Do Inquiry Letters Curb Corporate Catering Motives of High Sustainable R&D Investment? Empirical Evidence from China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis Development
2.1. RDILs Supervision and R&D Investment Strategy for Catering Motives
2.2. Market Pressure and the Regulatory Effect of RDILs
3. Research Design, Data Sources, and Variable Measurements
3.1. Data Sources and Sample Selection
3.2. Variable Measurement and Model Set
- (1)
- Sizeit, the total assets of the company in year t, and take the natural logarithm.
- (2)
- Levit, total liabilities of the company in year t divided by total assets.
- (3)
- Roeit, the roe of the company in year t, expressed as net income divided by total equity.
- (4)
- Magit, the percentage of management shareholding in the company in year t, expressed as a percentage of the company’s shares held by the company’s management.
- (5)
- Ageit, the number of years the company has been listed in year t, expressed as the difference between the current year and the IPO year.
- (6)
- Tobinqit, the Tobin’s Q ratio of the firm in year t, expressed as the ratio of the sum of the market value of equity and debt to the book value of total assets.
- (7)
- Cashit, the firm’s cash holdings in year t, expressed as the percentage of cash holdings to the firm’s total assets.
- (8)
- Stateit, the ownership variable of the firm in year t, taking 1 if the ultimate controller is state-owned, and 0 otherwise.
- (9)
- Inqit, the variable whether the company receives other kinds of inquiry letters in year t. The company takes 1 if it receives other kinds of inquiry letters in the current year, and 0 otherwise.
- (10)
- Emit, the variable of the quality of earnings information of the company in year t, expressed as the absolute value of the firm’s manipulative accrual for the current year; the Jones model was used for this calculation [28].
- (11)
- Rdit, the ratio of the company’s R&D expenses to total assets in the year t.
4. Empirical Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistics of Main Variables
4.2. Main Results: RDILs Supervision on Catering Motives of High Sustainable R&D Investment
4.3. Tests for Market Pressure and the Regulatory Effect of RDILs
4.4. Further Analysis: Impact of RDILs Supervision on the Strategic R&D Classification
5. Robustness Checks
5.1. Robustness Checks of Alternative Measures to the Original Dependent Variable
5.2. Self-Selection Issues
5.3. Results of Propensity Score Matching
5.4. Results of Conditional Fixed Effects Logit Estimation
6. Conclusions and Discussion
6.1. Conclusions
6.2. Policy Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Yu, Y.; Xu, Q. Influencing Factors of Enterprise R&D Investment: Post-Subsidy, Sustainability, and Heterogeneity. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5759. [Google Scholar]
- Cunningham, L.M.; Johnson, B.A.; Johnson, E.S.; Lisic, L.L. The Switch-Up: An Examination of Changes in Earnings Management after Receiving SEC Comment Letters. Contemp. Account. Res. 2022, 37, 917–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnston, R.; Petacchi, R. Regulatory Oversight of Financial Reporting: Securities and Exchange Commission Comment Letters. Contemp. Account. Res. 2017, 34, 1128–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gietzmann, M.B.; Pettinicchio, A.K. External Auditor Reassessment of Client Business Risk Following the Issuance of a Comment Letter by the SEC. Eur. Account. Rev. 2014, 23, 57–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ettredge, M.; Simon, D.; Smith, D.; Stone, M. Why Do Companies Purchase Timely Quarterly Reviews? J. Account. Econ. 1994, 18, 131–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, T.; Zhang, H. Does Counter-Cyclical Monetary Policy Promote Enterprise R&D Investment in a Recession? Empirical Evidence from China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6076. [Google Scholar]
