自我控制回报的创新性溢价
|
摘要
基于产品创新性之间的选择无差异性,诱导出产品创新性-价格均衡机制,给出作为自我控制回报的创新性溢价,并分析其对资本回报率和规模报酬的影响;进一步分析了创新性溢价对产品创新性分布的影响,并探讨市场最低准入创新性对创新性溢价的影响;最后,分析与比较了自我控制成本变化和动态诱惑下的创新性溢价.给出高创新性产品超额收益率的理论来源,为大规模投资提供了基于均衡的动力机制;同时解释了不同市场间持久存在的产品价格差异,为发展中国家相对较多的山寨与假冒高创新性高质量产品的行为提供了新的分析框架.
It has not received attention how the economic system compensates self-control,from those current studies which focus on the axiomatization foundation and decision application of self-control.The study is dedicated to exploring the compensation form concerning self-control cost deeds in the equilibrium framework over the course of product innovativeness enhancement.To achieve this end,the study initially captures the temptation and self-control cost through the gap of values between decision-makers' normative preference and alternative preference regarding return differences of distinct innovative products and associates self-control cost measurement with capital.Then,on the ground of indifferent among products,the study induces an equilibrium price-innovativeness schedule,formulates an innovativeness premium as returns to self-control and investigates the effect of innovativeness premium upon the attribute of returns to scale.Further,this study probes into the impact which innovativeness premium exerts on product innovation ladder in the equilibrium market and which innovativeness change in the minimum innovativeness standard on innovativeness premium.The study conducts a comparative analysis of the innovativeness premiums in the case of expansionary self-control cost function and dynamic temptation.This study acts as a provider of compensating mechanism for self-control,equilibrium-based dynamic mechanism for the decision behavior shifting into a longrun,large scale investment from short-run,small scale investment,and also a theoretic source of return to scale and excess return concerning investment going into product innovativeness.
It has not received attention how the economic system compensates self-control,from those current studies which focus on the axiomatization foundation and decision application of self-control.The study is dedicated to exploring the compensation form concerning self-control cost deeds in the equilibrium framework over the course of product innovativeness enhancement.To achieve this end,the study initially captures the temptation and self-control cost through the gap of values between decision-makers' normative preference and alternative preference regarding return differences of distinct innovative products and associates self-control cost measurement with capital.Then,on the ground of indifferent among products,the study induces an equilibrium price-innovativeness schedule,formulates an innovativeness premium as returns to self-control and investigates the effect of innovativeness premium upon the attribute of returns to scale.Further,this study probes into the impact which innovativeness premium exerts on product innovation ladder in the equilibrium market and which innovativeness change in the minimum innovativeness standard on innovativeness premium.The study conducts a comparative analysis of the innovativeness premiums in the case of expansionary self-control cost function and dynamic temptation.This study acts as a provider of compensating mechanism for self-control,equilibrium-based dynamic mechanism for the decision behavior shifting into a longrun,large scale investment from short-run,small scale investment,and also a theoretic source of return to scale and excess return concerning investment going into product innovativeness.
引文
[1]FEENSTRA R C,ROMALIS J.International prices and endogenous quality[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,2014,129(2):477-527.
[2]NOOR J.Temptation and revealed preference[J].Econometrica,2011,79(2):601-644.
[3]FUDENBERG D,LEVINE D K.A dual-self model of impulse control[J].American Economic Review,2006,96(5):1449-1476.
[4]FUDENBERG D,LEVINE D K.Timing and self-control[J].Econometrica,2012,80(1):1-42.
[5]ILYINA A,SAMANIEGO R.Structural change and financing constraints[J].Journal of Monetary Economics,2012,59(2):166-179.
[6]SHAPIRO C.Premiums for high quality products as returns to reputations[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1983,98(4):659-679.
[7]NOE T H,REBELLO M J,RIETZ T A.Product market efficiency:the bright side of myopic,uninformed,and passive external finance[J].Management Science,2012,58(11):2019-2036.
