. J. Wong, and G. R. Rao. 1998, Are accruals during initial public offerings opportunistic ? Review of Accornting Studies 3:175-208.
    19 Teoh, Siew Hong, Ivo Welch, and T.J. Wong, 1998b, Earnings management and the underperformance of seasoned equity offerings, Journal of Financial Economics 50,63-69.
    20 Burgstahler.D.C., and M.Eames,2001,Management of earnings and analyst forecasts to achieve zero earnings surprise,working paper, University of Washington,Seattle,WA.
    21 刘俏、陆洲.《公司资源的“隧道效应”——来自中国上市公司的证据》.平新乔、宋敏、张俊喜 主编.《治理结构、证券市场与银行改革》.北京大学出版社,2003.
    22 国有控股通常是绝对控股,即国有股东占到50%以上的股权比例,而家族企业由于资金问题,通常采用多重金字塔和复杂的交叉持股方式,以低股权控制上市公司。
    23 该标准主要借鉴了孔鹏(2005)家族上市公司“企业家”和“资本家”的标准,及王明琳、周春生(2006)“创业型家族”和“非创业型家族”标准。
    24 数据来源:《新财富》2005年第8期,p53.
    25 剔除了控制权和现金流权偏离系数大于6的异常样本10个,托宾Q大于3的样本3个,信息披露不完全的样本10个。
    26 本分类参考了陈晓、王琨(2005)发表于《经济研究》第4期的《关联交易、公司治理与国有股改革》一文中的标准。
    27 这里的分析我们主要运用2004年的横截面数据,辅以2002年和203年数据作稳健性检验,限于篇幅,就不一一列出,下文的分析如不特殊说明,都是采取同样的方法处理。
    28 这里衡量三维度的分析变量选择基于以下两点原则:①能够直接或间接反映各维度的重要特征;②上市公司年报数据中有披露或者易获取。
    29 家族主义程度中最有代表性的因素就是利他主义,本文没有采用王明琳(2006)的方法——用家族成员进入董事会的数量来衡量利他主义程度,因为家族上市公司年报中并不会主动披露家族董事成员特征,在获取这一信息时难免有所遗漏,TOP1虽然是间接衡量的方法,但数据易获取且相对可靠。
    30 信任程度不好直接测量,本文主要研究家族合谋掏空行为,掏空行为主要通过关联交易实施,那么关联方的信任就是一个合谋成立的基础,交易集中发生的关联方自然体现出家族的信任格局导向,如果关联交易集中发生在家族控制股东身上,那么家族企业中主要体现为特殊的家族主义信任关系格局。
    1 1999年3月17日,也就是距离1998年年报披露的前一个半月,中国证监会修改了对于二次发行和配股的要求,从连续三年的年ROE大于10%改为三年平均ROE大于10%但是没有任何一年小于6%。
    2 肖虹,《中国上市公司控股股东关联交易盈余管理研究》,厦门大学2000年博士学位论文
    3 如ST黄河高科在1999年之前的几年都是依靠关联交易渡过难关。1997年面临摘牌威胁,公司凭借着与母公司长岭黄河(集团)有限责任公司的巨额关联交易渡过难关,1999年公司再度用关联交易的手法,将1.1亿元的库存和债务一并划给母公司,其实转出去的存货市值早就低于帐面价值,此外,母公司还免了ST黄河高科5000多万元的债务。凭借关联交易,ST黄河高科1999年就实现了0.35元的每股收益,步入绩优股行列。
    4 Jian Ming, Earnings management and tunneling through related party transactions: Evidence from Chinese corporate groups,2003,pp.1-24.转引自余菊.《我国上市公司关联交易盈余管理和利益输出的实证研究》[学位论文1.重庆大学,2005,pp.5.
    5 证监会在2005年4月29日实施了股权分置改革,通过这次利益分割,给了非流通股和流通股股东一次重新签订利益分割契约的机会,尽管各利益相关主体对股改方案存在很大争议,但还是在一定程度上缓解了股权割裂问题。
    6 新《公司法》是这样规定的:董事、高级管理人员执行职务违反法律、行政法规、公司章程的规定,给公司造成损失的,股东可以请求监事会或者不设监事会的有限责任公司的监事提起诉讼,或者可以请求董事会(或者执行董事)提起诉讼。
    1 详见:Johnson, Simon, Peter Boone, Alasdair, Breach, and Eric Fiedman, Corporate Governance in the Asian Financial Crisis, 1997-1998, Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58: 1-2,141-186. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Agency Problem and Dividend Policies around the World, Journal of Finance, 2000a, 55: 1-33. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Investor Protection and Corporate Governance, Journal of Finance Economics, 2000b, 58: 3-27.
    2 参见:Bertrand, Marianne, Paras Mehta and Sendhil Mullainathan, Ferreting out Tunneling: An Application to Indian Business Groups, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2002, 117(1), 121-148. Morck, Randall, David Stangeland, and Bernard Yeung, Inherited Wealth, Corporate Control and Economic Growth: The Canadian Disease, in Randall. K. Morck, ed. : Concentrated Corporate Ownership(University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2000, 3.).