- Polk, C.; Sapienza, P. The Stock Market and Corporate Investment: A Test of Catering Theory. Rev. Financ. Stud. 2008, 22, 187–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yu, Y.; Lee, Y.T.; Fok, R.C.W. The Determinants of High-Interest Entrusted Loans in China. J. Bus. Fin. Acc. 2021, 48, 405–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, P.; Zhou, M.; Xu, J.; Liu, Y. Financialization, Government Subsidies, and Manufacturing R&D Investment: Evidence from Listed Companies in China. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12633. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, W.; Du, M.; Bai, Y. Mechanisms of Environmental Regulation’s Impact on Green Technological Progress—Evidence from China’s Manufacturing Sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Chen, Z.; Li, J. Can Trade Credit Maintain Sustainable R&D Investment of SMEs?—Evidence from China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 843. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, L.; Li, J.; Zander, P. Can Political Connections Maintain the Sustainability of R&D Investment in China? There Is No Such Thing as a Free Lunch. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4238. [Google Scholar]
- Bushee, B.J. The Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior. Account. Rev. 1998, 73, 305–333. [Google Scholar]
- Garg, M.; Peach, K.; Simnett, R. Evidence-informed Approach to Setting Standards: A Discussion on the Research Strategies of AASB and AUASB. Aust. Account. Rev. 2020, 30, 243–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinnuck, M.; Stevenson, K. Enhancing the Interface between Standard-setters and Academic Research. Aust. Account. Rev. 2021, 31, 169–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Troshani, I.; Rowbottom, N. Digital Corporate Reporting: Research Developments and Implications. Aust. Account. Rev. 2021, 31, 213–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, V.H.; Agbola, F.W.; Choi, B. Does Corporate Social Responsibility Enhance Financial Performance? Evidence from Australia. Aust. Account. Rev. 2022, 32, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saha, A.K.; Al-Shaer, H.; Dixon, R.; Demirag, I. Determinants of Carbon Emission Disclosures and UN sustainable Development Goals: The Case of UK Higher Education Institutions. Aust. Account. Rev. 2021, 31, 79–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bozanic, Z.; Dietrich, J.R.; Johnson, B.A. SEC Comment Letters and Firm Disclosure. J. Account. Public. Pol. 2017, 36, 337–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, Y.; Xu, Z. Audit Firm’s Confucianism and Stock Price Crash Risk: Evidence from China. Int. Rev. Financ. Anal. 2022, 79, 101995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- An, Z.; Li, D.; Yu, J. Firm Crash Risk, Information Environment, and Speed of Leverage Adjustment. J. Corp. Financ 2015, 31, 132–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, L.; Liu, J.; Peng, Y. Locality Stereotype, CEO Trustworthiness and Stock Price Crash Risk: Evidence from China. J. Bus. Ethics 2022, 175, 773–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, V.W.; Tian, X.; Tice, S. Does Stock Liquidity Enhance or Impede Firm Innovation? J. Financ. 