垄断与企业创新:来自反垄断法的证据

IF 1.8 Q3 MANAGEMENT Nankai Business Review International Pub Date : 2021-10-14 DOI:10.1108/nbri-03-2021-0019
Minggui Yu, Yujing Huang, Huijie Zhong, Qing Zhang
{"title":"垄断与企业创新:来自反垄断法的证据","authors":"Minggui Yu, Yujing Huang, Huijie Zhong, Qing Zhang","doi":"10.1108/nbri-03-2021-0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThere are two opposite views about whether the Antitrust Law is conducive to the development of the economy. One view is that the Antitrust Law can restrain monopoly, maintain market competition and benefit economic growth. The other view is that the Antitrust Law inhibits innovation by monopolistic firms and fosters rent-seeking, which is bad for economic growth. To provide a possible perspective for clarifying the controversy, this paper aims to answer the following two questions: first, will the Antitrust Law inhibit corporate innovation? Second, does the antitrust enforcement agency discriminate against private enterprises?\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nBased on the samples of A-share listed companies from 2003 to 2013, the authors use the implementation of China’s Antitrust Law in 2008 as a policy shock, take the monopoly enterprises in each industry as the treatment group and competitive enterprises as the control group, using the difference-in-differences method to test the impact of the implementation of the Antitrust Law on corporate innovation activities.\n\n\nFindings\nThe results show that compared with competitive enterprises, the patent output of monopolistic enterprises was significantly reduced after the implementation of the Antitrust Law, which indicates that the Antitrust Law does inhibit the innovation activities of monopolistic enterprises. Further research finds that the innovation suppression effect of the Antitrust Law is more prominent in state-owned enterprises, which means that the government does not have “selective law enforcement” against private enterprises in the process of law enforcement. Therefore, the results provide evidence for the idea that government intervention is neutral.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nFirst, the paper enriches and expands the research on the factors affecting corporate innovation from the perspective of market structure. Second, it enriches and expands relevant research on the consequences of implementing the Antitrust Law from the perspective of corporate innovation. Third, it not only provides the relevant empirical evidence for clarifying the dispute about the Antitrust Law but also is helpful to clarify whether the Chinese Government has “selective law enforcement” against private enterprises.\n","PeriodicalId":44958,"journal":{"name":"Nankai Business Review International","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monopoly and corporate innovation: evidence from antitrust law\",\"authors\":\"Minggui Yu, Yujing Huang, Huijie Zhong, Qing Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/nbri-03-2021-0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThere are two opposite views about whether the Antitrust Law is conducive to the development of the economy. One view is that the Antitrust Law can restrain monopoly, maintain market competition and benefit economic growth. The other view is that the Antitrust Law inhibits innovation by monopolistic firms and fosters rent-seeking, which is bad for economic growth. To provide a possible perspective for clarifying the controversy, this paper aims to answer the following two questions: first, will the Antitrust Law inhibit corporate innovation? Second, does the antitrust enforcement agency discriminate against private enterprises?\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nBased on the samples of A-share listed companies from 2003 to 2013, the authors use the implementation of China’s Antitrust Law in 2008 as a policy shock, take the monopoly enterprises in each industry as the treatment group and competitive enterprises as the control group, using the difference-in-differences method to test the impact of the implementation of the Antitrust Law on corporate innovation activities.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe results show that compared with competitive enterprises, the patent output of monopolistic enterprises was significantly reduced after the implementation of the Antitrust Law, which indicates that the Antitrust Law does inhibit the innovation activities of monopolistic enterprises. Further research finds that the innovation suppression effect of the Antitrust Law is more prominent in state-owned enterprises, which means that the government does not have “selective law enforcement” against private enterprises in the process of law enforcement. Therefore, the results provide evidence for the idea that government intervention is neutral.