    3 详见:李增泉、孙铮、王志伟,《“掏空”与所有权安排——来自我国上市公司大股东资金占用的经验证据》,《会计研究》2004年第12期。刘峰,贺建刚,《股权结构与大股东利益实现方式的选择—中国资本市场利益输送的初步研究》,《第二届实证会计研究论文集》,2003年。
    4 参见:La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Corporate Ownership around the World, Journal of Finance, 1999a, 54(2), 471-517. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, The Quality of Government, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 1999b, 15(1), 222-279. La Porta, R., F.Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation, Journal of Finance, 2002, 57: 1147-1170.
    5 参见:Barclay, Michael and Clifford Holderness, Private Benefits from Control of Public Corporation, Journal of Financial Economics, 1989, 25(2), 371-395. Dyck, Alexander and Luigi Zingales, Private Benefits of Control: an International Comparison, Journal of Finance, 2004, 59(2), 537-600. Atanasov, Vladimir, How Much Value Can Blockholders Tunnel? Evidence from the Bulgarian Mass Privatization Auctions, Journal of Financiial Economics, 2005, 76(1), 191-234.
    6 参见:Jensen, M.C and W H Meelding, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, Journal of Financial Economies, 1976, 3(4), 305-360. Shleifer A, and Vishny R. W., A Survey of Corporate Governance, Journal of Finance, 1997, 7,737-783. Morck, R, A. Shleifer and R. W. Vishny, Management Ownership and Market Valuation: an Empirical Analysis, Journal of Financial Economics, 1988, 20(1/2), 293-315. Bennsdsen, M., and D. Wolfenzon, The Balance of Power in Closely Held Corporations. Journal of Financial Economies 58, 113-139. Maury, Benjamin and Anete Pajuste, Multiple Large Shareholders and Firm Value, Journal of Banking and Finance, 2005,29(7), 1813-1834.
    7 Mitton, Todd, A Cross-firm Analysis of the Impact of Corporate Governance on the East Asian Financial Crisis, Journal of Financial Economics, 2002, 64(2), 215-241.
    8 参见:Hermalin, B., and M. Weisbach, The Effects of Board Composition and Direct Incentives on Finn Performance, Financial Management 1991, 20, 101-112.
    9 参见:于东智,《董事会、公司治理与绩效——对中国上市公司的经验分析》,《中国社会科学》,2003年第3期。唐清泉、罗当论、张学勤,《独立董事职业背景与公司业绩关系的实证研究》,《当代经济管理》,2005年第1期。罗党论、唐清泉,《独立董事制度实施效果分析——基于上市公司关联交易的证据》,《南方经济》2006年第9期。
    10 Mehran的研究表明,以市场为基础的报酬使美国公司的持股者受益,他证明了在制造业公司的绩效与以股权为基础的报酬之间存在正相关。然而,这种报酬制度也不是万能的。比如,当股利上升时,期权的价值下降,这增加了经理人员限制股利的动机。此外,以股权为基础的报酬使经理人员的报酬具有波动性。如果经理人员报酬的不确定性增长到足够高的程度时,他们就可能要求更高水平的报酬。这表明在控制代理成本方面,以期股和有限制的认股权可以作为持股权的替代机制。参见Mehran,Hamid,Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance, Journal of Financial Economics, 1995, 38, 163-184.
    11 参见:McConnell, J. J and Henri Servaes, Additional Evidence on Equity Ownership and Corporate Value, Journal of Financial Economics, 1990, 27(2), 595-613. Hermalin, B. and M. Weisbach. The Effects of Board Compensation and Direct Incentives on Firm Performance. Financial Management 1991, 20, 101-112.
    12 相关研究可以参考 Himmelberg, Charles and R. Glenn Hubbard. Incentive Pay and the Market for CEOs: An Analysis of Pay-For-Performance Sensitivity]. Working paper, Columbia University, 2000. Himmelberg, C. P., R. G. Hubbard, and D. Palia. Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance. Journal of Financial Economics,53,353-384, 1999. Hubbard, R.G., and D. Palia. Executive Pay and Performance: Evidence from the U.§.Banking Industry. Journal of Financial Economics 39, 105-130, 1995.
    13 详见:Khanna, Tarun and Krishna Palepu, Why Focused Strategies may be Wrong for Emerging Markets, Harvard Business Review, 1997, 75(4), 41-51. Khanna, Tarun and Krishna Palepu, Is Group Affiliation Profitable in Emerging Markets: An Analysis of Diversified Indian Business Group, Journal of Finance, 2000, 55(2), 867-891.