[8]ROLAND B,TIRLE J.Willpower and personal rules[J].Journal of Political Economy,2004,112(4):848-886.
[9]VOHS K D,BAUMEISTER R F,SCHMEICHEL B J,et al.Making choices impairs subsequent self-control:a limited-resource Account of decision making,self-regulation,and active initiative[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2008,94(5):883-898.
[10]TROPE Y,FISHBACH A.Counteractive self-control in overcoming temptation[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2000,79(4):493-506.
[11]FISHBACH A,SHAH J Y.Self-control in action:implicit dispositions toward goals and away from temptations[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2006,90(5):820-832.
[12]GAILLIOT M T,BAUMEISTER R F,DEWALL C N,et al.Self-control relies on glucose as a limited energy source:willpower Is more than a metaphor[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2007,92(2):325-336.
[13]FISHBACH A,TROPE Y.The substitutability of external control and self-control[J].Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2005,41(3):256-270.
(1)提升产品质量也可以理解为产品创新,投资过程也相同.为行文简洁,以后按照产品创新来行文.
(1)规范或者承诺偏好对应的利率(折现率)等于市场化的均衡利率(折现率)不是一个随意的假设,而是Noor(2011)[2]通过时间远离过程(time distancing)得到的必然结论.
(2)μ含义可能的解释有:基于Fudenberg&Levine(2012)[4]对决策者特征的描述:参数μ表达实践者的行为短期导向程度,其值越小,1)意味着决策者作为实践者时行为选择更倾向于短期导向;2)意味着当前经济体系中短期行为者出现的概率较大;3)意味着该经济体系中企业长期生存概率较低,其经验含义可以由经济体系中从事短期行为的企业的出现频率所提供.当然,也可以按照复合决策主体内部的“次偏好”或者“次个体”之间的冲突来理解:规范偏好对应的折现率δ是着眼于企业长期绩效的“发展者”所持有的时间偏好决定的折现率,而替代偏好对应的折现率δμ,μ∈[0,1)是着眼于企业短期绩效的“生存者”所持有的时间偏好决定的折现率,附加折现率δ可作如下理解:1)企业内部生存者和发展者之间时间偏好的差异程度;2)生存者与发展者之间时间偏好的差异与其在企业内部的话语权差异程度的复合度量.
(3)价格机制满足p′(T*θ,v)≥0,后文给出了相关证明.
(1)此处现金流就是对应产品生产中销售收入减去对应的变动成本,也就是产品的利润贡献流.
(2)根据自我控制的基础理论,自我控制成本是一次性地发生在决策时间点上.
(1)规模报酬现象存在导致创新性决策的必要性.作为任何具体的决策者,其自身资源所能提供的自我控制是依赖于企业所能承受的最大心理成本,关于此方面的进一步讨论请参见WILLPOWER方面的研究,例如文献(Roland&Tirle,2004[8]Vohs;et al,2008[9];Fudenberg&Levine,2012[4]).
(1)这可以认为高收入国家市场中政府所决定的产品质量或者创新性标准要高于低收入国家:发展中国家为了照顾民族工业,通常会制定较低的质量标准,而发达国家最低质量标准通常较高.可以将质量标准理解为产品创新性的市场准入标准.
(2)这可以用来解释山寨与假冒伪劣行为更多出现在发展中国家的现象.
(3)由于创新性T和S(T;T0)正相关,可以证明式(17)所决定的自我控制成本与诱惑价值之间凸相关.
[2]NOOR J.Temptation and revealed preference[J].Econometrica,2011,79(2):601-644.
[3]FUDENBERG D,LEVINE D K.A dual-self model of impulse control[J].American Economic Review,2006,96(5):1449-1476.
[4]FUDENBERG D,LEVINE D K.Timing and self-control[J].Econometrica,2012,80(1):1-42.