2014, 69, 2085–2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, X.; Chen, Y.; Zolotoy, L. Stock Liquidity and Stock Price Crash Risk. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 2017, 52, 1605–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fuller, J.; Jensen, M.C. Just Say No to Wall Street: Putting a Stop to The Earnings Game. J. Appl. Corp. Financ. 2010, 22, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.B.; Li, Y.; Zhang, L. CFOs versus CEOs: Equity Incentives and Crashes. J. Financ. Econ. 2011, 101, 713–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cosci, S.; Meliciani, V.; Sabato, V. Relationship Lending and Innovation: Empirical Evidence on a Sample of European Firms. Econ. Innov. New. Tech. 2016, 25, 335–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jones, J. Earnings Management during Import Relief Investigations. J. Account. Res. 1991, 29, 193–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gow, I.D.; Ormazabal, G.; Taylor, D.J. Correcting for Cross-Sectional and Time-Series Dependence in Accounting Research. Account. Rev. 2010, 85, 483–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laplante, S.K.; Skaife, H.A.; Swenson, L.A.; Wangerin, D.D. Limits of Tax Regulation: Evidence from Strategic R&D Classification and the R&D Tax Credit. J. Account. Public. Pol. 2019, 38, 89–105. [Google Scholar]
- Grabowski, H.; Vernon, J. The Determinants of Research and Development Expenditures in the Pharmaceutical Industry. In Drugs and Health; Helms, R., Ed.; American Enterprise Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 1981; pp. 3–21. [Google Scholar]
- McCutchen, W. Estimating the Impact of the R&D Tax Credit on Strategic Groups in The Pharmaceutical Industry. Res. Policy. 1993, 22, 337–351. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, W.; Vasarhelyi, M. Accounting and Financial Control for R&D Expenditures. Stud. Manag. Sci. 1980, 15, 199–213. [Google Scholar]
- Biddle, G.; Hilary, G.; Verdi, R. How Does Financial Reporting Quality Relate to Investment Efficiency? J. Account. Econ. 2009, 48, 112–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, M. Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers. Am. Econ. Rev. 1986, 76, 323–329. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, J.; Fazzari, S.; Petersen, B. Financing Innovation and Growth: Cash Flow, External Equity, and the 1990s R&D Boom. J. Financ. 2009, 64, 151–185. [Google Scholar]
- Heckman, J.J. Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error. Econometrica 1979, 47, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bushee, B.J.; Leuz, C. Economic Consequences of SEC Disclosure Regulation: Evidence from the OTC Bulletin Board. J. Account. Econ. 2005, 39, 233–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Du, X.; Jian, W.; Lai, S.; Du, Y.; Pei, H. Does Religion Mitigate Earnings Management? Evidence from China. J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 131, 699–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bloom, M.; Milkovich, G.T. Relationships among Risk, Incentive Pay, and Organizational Performance. Acad. Manag. J. 1998, 41, 283–297. [Google Scholar]
- Dehejia, R.H.; Wahba, S. Propensity Score-Matching Methods for Nonexperimental Causal Studies. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2002, 84, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rosenbaum, P.; Rubin, D. The Central Role of The Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika 1983, 70, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ethan, K. Bias in Conditional and Unconditional Fixed Effects Logit Estimation. Polit. Anal. 2001, 9, 379–384. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, M.H.; Shrestha, K.M. Analysis of the Long-Term Relationship Between Macro-Economic Variables and The Chinese Stock Market Using Heteroscedastic Cointegration. Manag. Financ. 2008, 34, 744–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | N | Mean | Std. Dev. | Q1 | Median | Q3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