    14 详见:Bae, Kee-Hong., Jun-Koo Kang and Jin-Mo Kim, Tunneling or Value Addition? Evidence from Mergers by Korean Business Groups, Journal of Finance, 2002, 57(6), 2695-2740. Baek, Jae-Seung, Jun-Koo Kang and Kyung-Suh Park, Corporate Governance and Finn Value: Evidence from the Korean Financial Crisis, Journal of Financial Economics, 2004, 71(2), 265-313. Chang, Sea Jin, Ownership Structure, Expropriation, and Performance of Group-affiliated Companies in Korea, Academy of Management Journal, 2003, 46(2), 238-253.
    15 这里将第一大股东的终极控制者所控制的其他公司与上市公司之间的资金占用也视为控股股东对上市公司的资金占用。
    16 董事会决策的科学性和独立性能说明控股家族的控制程度。董事长和总经理的两职设置情况及独立董事比例是董事会结构的最重要方面,限于本文所用数据库中两职设置情况未能详尽收集,且此信息不是本文的主要内容,故本文仅将独立董事比例加入分析模型中。
    17 这个结论即SHR_CEO与NOC_TUNL之间的关系存在监管激励效应与合谋掏空效应,和SHR_CEO与TQ之间的利益趋同效应和壕沟防守效应相呼应。
    18 德隆就是向银行大量贷款,通过高负债高成长的模式迅速扩张,家族股东掏空上市公司就相当于向银行挖掘隧道,当德隆大厦崩塌之际,引发一系列的连锁反应。
    1 这里的假设参考了杨柏(2005)《上市公司信息披露违规行为监管博弈分析》中的设置。
    [1] Aggarwal, R. K. and A. A. Samwick. Executive Compensation, Relative Performance Evaluation and Strategic Competition: Theory and Evidence [J]. Journal of Finance, 54 (6), 1970-1999,1999a..
    [2] Aggarwal, R. K. and A. A. Samwick. The Other Side of the Trade-off: The Impact of Risk on Executive Compensation [J]. Journal of Political Economy, 107,65-105,1999b.
    [3] Aghion, P. and Bolton, P. An Incomplete Contracts Approach to Financial Contracting [J] Review of Economic Studies, vol.59,473 & 494, 1992.
    [4] Alchian, Armen and Demsetz, Harod, Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization [J], American Economic Review, 1972,62, pp.777-795.
    [5] Atanasov, Vladimir, How Much Value Can Blockholders Tunnel? Evidence from the Bulgarian Mass Privatization Auctions [J], Journal of Financiial Economics, 2005, 76 (1), 191-234.
    [6] Bae, Kee-Hong, Jun-Koo Kang and Jin-Mo Kim, Tunneling or Value Addition? Evidence from Mergers by Korean Business Groups [J], Journal of Finance, 2002,57 (6), 2695-2740.
    [7] Baek, Jae-Seung, Jun-Koo Kang and Kyung Suh Park, Corporate Governance and Firm Value: Evidence from the Korean Financial Crisis [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 2004,71 (2), 265-313.
    [8] Bajari, P. and Tadelis, S. Incentives v.s. Transaction Costs [J]. Rand J. of Economics, 2001, vol.32 (3), 387-407,2001.
    
    [9] Barclay, Michael and Clifford Holderness, Private Benefits from Control of Public Corporation [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 1989,25(2), 371-395.
    [10]Baron D. and Besanko D. Regulation, Asymmetric Information and Auditing [J], Rand Journal of Economics, 1984, 15,447-470.
    [11]Bennsdsen, M., and D. Wolfenzon, The Balance of Power in Closely Held Corporations [J]. Journal of Financial Economics 58, 113-139.
    [12]Berglof, E., And E.L. Von Thadden, Short-term versus Long-term interests: A Model of Capital Structure with MultipleInvestors [J], Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109, pp. 1055-1084,1994.
    [13]Bergstrom, C, and K. Rydqvist, Ownership of Equity in Dual-Class Firms [J]. Journal of Banking and Finance 1990, 14, 255-269.
    [14]Berle, A., and G Means, The Modern Corporation and Price Property [M]. Macmillan, New York, 1932.
    [15]Bertrand, Marianne, Paras Mehta and Sendhil Mullainathan, Ferreting out Tunneling: An Application to Indian Business Group [J], Quarterly Journal of Ecnomics, 2002, 117(1), 121-148.
    [16]Bohn H. Monitoring Multiple Agents: The Role of Hierarchies [J], Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1987, 8 279-305.
    [17]Burgstahler.D.C.,and M.Eames,2001,Management of earnings and analyst forecasts to achieve zero earnings surprise [R], working paper,University of Washington,Seattle,WA.
    [18]Chang, Sea Jin, Ownership Structure, Expropriation, and Performance of Group-affiliated Companies in Korea [J], Academy of Management Journal, 2003,46(2), 238-253.
    [19]Claessens , S. , Djankov , S. , Lang , L., Who Control East Asian Corporation [R]. Policy Research Working Paper 2054, The World Bank. 1999.
    
    [20]Claessens, Stijn, Simeon Djankov and Larry H. P. Lang, The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58 (1/2).81-112.
    
    [21]Demski J. S., Sappington D. & Spiller P. T. Managing Supplier Switching [J]. Rand Journal of Economics, 1987,18(1), 77-97.