[5]ILYINA A,SAMANIEGO R.Structural change and financing constraints[J].Journal of Monetary Economics,2012,59(2):166-179.
[6]SHAPIRO C.Premiums for high quality products as returns to reputations[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1983,98(4):659-679.
[7]NOE T H,REBELLO M J,RIETZ T A.Product market efficiency:the bright side of myopic,uninformed,and passive external finance[J].Management Science,2012,58(11):2019-2036.
[8]ROLAND B,TIRLE J.Willpower and personal rules[J].Journal of Political Economy,2004,112(4):848-886.
[9]VOHS K D,BAUMEISTER R F,SCHMEICHEL B J,et al.Making choices impairs subsequent self-control:a limited-resource Account of decision making,self-regulation,and active initiative[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2008,94(5):883-898.
[10]TROPE Y,FISHBACH A.Counteractive self-control in overcoming temptation[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2000,79(4):493-506.
[11]FISHBACH A,SHAH J Y.Self-control in action:implicit dispositions toward goals and away from temptations[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2006,90(5):820-832.
[12]GAILLIOT M T,BAUMEISTER R F,DEWALL C N,et al.Self-control relies on glucose as a limited energy source:willpower Is more than a metaphor[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2007,92(2):325-336.
[13]FISHBACH A,TROPE Y.The substitutability of external control and self-control[J].Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2005,41(3):256-270.
(1)提升产品质量也可以理解为产品创新,投资过程也相同.为行文简洁,以后按照产品创新来行文.
(1)规范或者承诺偏好对应的利率(折现率)等于市场化的均衡利率(折现率)不是一个随意的假设,而是Noor(2011)[2]通过时间远离过程(time distancing)得到的必然结论.
(2)μ含义可能的解释有:基于Fudenberg&Levine(2012)[4]对决策者特征的描述:参数μ表达实践者的行为短期导向程度,其值越小,1)意味着决策者作为实践者时行为选择更倾向于短期导向;2)意味着当前经济体系中短期行为者出现的概率较大;3)意味着该经济体系中企业长期生存概率较低,其经验含义可以由经济体系中从事短期行为的企业的出现频率所提供.当然,也可以按照复合决策主体内部的“次偏好”或者“次个体”之间的冲突来理解:规范偏好对应的折现率δ是着眼于企业长期绩效的“发展者”所持有的时间偏好决定的折现率,而替代偏好对应的折现率δμ,μ∈[0,1)是着眼于企业短期绩效的“生存者”所持有的时间偏好决定的折现率,附加折现率δ可作如下理解:1)企业内部生存者和发展者之间时间偏好的差异程度;2)生存者与发展者之间时间偏好的差异与其在企业内部的话语权差异程度的复合度量.
(3)价格机制满足p′(T*θ,v)≥0,后文给出了相关证明.
(1)此处现金流就是对应产品生产中销售收入减去对应的变动成本,也就是产品的利润贡献流.
(2)根据自我控制的基础理论,自我控制成本是一次性地发生在决策时间点上.
(1)规模报酬现象存在导致创新性决策的必要性.作为任何具体的决策者,其自身资源所能提供的自我控制是依赖于企业所能承受的最大心理成本,关于此方面的进一步讨论请参见WILLPOWER方面的研究,例如文献(Roland&Tirle,2004[8]Vohs;et al,2008[9];Fudenberg&Levine,2012[4]).
(1)这可以认为高收入国家市场中政府所决定的产品质量或者创新性标准要高于低收入国家:发展中国家为了照顾民族工业,通常会制定较低的质量标准,而发达国家最低质量标准通常较高.可以将质量标准理解为产品创新性的市场准入标准.
(2)这可以用来解释山寨与假冒伪劣行为更多出现在发展中国家的现象.
(3)由于创新性T和S(T;T0)正相关,可以证明式(17)所决定的自我控制成本与诱惑价值之间凸相关.