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nFirst, the paper enriches and expands the research on the factors affecting corporate innovation from the perspective of market structure. Second, it enriches and expands relevant research on the consequences of implementing the Antitrust Law from the perspective of corporate innovation. Third, it not only provides the relevant empirical evidence for clarifying the dispute about the Antitrust Law but also is helpful to clarify whether the Chinese Government has “selective law enforcement” against private enterprises.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nankai Business Review International\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nankai Business Review International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/nbri-03-2021-0019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nankai Business Review International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/nbri-03-2021-0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

关于《反垄断法》是否有利于经济发展,有两种相反的观点。一种观点认为,《反垄断法》可以抑制垄断,维护市场竞争,有利于经济增长。另一种观点认为,《反垄断法》抑制了垄断企业的创新,助长了寻租,这不利于经济增长。为了为澄清这一争议提供一个可能的视角,本文旨在回答以下两个问题:第一,《反垄断法》是否会抑制企业创新?第二,反垄断执法机构是否歧视私营企业?设计/方法论/方法基于2003-2013年A股上市公司的样本,以2008年中国《反垄断法》的实施为政策冲击,以各行业的垄断企业为处理组,以竞争企业为对照组,运用差异中的差异法检验《反垄断法》实施对企业创新活动的影响。研究结果表明,与竞争企业相比,《反垄断法》实施后,垄断企业的专利产量显著下降,这表明《反托拉斯法》确实抑制了垄断企业的创新活动。进一步研究发现,《反垄断法》的创新抑制作用在国有企业中更加突出,这意味着政府在执法过程中对民营企业没有“选择性执法”。因此,研究结果为政府干预是中性的观点提供了证据。创新/价值首先,本文从市场结构的角度丰富和拓展了对影响企业创新因素的研究。二是从企业创新的角度丰富和拓展了反垄断法实施后果的相关研究。第三,它不仅为澄清《反垄断法》的争议提供了相关的经验证据,也有助于澄清中国政府是否对私营企业有“选择性执法”。
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
Monopoly and corporate innovation: evidence from antitrust law
Purpose There are two opposite views about whether the Antitrust Law is conducive to the development of the economy. One view is that the Antitrust Law can restrain monopoly, maintain market competition and benefit economic growth. The other view is that the Antitrust Law inhibits innovation by monopolistic firms and fosters rent-seeking, which is bad for economic growth. To provide a possible perspective for clarifying the controversy, this paper aims to answer the following two questions: first, will the Antitrust Law inhibit corporate innovation? Second, does the antitrust enforcement agency discriminate against private enterprises? Design/methodology/approach Based on the samples of A-share listed companies from 2003 to 2013, the authors use the implementation of China’s Antitrust Law in 2008 as a policy shock, take the monopoly enterprises in each industry as the treatment group and competitive enterprises as the control group, using the difference-in-differences method to test the impact of the implementation of the Antitrust Law on corporate innovation activities. Findings The results show that compared with competitive enterprises, the patent output of monopolistic enterprises was significantly reduced after the implementation of the Antitrust Law, which indicates that the Antitrust Law does inhibit the innovation activities of monopolistic enterprises. Further research finds that the innovation suppression effect of the Antitrust Law is more prominent in state-owned enterprises, which means that the government does not have “selective law enforcement” against private enterprises in the process of law enforcement. Therefore, the results provide evidence for the idea that government intervention is neutral. Originality/value First, the paper enriches and expands the research on the factors affecting corporate innovation from the perspective of market structure. Second, it enriches and expands relevant research on the consequences of implementing the Antitrust Law from the perspective of corporate innovation. Third, it not only provides the relevant empirical evidence for clarifying the dispute about the Antitrust Law but also is helpful to clarify whether the Chinese Government has “selective law enforcement” against private enterprises.
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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Nankai Business Review International (NBRI) provides insights in to the adaptation of American and European management theory in China, the differences and exchanges between Chinese and western management styles, the relationship between Chinese enterprises’ management practice and social evolution and showcases the development and evolution of management theories based on Chinese cultural characteristics. The journal provides research of interest to managers and entrepreneurs worldwide with an interest in China as well as research associations and scholars focusing on Chinese problems in business and management.
期刊最新文献
Research on business model innovation of SMEs in the industrial internet era: building theory from the case of PAYA Delegation and salary information disclosure strategies of customer acquisition and retention Enhancing word of mouth in the quick service restaurants: role of perceived brand globalness and localness Can stakeholders’ attention to innovation promote corporate innovation? The effect of referral tasks on customers’ referral likelihood on social platforms
×
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