rdsit+1 | 11,822 | 0.032 | 0.176 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Inqrdit | 11,822 | 0.036 | 0.186 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Crashit | 11,822 | 0.320 | 0.466 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Illiqdit | 11,822 | 0.610 | 0.853 | 0.164 | 0.327 | 0.692 |
Shortit | 11,822 | 0.059 | 0.235 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Sizeit | 11,822 | 22.340 | 1.293 | 21.439 | 22.179 | 23.062 |
Levit | 11,822 | 0.423 | 0.201 | 0.263 | 0.414 | 0.569 |
Roeit | 11,822 | 0.051 | 0.160 | 0.029 | 0.067 | 0.111 |
Magit | 11,822 | 0.142 | 0.196 | 0 | 0.014 | 0.269 |
Ageit | 11,822 | 10.759 | 7.453 | 4 | 9 | 18 |
Tobinqit | 11,822 | 2.081 | 1.807 | 0.998 | 1.540 | 2.549 |
Cashit | 11,822 | 0.146 | 0.111 | 0.068 | 0.116 | 0.190 |
Stateit | 11,822 | 0.317 | 0.465 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Inqit | 11,822 | 0.215 | 0.411 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Emit | 11,822 | 0.055 | 0.057 | 0.017 | 0.038 | 0.070 |
Rdit | 11,822 | 0.002 | 0.010 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Variable | (1) Coeff. | (2) Marginal Effects |
---|---|---|
Inqrdit | 0.607 *** | 0.022 ** |
(2.96) | (2.29) | |
Sizeit | −0.080 *** | −0.002 *** |
(−3.17) | (−3.23) | |
Levit | −0.461 | −0.012 |
(−1.21) | (−1.22) | |
Roeit | −0.960 *** | −0.026 *** |
(−4.24) | (−4.30) | |
Magit | 0.201 | 0.005 |
(1.08) | (1.09) | |
Ageit | −0.006 | −0.000 |
(−0.40) | (−0.40) | |
Tobinqit | −0.071 * | −0.002 * |
(−1.91) | (−1.93) | |
Cashit | −0.159 | −0.004 |
(−0.28) | (−0.28) | |
Stateit | −0.226 * | −0.006 * |
(−1.72) | (−1.78) | |
Inqit | 0.023 | 0.001 |
(0.22) | (0.22) | |
Emit | −1.824 ** | −0.049 ** |
(−2.45) | (−2.46) | |
Rdit | 5.222 | 0.141 |
(1.53) | (1.49) | |
Constant | −0.930 | |
(−1.56) | ||
Industry | Yes | |
Year | Yes | |
Obs. | 11,822 | |
PseudoR2 | 0.031 |
Charit = Crashit | Charit = Illiqdit | Charit = Shortit | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | (1) Coeff. | (2) Marginal Effects | (3) Coeff. | (4) Marginal Effects | (5) Coeff. | (6) Marginal Effects |
Inqrdit | 0.890 *** | 0.036 *** | 0.830 *** | 0.033 *** | 0.634 *** | 0.023 ** |
(4.42) | (3.05) | (3.75) | (2.65) | (2.89) | (2.20) | |
Inqrdit × Charit | −0.718 ** | −0.014 *** | −0.483 *** | −0.013 ** | −0.230 *** | −0.006 *** |
(−2.28) | (−3.19) | (−2.60) | (−2.57) | (−10.24) | (−10.51) | |
Charit | 0.032 | 0.001 | 0.017 | 0.000 | 0.103 | 0.003 |
(0.41) | (0.41) | (0.17) | (0.17) | (0.45) | (0.44) | |
Sizeit | −0.080 *** | −0.002 *** | −0.081 * | −0.002 * | −0.083 *** | −0.002 *** |
(−2.91) | (−2.95) | (−1.91) | (−1.95) | (−2.68) | (−2.73) | |
Levit | −0.455 | −0.012 | −0.464 | −0.012 | −0.461 | −0.012 |
(−1.17) | (−1.17) | (−1.21) | (−1.21) | (−1.23) | (−1.24) | |
Roeit | −0.996 *** | −0.027 *** | −0.942 *** | −0.025 *** | −0.963 *** | −0.026 *** |
(−4.98) | (−5.04) | (−4.37) | (−4.39) | (−4.22) | (−4.30) | |
Magit | 0.196 | 0.005 | 0.189 | 0.005 | 0.203 | 0.005 |
(1.07) | (1.08) | (0.89) | (0.90) | (1.06) | (1.07) | |
Ageit | −0.006 | −0.000 | −0.006 | −0.000 | −0.006 | −0.000 |
(−0.42) | (−0.42) | (−0.42) | (−0.42) | (−0.40) | (−0.40) | |
Tobinqit | −0.071 * | −0.002 ** | −0.073 * | −0.002 * | −0.072 * | −0.002 * |