    [22]Denis, D. and J.McConnell. International Corporate Governance [J]. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 38,1-36,2003.
    [23]Djankov, S., and P. Murrell. Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: a Quantitative Survey[R]. Working Paper, the World Bank and University of Maryland, 2002.
    [24]Dyck, Alexander and Luigi Zingales, Private Benefits of Control: an International Comparison [J], Journal of Finance, 2004,59(2), 537-600.
    [25]Eshel I., Samuelson L., Skaked A. Altruists, egoists, and holligans in a local interaction model [J], American Economic Review 88(1), 1998.
    [26]Faccio M. and L.H.P. Lang, The Ultimate Ownership of Western European Corporations [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 2002, 65,365-395.
    [27]Fama, Eugene F., and Jensen, Michael C, Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm [J], Journal of Political Economy, 1980, 88, No.2 : 288-307.
    [28]Gadhoum, Family Control and Grouping: Possible Expropriation via Dividends [R], University of Quebec, Working Paper 14-2000, Aug.
    [29]Garen, John E.. Executive Compensation and Principal-Agent Theory [J]. Journal of Political Economy 102(6), 1175-1199,1994.
    [30]Gillan, S.G., L.T. Starks. Corporate Governance Proposals and Shareholder Activism: The Role of Institutional Investores [J]. Journal of Financial Economics. 2000 Vol.57,pp:275-305.
    [31]Grossman, S. and Hart.O. The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration [J], Journal of Political Economy 1986,94.
    [32] Grossman S, and Hart. O. One share one vote and the market for corporate control [J] . Journal of Financial Economics, 1988 ,(20) pp : 175—202.
    [33]Grossman S. and Hart.O. An analysis of the principal agent problem [J]. Econometrics, 1983( 51 ): 7 -45
    [34]H. Demsetz. The structure of ownership and the theory of the firm [J]. Journal of Law and Economics, Vol.26,1983.
    [35] Hall, B. J., and J. B. Liebman. Are CEOs Really Paid Like Bureaucrats [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113,653-691,1998.
    [36]Hart, O. An Economist's Perspective on the Theory of the Firm [J], Columbia Law Review, 1989,89:1757-1774.
    [37]Hart, O. Corporate Governance: Some Theory and Implications [J]. The Economic Journal Vol. 105, 1995
    [38]Hart, O. & Moore, J. Incomplete Contracts and Renegotiation [J]. Econometrica, 1995, Vol. 56.
    [39]Hart, O., & Moore, Default and Renegotiation [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1998, Vol.113, 1-41.
    [40] Hart, O., Default and renegotiation: a dynamic model of debt [R] , NBER working paper. 1997, Jan.
    [41] Helen Short, Kevin Keasey, Managerid Ownership and the proformance of Firms: Evidence from the UK [J]. Journal of Corporate Finance, (5):71-101,1999.
    [42]Hellman, T. The Allocation of Control Rights in Venture Capital Contracts [J].Rand J. of Economics, vol.29, 57-76. 1998.
    [43]Hermalin, B. and M. Weisbach. The Effects of Board Compensation and Direct Incentives on Firm Performance [J]. Financial Management 1991,20, 101-112.
    [44]Himmelberg, C. P., R. G Hubbard, and D. Palia. Understanding the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 53,353-384, 1999.
    [45]Himmelberg, Charles and R. Glenn Hubbard. Incentive Pay and the Market for CEOs: An Analysis of Pay-For-Performance Sensitivity [R]. Working paper, Columbia University, 2000.
    
    [46]Hindriks, J., Kee. M., Muthoo. A, Corruption, Extortion and Evasion [J], Journal of Public Economics, 1999, 74: 395-430.
    [47]Holderne ss, C. G, and D. P.Sheehan. The Role of Majority Shareholders in Publicly Held Corporations: An ExploratoryAnalysis [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 1988, Vol. 20: 317-346.
    [48]Holmstrom, B., and Tirole, J. The Theory of the Firm [M]. Handbook of Industrial Organization, 1989, vol.1 Handbooks in Economics, no. 10, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 61-133.
    [49]Holmstrom, Bengt. Moral Hazard in Teams [J], Bell Journal of Economics. 1982, 13, 324-340.
    [50]Hubbard, R.G, and D. Palia. Executive Pay and Performance: Evidence from the U.S.Banking Industry. [J], Journal of Financial Economics 39,105-130, 1995.
    [51]Jensen, M., and Kevin J. Murphy. Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives [J]. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 225-264, 1990.
    [52] Jensen, M.C and W H Meckling, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 1976, 3(4), 305-360.
    [53] Jensen, M.C, Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance and takeovers [J], American Economics Review 76, May, pp. 323-329, 1986.
    [54] Johnson, Simon, Peter Boone, Alasdair, Breach, and Eric Fiedman, Corporate Governance in the Asian Financial Crisis, 1997-1998 [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, 58: 1-2, 141-186.
