金融学专业外文翻译----私募股权投资在新兴市场全球化企业中的角色

中文3478字
本科毕业论文外文原文
外文题目：Financial Foreign Direct Investment: The Role of Private Equity Investments in the Globalization of Firms from
Emerging Markets
出处：Management International Review, 2009:11-26 DOI:10.1007 /s11575-008-0122-9
作者：Tamir Agmon and Avi Messica
原文：
1. Introduction
International business and economic development are closely related. When applying to emerging markets, foreign direct investment (FDI) and development economics are two sides of the same coin. In terms of the classical OLI model of the economics of international business, the multinational enterprises (MNE) brings into play the ownership advantage while the governments of emerging markets bring into play the location advantage (Dunning 2000). For most part, the economics and the strategy of international business focused on the MNE while economic geography from Koopman (1957) to Krugman (1991) and later (as well as development economics) have focused on the country in which the investment takes place.
This paper brings together international business development economics and international trade to gain better insights into an important and fascinating phenomenon in the arena of international business –the recent growth of private equity investments in emerging markets. The tremendous growth of private equity investments in emerging markets is evident from the data presented in Table 1. The total went up almost ten times, from about $3.5B to more than $33B in the period 2003-2006. Emerging Asia led the emerging markets with $19.4B raised in 2006 by 93 funds; about a third of the money that was raised by these funds went to China and
India.
The main argument that is presented and discussed in this paper is that private equity investments in emerging markets is another expression of foreign direct investment (FDI) where firms from the developed countries export specific factors of production (their ownership advantage) to small countries and emerging markets (new locations) as a way to generate value to all stakeholders. The firms in the developed countries in this case are specialized financial institutions (private equity funds) (Yoshikawa et al. 2006) and the factor of production that they export is high-risk sector specific capital. We dubbed this form of FDI as financial foreign direct investment (FFDI), but the process and the rational are the same as in the classical FDI analysis. FFDI (synonymous–but not restricted to–for private equity throughout this paper) is a subset of FDI that is solely devoted–as the name implies–for investments in private firms in purpose of generating high return on- investment over a relatively short period (5-7 years). The term “short” is relative and in comparison with the typical investment periods of the investors of private equity funds (e.g., pension funds, endowment funds and the like). At the extreme, i.e., in venture capital investments, investors take into account upfront that some of their investments will be written off at the prospects that few will generate return that will more than compensate those sunk investments (hence the “high-risk” referral). Sector specific capital is a general phenomenon. In many industries such investment is more than mere financial investment and is augmented by specific information that the investor may posses in the form of managerial expertise, deal structuring specialty, networking capabilities and the like. In the case of the high-risk capital industry there is a need to bridge the gap between the risk perception of the investment project by the entrepreneurs or the “insiders” and the investors (most often risk-averse investors), the “outsiders”. This is accomplished by a combination of v alidation processes and screening mechanisms that are engaged by the private equity funds. In this regard they act as financial and risk intermediaries (Coval/Thakor 2005, provide an analytical framework for this approach). The value of the general partners of private equity funds depends on the quality of the risk intermediation that they perform for their investors. This makes them credible and reliable processors of information.
Table 1: Emerging Markets Private Equity Funds Raising, 2003-2006 (US$ Millions)
Emerging Asia CEE
Russia
Latham Sub-Sah
ara
Africa
Middle-
East
Africa
Multi
ple
Regio
ns
Total
2003 2,200 406 417 NA 350 116 3,489 2004 2,800 1,777 714 NA 545 618 6,454 2005 15,446 2,711 1,272 791 1,915 3,630 25,765 2006 19,386 3,272 2,656 2,353 2,946 2,580 33,193 Source: EMPEA (Emerging Markets Private Equity Association) 2007.
The discussion and the analysis presented in this paper draw on three different bodies of literature; the literature of finance and growth from development economics, (Levine 1997, 2004), the literature on comparative advantage in the discussion of patterns of trade (Deardorff 2004) and the literature of imperfect contracts in micro economics and in financial economics (Hart 2001, Zingales 2000).
Financial foreign direct investment as practiced by private equity funds can be a powerful contributor to economic and business growth in emerging markets. FFDI changes the scene of international business as it contributes to a change in the relations between firms in developed countries and firms in the emerging markets. The unique relatively short term nature of a private equity investment makes it an appropriate instrument for the transition period that the world of international business is experiencing regarding the role of emerging markets and the role of China and India in particular. This is so because the short term nature of private equity investments allows firms in emerging markets for sufficient time for transfer of information and learning and yet allow the local stakeholders to resume full ownership once the process is completed.
The relations between the development economics literature on finance and growth and the international business literature is presented and discussed in the next section of the paper. It is shown that the two bodies of literatures are quite related once one penetrates the specific lingo employed by each one of them. The problems in the institutional setting and the lack of sufficient development of the capital
markets in most emerging markets are overcome by creating specific international alliances that generate local comparative advantage. In section three, the concept of local comparative advantage (Deardorff 2004) is used for better understanding of FFDI. The perfect and efficient financial market of the Modern Theory of Finance is replaced by a set of imperfect contracts negotiated and renegotiated between domestic firms in emerging markets and private equity funds from the US and other major capital markets. This issue is discussed and analyzed in section four of the paper. Private equity funds drew a fair amount of criticism lately. The potential of private equity investment in emerging markets is discussed in section five of the paper. The conclusions of the study are briefly discussed in section six, the last section of the paper.