(−1.95) | (−1.97) | (−1.89) | (−1.90) | (−1.80) | (−1.82) | |
Cashit | −0.130 | −0.003 | −0.155 | −0.004 | −0.156 | −0.004 |
(−0.23) | (−0.23) | (−0.27) | (−0.27) | (−0.28) | (−0.28) | |
Stateit | −0.231 * | −0.006 * | −0.226 * | −0.006 * | −0.226 * | −0.006 * |
(−1.72) | (−1.79) | (−1.74) | (−1.80) | (−1.72) | (−1.78) | |
Inqit | 0.018 | 0.000 | 0.024 | 0.001 | 0.022 | 0.001 |
(0.18) | (0.18) | (0.23) | (0.23) | (0.21) | (0.21) | |
Emit | −1.839 ** | −0.049 ** | −1.806 ** | −0.049 ** | −1.837 ** | −0.050 ** |
(−2.42) | (−2.43) | (−2.45) | (−2.46) | (−2.52) | (−2.53) | |
Rdit | 5.205 | 0.140 | 5.040 | 0.136 | 5.150 | 0.139 |
(1.45) | (1.42) | (1.45) | (1.42) | (1.50) | (1.47) | |
Constant | −0.933 | −0.890 | −0.877 | |||
(−1.31) | (−0.87) | (−1.36) | ||||
Industry | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
Year | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
Obs. | 11,822 | 11,822 | 11,822 | |||
PseudoR2 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.031 |
Variable | (1) Non-Receiving Group | (2) Receiving Group | (3) Homogeneity Test of Variance (F Value) | (4) The Difference in Means (Unequal) | (5) Test for Differences in Means (t Value) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Srdcit−3 | −0.01 | 0.212 | −0.538 | −0.222 ** | (−2.420) |
Srdcit−2 | −0.035 | 0.188 | −0.472 | −0.223 ** | (−2.497) |
Srdcit−1 | −0.028 | 0.368 | −0.345 | −0.397 *** | (−3.836) |
Srdcit | −0.015 | 0.15 | −0.374 | −0.165 | (−1.632) |
Srdcit+1 | −0.02 | 0.144 | −0.381 | −0.164 | (−1.609) |
Srdcit+2 | −0.016 | 0.169 | −0.364 | −0.185 | (−1.192) |
Srdcit+3 | −0.027 | 0.323 | −0.303 | −0.35 | (−1.388) |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | Srdcit | Srdcit+1 | Srdcit+2 | Srdcit+3 |
Inqrdit | 0.047 | 0.111 | 0.131 | 0.436 *** |
(0.58) | (1.30) | (0.64) | (3.16) | |
Inqrdit × Srdcit−1 | −0.086 *** | −0.164 *** | −0.184 | −0.039 |
(−3.57) | (−4.63) | (−1.17) | (−0.28) | |
Srdcit−1 | −0.005 | 0.028 * | 0.021 | 0.036 |
(−0.48) | (1.93) | (0.74) | (0.84) | |
Sizeit | 0.025 | 0.034 ** | 0.022 ** | 0.022 ** |
(1.13) | (2.08) | (2.31) | (2.46) | |
Levit | −0.133 * | −0.145 ** | 0.022 | 0.043 |
(−1.91) | (−2.03) | (0.15) | (0.33) | |
Roeit | −0.945 *** | −0.285 ** | −0.056 | −0.057 |
(−9.76) | (−2.13) | (−0.19) | (−0.38) | |
Magit | −0.035 | 0.225 ** | 0.113 | 0.127 |
(−0.73) | (2.11) | (0.60) | (0.48) | |
Ageit | −0.001 | 0.002 | −0.001 | −0.000 |
(−1.04) | (1.36) | (−0.46) | (−0.15) | |
Tobinqit | 0.028 * | 0.018 | 0.037 ** | 0.038 |
(1.77) | (1.00) | (2.17) | (1.33) | |
Cashit | 0.077 | 0.113 | 0.055 | −0.373 ** |
(0.59) | (0.98) | (0.21) | (−2.15) | |
Stateit | −0.045 *** | −0.065 ** | −0.082 ** | −0.084 *** |
(−2.70) | (−2.00) | (−2.22) | (−4.09) | |
Inqit | −0.032 | 0.025 | 0.062 | −0.066 |
(−0.99) | (0.47) | (0.63) | (−1.43) | |
Emit | 0.486 | 0.528 *** | 0.260 | −0.121 |
(1.54) | (2.85) | (0.77) | (−0.01) | |
Rdit | 18.307 *** | 11.279 *** | 7.955 * | 2.493 |
(6.77) | (12.23) | (1.90) | (0.71) | |
Constant | −0.619 | −0.777 ** | −0.396 | −0.323 |
(−1.27) | (−2.00) | (−1.18) | (−1.17) | |
Industry | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Year | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Obs. | 10,066 | 10,041 | 7345 | 5068 |
Adj_R2 | 0.036 | 0.013 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
(1) | (2) | |
---|---|---|
Variables | rdsit+1(median) | rdsit+1(area) |
Inqrdit | 0.455 * | 0.678 ** |
(1.81) | (2.12) | |
Sizeit | −0.077 | −0.163 *** |
(−0.98) | (−4.45) | |
Levit | −0.053 | −0.055 |
(−0.29) | (−0.26) | |
Roeit | −0.944 *** | −0.739 *** |
(−3.42) | (−2.89) | |
Magit | 0.430 * | 0.586 |