    [55]Johnson, Simon, Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes and Andrew Shleifer, Tunneling [J], American Economi Review Papers and Proceedings, 2000,90(2), 22-27.
    [56]K.W.Clarkson & K.L. Miller. Industrial Organization: Theory, Evidence and Public Theory [M], New York, McGraw-Hill, 1982.
    [57]Kaplan, S.&Stromberg,Per,2000.Financial Contracting Theory Meets the Real World [R] NBER working paper no.7 660, pulished in Review of Economic Studies, Aprail, 2003.
    [58]Khanna, Tarun and Krishna Palepu Is Group Affiliation Profitable in Emerging Markets: An Analysis of Diversified Indian Business Group [J], Journal of Finance, 2000, 55(2), 867-891.
    [59] Khanna, Tarun and Krishna Palepu, Why Focused Strategies may be Wrong for Emerging Markets [J], Harvard Business Review, 1997, 75(4), 41-51.
    [60] Klaus E.Meyer, Stakeholder Influence and Radical change: A Coordination Game Perspective [J]. Asia pacific Journal of Management, 1994, 21, p235-253.
    [61]Kofman, F. & J. Lawarree, Collusion in Hierarchical Agency [J], Econometrica, 1993, 61: 629-656.
    
    [62]La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A, Vishny R W. Law and Finance [R]. NBER Working paper, 5661, 1996,1-45.
    [63]La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Agency Problem and Dividend Policies around the World [J], Journal of Finance, 2000a, 55: 1-33.
    [64] La Poria, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Investor Protection and Corporate Governance [J], Journal of Finance Economics, 2000b, 58: 3-27.
    [65]La Poria, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer & R. W. Vishny, Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation [J], Journal of Finance, 2002,57: 1147-1170.
    [66] La Poria, Rafael, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrew Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, Law and Finance [J], Journal of Political Economy, 1998,106(6), 231-269.
    [67] La Poria, Rafael, Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio, Shleifer, Andrei, and Vishny, Robert (LLSV) , Corporate ownership around the world [J]. Journal of Finance, 54, pp. 471-517,1999.
    
    [68]Laffont J &Tirole J, Cost Padding, Auditing and Collusion[R]. Annales F Economie et de Statistique, 1992.
    [69]Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Collusion and Delegation [J], Rand Journal of Economics, 1998,29: 280-305.
    [70]Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Collusion under Asymmetric Information [J], Econometrica, 1997,65,875-911.
    [71]Laffont, J-J. and D. Martimort, Mechanism Design with Collusion and Correlation [J], Econometrica, 2000,68: 309-342.
    [72] Lee Y S., Rosenstein S., Wyatt J G The value of financial outside directors on corporate boards [J]. International Review of Economic and Finance, 1999(8):421-431.
    [73]Marianne, P., Tobias, J., & Annette Vissing-Jorgensen. Why Do Entrepreneurs Hold Large Ownership Shares? Testing Agency Theory Using Entrepreneur Effort and Wealth[R].NBER working paper, January 21, 2003.
    [74]Masahiko Aoki, Institutional Complement between organizationalArchitecture and corporate Governance. RIETI Discussion Paper Series[C], 2003.03-E-005.
    [75]Maskin. E. and Tirole. J. Two remarks on the property-rights literature [J]. Review of Economic Studies, 1999. 66(1): 139-149.
    
    [76]Maskin. E. On indescribable contingencies and incomplete contracts[C]. EEA 2001 meeting.
    
    [77]Maury, Benjamin and Anete Pajuste, Multiple Large Shareholders and Firm Value [J], Journal of Banking and Finance, 2005,29(7), 1813-1834.
    [78]Mazzola, P., Marchisio, G. The role of going public in family businesses' long-lasting growth: A study of Italian IPOs [J]. Family Business Review, 2002,(15): 133-142.
    [79]McConnell, J. J., and H. Servaes. Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 27, 595-612, 1990.
    [80]McConnell, J.J and Henri Servaes, Additional Evidence on Equity Ownership and Corporate Value [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 1990,27(2), 595-613.
    
    [81]Mehran, Hamid, Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 1995, 38, 163-184.
    [82]Mitton, Todd, A Cross-firm Analysis of the Impact of Corporate Governance on the East Asian Financial Crisis [J], Journal of Financial Economics, 2002, 64(2), 215-241.
    [83]Moerland P W. Alternative Disciplinary Mechanism in Different Corporate Systems [J], Journal of Economic Behavior and Organazation,1995(Vol 26)
    
    [84]Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R. W. Vishny. Management Ownership and Market Valuation: An Empirical Analysis [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 293-315, 1988.
    [85]Morck, Randall, David Stangeland, and Bernard Yeung, Inherited Wealth, Corporate Control and Economic Growth: The Canadian Disease [M], in Randall. K. Morck, ed. : Concentrated Corporate Ownership, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2000, 3.
    [86]Pagano, Marco and Ailsa Roell, The Choice of Stock Ownership Structure: Agency Costs, Monitoring, and the Decision to Go Public [J], Quarterly Journal of Ecnomics, 1998, 113(1), 187-225.
