气候监管风险如何影响劳动力就业决策?来自准自然实验的证据

IF 5.2 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS 中国经济评论 Pub Date : 2024-07-06 DOI:10.1016/j.chieco.2024.102236
William Mbanyele , Hongyun Huang , Linda T. Muchenje , Jun Zhao
{"title":"气候监管风险如何影响劳动力就业决策?来自准自然实验的证据","authors":"William Mbanyele ,&nbsp;Hongyun Huang ,&nbsp;Linda T. Muchenje ,&nbsp;Jun Zhao","doi":"10.1016/j.chieco.2024.102236","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We exploit a green lending mandate as a quasi-natural experiment and estimate its effect on labor investment inefficiency of firms with high carbon risk. We document that heightened climate regulatory risk through mandatory green lending requirements motivates firms with higher carbon risk to adjust their labor investments to levels supported by economic fundamentals. We especially show that climate regulatory risk lowers labor investment inefficiency by curbing overinvestment in labor. This impact is more concentrated among firms that are more dependent on banks for liquidity, firms with severe financial constraints, and those with more institutional investors. After the green credit policy, we also observe an increase in bank lending costs and a reduction in loan maturities for carbon-intensive firms. Overall, our findings suggest that climate bank lending regulation is one of the major channels through which climate risks get embedded in labor employment decisions. In particular, green lending regulatory costs can have significant effects on corporate labor investment efficiency.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48285,"journal":{"name":"中国经济评论","volume":"87 ","pages":"Article 102236"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How does climate regulatory risk influence labor employment decisions? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment\",\"authors\":\"William Mbanyele ,&nbsp;Hongyun Huang ,&nbsp;Linda T. Muchenje ,&nbsp;Jun Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chieco.2024.102236\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We exploit a green lending mandate as a quasi-natural experiment and estimate its effect on labor investment inefficiency of firms with high carbon risk. We document that heightened climate regulatory risk through mandatory green lending requirements motivates firms with higher carbon risk to adjust their labor investments to levels supported by economic fundamentals. We especially show that climate regulatory risk lowers labor investment inefficiency by curbing overinvestment in labor. This impact is more concentrated among firms that are more dependent on banks for liquidity, firms with severe financial constraints, and those with more institutional investors. After the green credit policy, we also observe an increase in bank lending costs and a reduction in loan maturities for carbon-intensive firms. Overall, our findings suggest that climate bank lending regulation is one of the major channels through which climate risks get embedded in labor employment decisions. In particular, green lending regulatory costs can have significant effects on corporate labor investment efficiency.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48285,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中国经济评论\",\"volume\":\"87 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中国经济评论\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043951X24001251\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国经济评论","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043951X24001251","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们利用绿色贷款强制要求作为准自然实验,估算其对高碳风险企业劳动力投资低效率的影响。我们记录了通过强制性绿色贷款要求提高气候监管风险,促使碳风险较高的企业将其劳动力投资调整到经济基本面支持的水平。我们特别表明,气候监管风险通过抑制劳动力的过度投资,降低了劳动力投资的低效率。这种影响更多集中在流动性更依赖银行的企业、财务约束严重的企业以及拥有更多机构投资者的企业。绿色信贷政策实施后,我们还观察到碳密集型企业的银行贷款成本增加,贷款期限缩短。总之,我们的研究结果表明,气候银行贷款监管是气候风险嵌入劳动力就业决策的主要渠道之一。特别是,绿色贷款监管成本会对企业劳动力投资效率产生重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How does climate regulatory risk influence labor employment decisions? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment

We exploit a green lending mandate as a quasi-natural experiment and estimate its effect on labor investment inefficiency of firms with high carbon risk. We document that heightened climate regulatory risk through mandatory green lending requirements motivates firms with higher carbon risk to adjust their labor investments to levels supported by economic fundamentals. We especially show that climate regulatory risk lowers labor investment inefficiency by curbing overinvestment in labor. This impact is more concentrated among firms that are more dependent on banks for liquidity, firms with severe financial constraints, and those with more institutional investors. After the green credit policy, we also observe an increase in bank lending costs and a reduction in loan maturities for carbon-intensive firms. Overall, our findings suggest that climate bank lending regulation is one of the major channels through which climate risks get embedded in labor employment decisions. In particular, green lending regulatory costs can have significant effects on corporate labor investment efficiency.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
中国经济评论
中国经济评论 ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
4.40%
发文量
380
期刊介绍: The China Economic Review publishes original works of scholarship which add to the knowledge of the economy of China and to economies as a discipline. We seek, in particular, papers dealing with policy, performance and institutional change. Empirical papers normally use a formal model, a data set, and standard statistical techniques. Submissions are subjected to double-blind peer review.
期刊最新文献
Quenching thirst, easing debt: Improvement in water resource endowment alleviates local government debt risk Infrastructure and the patterns of trade: An empirical look at China Cognitive ability in matching with strategic uncertainty: An experimental study Follow the gaze: How social attention shapes gendered trading choices Did the anti-avoidance rules curtail the profit shifting of foreign multinationals in China?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1