2. Finance, Growth and International Business
In a survey paper on the relations between financial development and economic growth Levine (1997) states that: “…the development of financial markets and in stitutions are critical and inextricable part of the growth process”. He continues and says that: “…financial development is a good predictor of future rates of economic growth, capital accumulation
and technological change. Moreover, cross-country, case study, industry- and firm- level analyses document extensive periods when financial development-or the lack thereof-crucially affect the speed and the pattern of economic development”, (Levine 1997, p. 689). Levine makes two other important points; first that the discussion of finance and developments takes place outside the state-contingent world of Arrow (1964) and Debreu (1959) and the discussion takes place in an incomplete world with imperfect (monopolistic) competition. The second point is that there are three main research questions in the field of finance and development that needs more attention. (1) Why does financial structure change as countries grow? (2) Why do countries at similar stages of economic development have different looking financial systems? and (3) are there longterm economic growth advantages to adopting legal and policy changes that create one type of financial system vis-à-vis another?
The three research questions raised by Levine deal with different aspects of the location of foreign direct investment. In particular, the three research questions deal
with the gap between the potential of a certain country, or countries, as a site for an international oriented investment and the actual investment that has taken place. This is particularly true where the investment from the developed countries is in the form of high-risk sector specific capital such as provided by private equity funds. The potential of some countries in attracting private equity funds is not being fully realized due to the absence of an appropriate financial system. A well developed financial system is necessary to enhance the import of sector specific (high-risk) capital, a necessary condition for FFDI.
As the financial structure of a country changes (as the country grows), it is suggested by Levine in his first question that different types of FDI can be accommodated. The development of FDI in China is an evidence of this process. Yet, as it is proposed in Levine’s second question, the financial markets of countries w ith similar rate of growth develop in different pace and in a different way. There are long-term economic growth advantages of adopting certain patterns of development for the financial market of a given country. In many cases FDI and FFDI do depend on relatively transparent and enforceable corporate governance. Morck, Wolfenzon, and Yeung (2005) demonstrated that economic entrenchment has a high price in foregone growth opportunities.
There are three related problems in creating a domestic financial system for private equity and venture capital investments:
How to mobilize the type and the quantity of savings (capital) appropriate for such investments where most of the capital should be imported from the major capital markets of the world?
How to generate credible information and trust? How to monitor management and to exert corporate control?
The only feasible way to accommodate private equity and venture capital investments in emerging markets is to import sector specific high-risk capital from the US and other major capital markets. The term sector specific capital recognizes the fact that capital is not a unified factor of production (in the same way that there are different types of labor there are different types of capital). High-risk sector specific capital relates to the portfolio of the investors and to the relational capital of the
specific financial intermediaries (i.e., the private equity funds). Most of the high-risk capital in the world is coming from large institutional investors in the US and it is a part of their assets’ management program. (A good example of how such capital relates to the total portfolio is the investment policy of CALPERS the largest pension fund in the US). Due to internal and external regulations, financial institutions cannot make investment unless there is an acceptable level of transparency and corporate governance in the country where the money is invested. Whether such a process is possible in a given developing country and what are the chances that if implemented it will succeed is a very important question. Horii, Ohdoi, and Yamamoto (2005) deal with this issue. They address the question why some developing countries are less successful than others in adopting technologies and more effective financial markets techniq ues. To quote Horii et al. (2005, p. 2): “A fundamental question is why some countries are stuck with poor performance even though it results in primitive financial markets and unproductive technologies”. They conclude that in some cases the expected increase in the income inequality due to the financial led technological changes deters people from adopting financial, legal, and political reforms that will lead to financial, business, and economic development. Morck, Wolfenzon, and Yeung (2005) provide somewhat different answer, also focusing on income distribution but from a point of view of economic entrenchment and rent seeking behavior.
Nowhere the relationship between finance, growth, and international business is more pronounced than in the impressive development of the private equity funds devoted for investment in emerging markets. Table 1 presents data on the growth of private equity funds raised for investment in emerging markets by regions.
The amounts of money raised by private equity funds dedicated for investments in emerging markets went up tremendously in the last five years. More importantly significant amounts were invested to support domestic companies in emerging markets to become more competitive in the global markets by providing their own brands of products to the world’s consumers. Lenovo is a case in point when a major investment by three American private equity funds (Texas Pacific Group, General Atlantic, and Newbridge Capital) was made in a Chinese company with the purpose of making Lenovo a leading competitor in the global market.
译文：
金融类对外直接投资：私募股权投资在新兴市场全球
化企业中的角色
一、简介
国际商业和经济发展密切相关。