    [87]Palia, Darius. The Endogeneity of Managerial Compensation in Firm Valuation: A Solution [J]. Review of Financial Studies 14,3,735-764,2002.
    [88]Persson, T.Roland, G and Tabellini, G 2000, Comparative politics and public finance [J], Journal of Political Economy, 108(6): 1121-1161.
    [89] Rafael P L.Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes,Andrei Shleifer and Robert Vishny. Investor Protection and Corporate Governance [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2000, (58):32 -37.
    [90]Rasmusen, E. B. Explaining incomplete contracts as the result of contract-reading costs [J]. Advances in Economic Analysis & Policy, 2001,1(1): 1-32.
    [91]Saiegh, S. M., Tommasi, M. An "incomplete-contracts" approach to inter-governmental systems in Latin America [R], Annual. World Bank Conference, 1999, June 20.
    [92] Shleifer, Andrei and Robert W. Vishny, A Survey of Corporate Governance [J], Journal of Finance, 1997, 52 (2). 737-783.
    [93] Shleifer, Andrei, State versus Private Ownership [J], Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1998, 12(4): 133-150.
    [94]Stark O. & Falk I., Transfers, Empathy Formation, and reverse Transfers [J], American Economic Review 88(2), 1998.
    [95]Teoh, S. H., T. J. Wong, and G R. Rao. Are accruals during initial public offerings opportunistic? [J]. Review of Accornting Studies 1998, 3:175-208.
    [96]Teoh, Siew Hong, Ivo Welch, and T.J. Wong, Earnings management and the long-run market erformance of initial public offerings [J], Journal of Finance 1998a, 53,1935-1974.
    [97]Teoh, Siew Hong, Ivo Welch, and T.J. Wong, Earnings management and the underperfor- mance of seasoned equity offerings [J], Journal of Financial Economics 1998b, 50,63-69.
    [98] Tirole J., Collusion and the Theory of Organizations [M], Advances in Economic Theory, Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, 1992.
    [99] Tirole, J., Incomplete contracts: where do we stand? [J] Econometrica 1999, 67(4): 741-781.
    
    [100] Tirole, J., Corporate Governance [J]. Econometrica, 2001, Vol.69, no.1, 1-35.
    [101] Tirole, J., Hierarchies and Bureaucracies: On the Rule of Collusion in Organization [J], Journal of Law, Economic & Organization, 1986,2: 181-214.
    [102] Wei.Z. F. Xie and S. Zhang. Ownership Structure and Firm Value in China's Privatized Firms: 1991-2001 [J]. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 40, pp87-108, 2005.
    [103] William S., Schulze, Michael H., Lubatkin & Richard N. Dino, Altruism, Agency, and the Competitiveness of Family Firms [J], Managerial and Decision Economics 23, 2002.
    [104] Williamson, O. E., and The Theory of the firm as governance structure: from choice to contract [J], Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2002, 16(3): 171-195.
    
    [105] Williamson. O. E. Industrial Organnization [M]. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 1996.
    [106] Williamson, O.E., Ronald H. Coase. Institution, Contracts and Organizations [M] edited by Claude Menard, Press of Edward Elgar, 2000.
    [107] Xu. X and Y.Wang. Ownership Structure and Corporate Governance in Chinese Stock Companies [J]. China Economic Review 10, pp75-98, 1999.
    
    
    [108] Zarkada-Fraser and M. Skitmore, Decisions with Moral Content: Collusion. [J] Construction Management & Economics, 2000, 18: 101-111.
    [109] Zingales, Luigi, The Value of the Voting Right: A Study of the Milan Stock Exchange experience [J], Review of Financial Studies, 1994, 7(1), 125-148.
    [110] 白重恩等.中国上市公司治理结构的实证研究[J].经济研究,2005,(2).
    [111] 伯利,米恩斯.现代公司与私有财产(中文版)[M].台湾银行经济研究室,1981.
    [112] 陈晓、王琨.关联交易、公司治理与国有股改革——来自我国资本市场的实证证据[J].经济研究,2005(4).
    [113] 陈志俊、邹恒甫.防范串谋的激励机制设计理论研究[J].经济学动态,2002(10).
    [114] 董志强、蒲勇健.掏空、合谋与独立董事报酬.世界经济,2006(6).
    [115] 樊景立、郑伯壎.华人组织的家长式领导:一项文化观点的分析[J].本土心理学研究,2000,(6).
    [116] 冯邦彦.香港华资财团(1997)[M].三联书店(香港)有限公司,1997.
    [117] 冯根福.关于健全和完善我国上市公司治理结构几个关键问题的思考[J].当代经济科学,2001(6).
    [118] 冯根福、韩冰、闫冰.中国上市公司股权集中度变动的实证分析[J].经济研究,2002,(8).
    [119] 付文阁.中国家族企业面临的紧要问题[M].北京:经济日报出版社,2004.
    [120] 高雷、何少华、黄志忠.公司治理与掏空[J].经济学(季刊),2006,(7).