(1.94) | (1.00) | |
Ageit | −0.005 | 0.010 |
(−1.19) | (0.68) | |
Tobinqit | −0.054 ** | −0.090 * |
(−2.03) | (−1.93) | |
Cashit | −0.958 ** | −1.046 ** |
(−1.98) | (−2.06) | |
Stateit | 0.103 | 0.096 |
(1.25) | (0.85) | |
Inqit | −0.278 ** | −0.280 |
(−2.31) | (−1.34) | |
Emit | −0.741 * | 1.236 *** |
(−1.80) | (6.09) | |
Rdit | −3.917 | −1.658 |
(−0.72) | (−0.25) | |
Constant | −1.178 | 0.398 |
(−0.69) | (0.49) | |
Industry | Yes | Yes |
Year | Yes | Yes |
Obs. | 11,822 | 11,822 |
PseudoR2 | 0.015 | 0.022 |
(1) | (2) | |
---|---|---|
Variable | Inqrdit | rdsit+1 |
Csecit | 0.011 *** | |
(4.53) | ||
Salaryit | 0.008 * | |
(1.72) | ||
Inqrdit | 0.609 *** | |
(2.91) | ||
Sizeit | −0.105 *** | −0.050 |
(−3.79) | (−0.33) | |
Levit | 0.612 *** | −0.633 |
(4.17) | (−0.81) | |
Roeit | −0.612 *** | −0.801 |
(−5.25) | (−0.74) | |
Magit | −0.373 ** | 0.308 |
(−2.41) | (0.40) | |
Ageit | 0.011 *** | −0.009 * |
(2.60) | (−1.84) | |
Tobinqit | 0.001 | −0.071 * |
(0.06) | (−1.83) | |
Cashit | −0.237 | −0.088 |
(−0.95) | (−0.11) | |
Stateit | −0.286 *** | −0.145 |
(−4.30) | (−0.42) | |
Emit | 1.075 *** | −2.121 |
(2.74) | (−1.13) | |
Rdit | 8.989 *** | 2.850 |
(5.86) | (0.24) | |
Inqit | 0.022 | |
(0.20) | ||
IMR | −0.321 | |
(−0.17) | ||
Constant | −0.546 | −0.915 |
(−0.71) | (−1.32) | |
Industry | Yes | Yes |
Year | Yes | Yes |
Obs. | 11,822 | 11,822 |
Adj_R2 | 0.132 | 0.031 |
rdsit+1 | ||
---|---|---|
Variable | (1) Coeff. | (2) Marginal Effects |
Inqrdit | 0.482 *** | 0.008 *** |
(4.01) | (6.08) | |
Sizeit | −0.154 | −0.003 |
(−0.70) | (−0.69) | |
Levit | −0.115 | −0.002 |
(−0.35) | (−0.34) | |
Roeit | −0.032 | −0.001 |
(−0.12) | (−0.12) | |
Magit | 0.345 | 0.006 |
(0.46) | (0.45) | |
Ageit | 0.008 | 0.000 |
(0.37) | (0.37) | |
Tobinqit | 0.059 | 0.001 |
(0.63) | (0.64) | |
Cashit | −0.102 | −0.002 |
(−0.05) | (−0.05) | |
Stateit | 0.044 | 0.001 |
(0.78) | (0.85) | |
Emit | −3.180 | −0.052 |
(−1.61) | (−1.53) | |
Rdit | 6.926 | 0.114 |
(0.93) | (0.97) | |
Constant | −11.053 ** | |
(−1.98) | ||
Industry | Yes | |
Year | Yes | |
Obs. | 846 | |
PseudoR2 | 0.067 |
rdsit+1 | ||
---|---|---|
Variable | (1) Coeff. | (2) Marginal Effects |
Inqrdit | 0.594 * | 0.587 ** |
(1.89) | (2.40) | |
Sizeit | −1.107 *** | −0.057 |
(−3.67) | (−0.95) | |
Levit | 0.932 | −0.320 |
(1.08) | (0.348) | |
Roeit | −0.599 | −0.915 *** |
(−1.33) | (−2.77) | |
Magit | −0.106 | 0.173 |
(−0.10) | (0.55) | |
Ageit | −0.028 | −0.010 |
(−0.48) | (−1.05) | |
Tobinqit | −0.147 ** | 0.004 |
(−2.39) | (0.11) | |
Cashit | 0.335 | −0.403 |
(0.35) | (−0.78) | |
Stateit | 0.545 | −0.299 ** |
(0.99) | (−1.99) | |
Inqit | −0.071 | −0.051 |
(−0.40) | (0.72) | |
Emit | −2.902 ** | −2.163 ** |
(−2.11) | (−2.04) | |
Rdit | 5.769 | 5.330 |
(0.44) | (1.40) | |
Obs. | 11,822 | |
PseudoR2 | 0.0289 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yu, Y.; Lee, Y.-T. Do Inquiry Letters Curb Corporate Catering Motives of High Sustainable R&D Investment? Empirical Evidence from China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7476. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127476
Yu Y, Lee Y-T. Do Inquiry Letters Curb Corporate Catering Motives of High Sustainable R&D Investment? Empirical Evidence from China. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7476. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127476
Chicago/Turabian StyleYu, Yan, and Yi-Tsung Lee. 2022. "Do Inquiry Letters Curb Corporate Catering Motives of High Sustainable R&D Investment? Empirical Evidence from China" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7476. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127476