当应用到新兴市场时，对外直接投资（FDI）和经济的发展是一个问题的两个方面。

就国际商务经济传统的OLI模型而言，多国企业（跨国公司）带来发挥所有权优势而新兴市场的政府发挥区位优势（邓宁2000年）。

对于大部分，经济学和国际经营战略的重点是跨国公司，而经济地理从库普曼（1957）到克鲁格曼（1991年），后来（还是经济的发展）重点在于一个能够发生投资的国家。

本文汇集了国际业务的发展经济学和国际贸易在国际商业领域里对一个重要的并具有极大吸引力的现象获得更好的见解——私人股权投资在新兴市场近年的增长。

从表1中的数据可以呈现出在新兴市场的私人股权投资的巨大增长是显而易见的。

在2003-2006年期间，从约3.5b美元到多于33B美元，总计上升了近十倍。

亚洲新兴市场在2006年引导新兴市场以93基金筹集19.4B美元，相关的基金所筹集的三分之一的资金是流向中国和印度。

本文提出并探讨的主要论点是，新兴市场的私人股本投资是对外直接投资（FDI）的另一种表现地方，公司从发达国家出口产品的具体因素（其所有权优势）到达小国家和新兴市场（新地点），作为对所有利益相关者创造价值的一种途径。

在这种情况下这种公司在发达国家就是专门的金融机构（私募基金）（吉川等人。

2006年）和产品因素即他们的出口是高风险行业的特定资本。

我们称这种对外直接投资是金融类对外直接投资（FFDI）的形式，但过程和理性在经典的对外直接投资分析中是相同的。

FFDI（同义——但不局限于——贯穿整个文件的私募股权）是对外直接投资仅仅投入的一个子集，-顾名思义-在私人公司投资是为了在一个相对较短的时间(5-7 年)内获得高投资回报的目的。