    [121] 胡军.跨文化管理[M].暨南大学出版社,2003.
    [122] 胡军、王霄、钟永平.华人企业管理模式及其文化基础——以港、台及大陆为例实证研究的初步结果[J].管理世界,2002,(12).
    [123] 黄群慧.控制权作为企业家的激励约束因素:理论分析及现实解释意义[J].经济研究,2000(1).
    [124] 雷丁(G Redding).海外华人企业家的管理思想——文化背景与风格[M].(中译本),上海三联书店,1993.
    [125] 黎来芳.商业伦理、诚信义务与不道德控制——鸿仪系掏空上市公司的案例研究[J].会计研究,2005,(11).
    [126] 李善民等.收购公司与目标公司配对组合绩效的实证分析[J].经济研究,2004,(6).
    [127] 李善民、周木堂、余鹏翼.最终所有权性质、治理机制对企业绩效的影响研究[J].管理科学,2006,(5).
    [128] 李维安等.现代公司治理研究——资本结构、公司治理和国有企业股份制改造[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.
    [129] 李新春、张书军主编.家族企业:组织、行为与中国经济[M].上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2005.
    [130] 李新春.企业家过程与国有企业的准企业家模型[J].经济研究,2000(6).
    [131] 李增泉、孙铮、王志伟.“掏空”与所有权安排——来自我国上市公司大股东资金占用的经验证据[J].会计研究,2004,(12).
    [132] 刘峰,贺建刚.股权结构与大股东利益实现方式的选择—中国资本市场利益输送的初步研究[C].第二届实证会计研究论文集,2003.
    [133] 刘俏、陆洲.公司资源的“隧道效应”——来自中国上市公司的证据.平新乔、宋敏、张俊喜主编.治理结构、证券市场与银行改革[M].北京大学出版社,2003.
    [134] 刘少波.控制权收益悖论与超控制权收益[J].经济研究,2007,(2).
    [135] 刘少波、戴文慧.我国上市公司募集资金投向变更研究[J].经济研究,2004,(5).
    [136] 陆挺、刘小玄.企业改制模式与改制绩效[J].经济研究,2005,(6).
    [137] 罗党论、唐清泉.独立董事制度实施效果分析——基于上市公司关联交易的证据[J].南方经济,2006,(9).
    [138] 罗建兵.合谋理论研究述评.经济学动态,2005,(10).
    [139] 马忠、李学伟.MBO上市公司所有权与控制权对治理结构的影响[J].中国软科学,2004,(2).
    [140] 毛道维、蔡雷、任佩瑜.1999—2002年中国上市公司MBO实证研究——兼论EMBO对国有企业改革的意义[J].中国工业经济,2003,(10).
    [141] 毛蕴诗.多元化经营三维模型及多元化经营的几个命题[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(6).
    [142] 毛蕴诗.“家族企业的体制创新与管理革命”(笔谈四篇)家族式企业:形成、过渡与变革[J].学术研究,2001,(5).
    [143] 毛蕴诗、蒋敦福、程艳萍.中国上市公司的亏损问题与重构研究[J].管理世界,2001,(5).
    [144] 毛蕴诗.企业家与职业经理特征识别模型——经济转型期中国企业家与职业经理的识别例证[J].学术研究,2003,(4).
    [145] (美)J·弗雷德·威斯通等.兼并、重组与公司控制[M],经济科学出版社,1998.
    [146] (美)G.J·施蒂格勒.产业组织与政府管制[M].上海人民出版社、上海三联书店,1998.
    [147] (美)R.·科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集[M].上海三联书店,1994.
    [148] (美)哈罗德·德姆塞茨(1988).所有权、控制与企业——论经济活动的组织[M],段毅才等译,北京,经济科学出版社,1999.
    [149] (美)哈特.企业、合同与财务结构[M].费方域译.上海三联书店,1998.
    [150] (美)科斯,诺斯,威廉姆森.制度、契约与组织——从新制度经济学角度的透视[M].刘刚等译.北京:经济科学出版社,2003.
    [151] (美)科斯.论生产的制度结构[M].上海三联书店,1994.
    [152] (美)拉姆·查然.顶级董事会运作:如何通过董事会创造公司的竞争优势[M],北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003.
    [153] (美)威廉姆森(1971).生产的纵向一体化:市场失灵的考察.载.企业制度与市场组织——交易费用经济学文选[M].上海三联书店,1996.
    [154] (美)沃尔特·J·萨蒙等.公司治理[M],中国人民大学出版社、哈佛商学院出版社,2001.
    [155] 平新乔、李自然.上市公司信息披露中的勾结问题.平新乔、宋敏、张俊喜主编.治理结构、证券市场与银行改革[M].北京大学出版社,2003.
    [156] 申明浩、苏晓华.管理层融资收购与股权激励的实证研究[J].山西财经大学学报,2007,(1).
    [157] 申明浩等.民营科技企业创新动机与战略选择[J].软科学,2006,(6).
    [158] 申明浩.“企业家控制”的企业剩余权细分[J].改革,2005,(4).
    [159] 申明浩.企业资源基础理论与交易成本理论的争论与整合[J].经济学动态,2006,(11).
    [160] 宋献中、李源.民营控股上市公司股权结构特征分析[J].财会月刊,2006,(18).
    [161] 苏启林.上市公司家族控制与公司治理:基于契约理论的研究[D].暨南大学博士学位论文,2004.
    [162] 苏启林等.民营上市公司控制权形成及其影响研究[J].管理世界,2005(1).
    [163] 苏启林等.上市公司家族控制与企业价值[J].经济研究,2003,(8).
    [164] 苏启林.家族企业[M].经济科学出版社.2005.
    [165] 苏启林等.中美私营家族企业比较[J].中国国情国力,2003,(9).
    [166] 隋广军等.产业演进及其微观基础研究[M].经济科学出版社,2007.
    [167] 隋广军、申明浩.产业集聚生命周期演进的动态分析[J].经济学动态,2004,(11).
    [168] 隋广军、申明浩、宋剑波.基于专利水平地区差异的高科技产业化问题研究[J].管理世界,2005,(8).
    [169] 孙永祥.公司治理结构:理论与实证研究[M].上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2002.
    [170] 孙永祥、黄祖辉.上市公司治理结构的实证分析[J].经济研究,1999,(12).
    [171] 唐清泉、罗当论、张学勤.独立董事职业背景与公司业绩关系的实证研究[J].当代经济管理,2005,(1).
    [172] 唐宗明、蒋位.中国上市公司大股东侵害度实证分析[J].经济研究,2002,(4).
    [173] 王琨、肖星.机构投资者持股与关联方占用的实证研究[J].南开管理评论,2005(2).
    [174] 王明夫.企业家雇佣资本——现代公司治理的“企业家主权”模式论[J].中国企业家,2003,(9).
    [175] 王明琳、周生春.控制性家族类型、双重三层委托代理问题与企业价值[J].管理世界,2006,(8).
    [176] 王明琳、周生春.家族金字塔控股结构存在原因探析[J].外国经济与管理,2006,(2).
    [177] 王志明、顾海英.利他主义、代理问题及家族企业[J].社会科学战线,2004,(5).
    [178] (香港)郎咸平.公司治理[M].社会科学文选出版社,2004.
    [179] 肖虹.控股股东关联交易利润操纵的制度约束[J].财会月刊,2003,(3).
    [180] 徐晓东、陈小悦.第一大股东对公司治理、企业绩效的影响[J].经济研究,2003,(2).
    [181] 杨柏.上市公司信息披露违规行为监管博弈分析[J].管理世界,2005,(8).
    [182] 杨其静.财富、企业家才能与最优融资契约安排[J].经济研究,2003,(4).
    [183] 杨其静.合同与企业理论前沿综述[J].经济研究,2002,(1).
    [184] 益智.中国上市公司MBO的实证研究[J].财经研究,2003,(5).
    [185] 应焕红.“家族制”与民营企业制度创新[J].浙江学刊,2001,(5).
    [186] 于东智.董事会、公司治理与绩效——对中国上市公司的经验分析[J].中国社会科学,2003(3).
    [187] 余立智.家族企业的成长机理与变迁路径——一个分析框架及其对中国民营企业家族化问题的解释[M].中国财政经济出版社,2004年.
    [188] 云冠平等.东南亚华人企业经营管理研究[M].经济管理出版社,2000.
    [189] 詹森、麦克林.企业理论:管理行为、代理成本与所有权结构.所有权、控制权与激励——代理经济学文选[M].上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1998.
    [190] 张炳申、安凡所.管理权力模式与最优契约模式比较分析[J].外国经济与管理,2005,(3).
    [191] 张捷.东亚企业的融资模式、治理结构与金融危机[J].世界经济,2000,(8).
    [192] 张军,王祺.权威、企业绩效与国有企业改革[J].中国社会科学,2004,(5).
    [193] 张维迎.博弈论与信息经济学[M].上海:上海三联出版社,1996.
    [194] 张维迎.法律制度的信誉基础[J].经济研究,2002,(1).
    [195] 张维迎.所有权、治理结构与委托——代理关系[J].经济研究,1996,(9).
    [196] 张卫国等.组织中的非正式行为问题——串谋行为和权力滥用[J].探索,2005,(1).
    [197] 赵文华.国外代理理论中串谋问题的研究进展及中国的特殊性[J].广东社会科学,2005,(6).
    [198] 赵文华、安立仁、席酉民.国有企业中的串谋问题分析[J].中国软科学,1998,(8).
    [199] 赵文华、安立仁、席酉民.一个新的代理问题——串谋行为[J].西北大学学报,1998(3).
    [200] 郑伯壎.差序格局与华人组织行为[J].本土心理学研究,1995,(3).
    [201] 朱卫平.企业家本位论——中小企业所有权制度安排研究[M],经济科学出版社,2004.

© 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