所谓“短”是相对的，而且与私募基金（如养老基金，捐赠基金等）的投资者典型的投资期相比较。

在极端情况下，例如，在风险资本投资中，投资者考虑到预付账目，它们的较少产生回报的部分投资将被写入计划中，，以更多补偿那些亏本投资（因此推荐“高风险”）。

特定行业的资本是一种普遍的现象。

在许多行业，例如投
资不仅仅是金融投资，还是增加了具体的信息使得投资者可以具备管理经验，交易结构设计专业化，具有网络功能之类的形式。

以高风险资本业为例需要缩小企业家或行内人和投资者（通常是风险厌恶的投资者）及行外人在投资项目中的风险认知差距。

这是通过所从事的私募基金流程的验证和筛选机制的结合完成的。

在这方面，他们（科瓦尔/ Thakor 2005年，为这一途径提供了一个分析框架）成为了金融和风险中介机构。

私人股权基金的普通合伙人的价值取决于他们为他们的投资者履行的风险中介的质量。

这使它们的信息和处理能力是可靠的。

表1：新兴市场私募股权集资，2003-2006（百万美元）
亚洲新兴市场中欧和
东欧俄
罗斯
拉丁美
洲
撒哈拉
以南非
洲
中东非
洲
多区域总计
2003 2,200 406 417 NA 350 116 3,489 2004 2,800 1,777 714 NA 545 618 6,454 2005 15,446 2,711 1,272 791 1,915 3,630 25,765 2006 19,386 3,272 2,656 2,353 2,946 2,580 33,193 来源：EMPEA（新兴市场私募股权协会）2007。

这篇论文的讨论和分析动用了三个不同机构的文献；财政文献和发展经济学的增长（莱文1997年，2004年），在讨论贸易模式中具有比较优势的文献（迪尔多夫2004年），在微观经济学和金融经济学中存在不完善的合同的文献（哈特2001年，津加莱斯2000年）。

作为实行私募股权投资基金，金融类对外直接投资是经济和新兴市场业务增长的强大贡献者。

FFDI改变了国际商业界，因为它改变了在新兴市场与发达国家的公司之间的关系。

独特的相对短期性质的私人股权投资使其成为过渡期适当的工具，国际商业界正在经历有关新兴市场的作用，特别是中国和印度的作用。

之所以如此，是因为短期的私人股本投资允许公司在新兴市场中有在哦够时间转让信息和学习，一旦过程完成还允许当地利益相关者回复全部所有权。

发展经济学文献对金融和经济增长与国际商业文献之间的关系在论文的下一节提出和讨论。

据文献表明，一旦其中一个越过行情迅速增长，这两个机构都相当相当相关。

在机构设置问题和资本市场的缺乏充分发展在大多数新兴市场通过创建特定的国际联盟来克服，以产生局部相对的优势。

在第三部分，地方比较优势的概念（迪尔多夫2004年）用于FFDI对更好地了解。

现代金融理论中完美
和高效的金融市场在新兴市场的国内企业和美国私募投资基金以及其他主要资本市场被一种不确切的合同谈判和重新谈判设置所取代。

这个问题在论文的第四节进行了讨论和分析。

私募基金最近引起了相当多的批评。

私人股权投资在新兴市场的潜力在论文的第五部分进行了讨论。

这项研究的结论在第六部分即论文的最后一节进行了简要讨论。

二、财务，经济增长和国际商务
在关于金融发展与经济增长的关系调查的文件中莱文（1997）指出：“...金融市场和机构的发展是成长过程中至关重要的和不可分割的一部分。

”他继续说，说：“．．．．．．金融发展是对未来经济增长利率，资本积累及技术变革很好的预测。

此外，绕过国内、个案研究，当金融业的发展或缺乏其中的关键影响速度和经济发展模式，是行业和企业层面的分析文件的广泛时期”，（莱文1997年，第689页）。

莱文另外提出了两个重要观点：第一，金融和发展的讨论发生在代表区域（1964年）和德布鲁（1959）之外，以及辩论发生在存在不完美（即垄断）竞争的地方。

第二个观点是，在需要更多关注的金融和发展领域有三个主要研究问题。

（1）为什么当国家成长时金融结构会发生变化？（2）一国为什么在同样的经济发展阶段有不同表现的金融体系？（三）长期经济增长的优势通过法律和政策变化，能创建一个与另一个相对的金融体系吗？
莱文提出的三个研究问题处理与区域对外直接投资不同的方面。

尤其，当一个国际化的投资和实际投资的地点已经产生时，三个研究问题处理的某个国家或所有国家之间的潜在差距。

这一点尤其如此，发达国家的投资在高风险行业有特定的资本形式，如由私募股权基金提供。

一些国家在吸引私募股权基金的潜力由于缺乏适当的金融体系没有得到充分实现。

一个成熟的金融体系是加强特殊行业（高风险）资本的进口的需要，也是FFDI的必要条件。

当一个国家金融结构发生变化（如国家成长），莱文在他的第一个问题里建议不同类型的对外直接投资可以得到满足。

对外直接投资在中国的发展是这过程的凭据。

还有，国家金融市场以不同速度和不同的方式于经济发展有相似的比率，这是莱文的第二个问题里所提到的。

某个国家的金融市场采取一定的发展模式有长期经济增长优势。

在许多情况下，FDI和FFDI取决于相对透明和可实施的企业管治。

Morck，Wolfenzon，和Yeung（2005）表明，经济优势已经在放弃价格高增长机会。

有三个与开创国内私人股本和风险资本投资的金融系统相关的问题：
如何调动储蓄（资本）的类型和数量适合大部分资金从世界主要资本市场进口的投资？
如何产生可靠的信息和信任？如何监控管理和发挥企业控制？
适应私人股本和风险资本在新兴市场的投资唯一可行的办法是从美国和其他主要资本市场进口特定行业的高风险资本。

长期的特定行业资本承认这样一个事实，即资本不是一个统一的产品要素（劳动类型不同，资本类型不同而用同样的方式）。

高风险行业特定资本关系到投资者的投资组合以及金融中介的关系资本（例如，私人股权基金）。

在世界上的大多高风险资本是来自美国的大型机构投资者，这是他们的资产管理计划的一部分。

（一个关于这些资本如何涉及到总投资组合的很好的例子是美国最大的养老基金加利福尼亚政府雇员退休系统）。

由于内部和外部法规，除非有一个提供投资资金的国家的透明度和公司治理达到可接受的水平，否则金融机构不能进行投资。

这个过程是在一个特定的发展中国家是否可能以及什么是其实施成功的机会，将是一个非常重要的问题。

Horii, Ohdoi, 和 Yamamoto（2005）解决了这个问题。

他们处理了这个问题：为什么一些发展中国家比其他在通过技术和更为有效的使用金融市场技术的国家不成功。

引用于Horii等。

（2005年，第2页）：“一个根本的问题是，尽管他导致了原始的金融市场和非生产性技术，为什么一些国家表现欠佳。

”他们得出结论，在某些情况下，预期增加的收入不平等导致阻碍了人们通过金融主导的致力于金融，商务和经济发展的金融，法律和政治改革。

Morck, Wolfenzon, 和 Yeung（2005）提供的答案有所不同，重点在于收入分配而不是经济巩固观点和寻租行为。

任何地方的金融，经济增长和国际商务之间的关系比在新兴市场投入资金私人股本投资骄人的发展更为明显。

表一列出投资在地区的新兴市场的私人股权投资资金增长数据。

在过去的五年由私募基金筹集的资金款项专用于新兴市场的投资大幅上升。

更重要的是大量投资于以支持支持新兴市场的国内公司向全世界的消费者提供自己的品牌产品，从而在全球市场更有竞争力。

联想是一个很好的例子，一个中国公司以使联想在全球市场领先竞争对手的目的，作出主要由三个美国私募股本基金（德克萨斯太平洋集团，美国泛大西洋投资集团和新桥资本集团）组成的投资。