【正文】 ress brought on by a operating shortfall, firms that derive much of their operating ine from opaque assets may have difficulty quickly liquidating these assets at fair market value in order to raise capital to avert financial distress. This is due to the information asymmetries normally associated with opaque assets and the relative lack of marketability for such assets. The second asset characteristic we examine is growth options. Firms with growth options have much of the firm’s value tied to future, and as yet, unrealized cash flows. Because of the uncertain nature of the payoff from such assets, the value of these investments is unlikely to be fully realized in bankruptcy. If, after adopting ERM, the firm considers financial distress to be less likely (through a reduction in lower tail outes), we expect to observe greater investment in opaque assets and assets with growth options. Source: Pagach, Donald P. and Warr, Richard S. 2021 “The Effects of Enterprise Risk Management on Firm Performance”. Available at SSRN: July 6, 2021. 譯文 ： 企業(yè)風(fēng)險管理對企業(yè)績效的影響 我們研究 企業(yè)采用 企業(yè)風(fēng)險管理 （ ERM） 原則 對公司長期業(yè)績產(chǎn)生的影響，通過 分析使用 ERM 期間公司財務(wù) 、 資產(chǎn)和市場特征 發(fā)生的 變化。 captured in the following statement: “There is clearly a heightened awareness of the need to manage risks more strategically in order to achieve expected shareholder value (The Conference Board, July 2021)”. Under this view ERM creates value by identifying and proactively addressing risks. Third, do firms’ financial characteristics, such as leverage, growth and asset opacity change after ERM implementation? This research question examines the effect that ERM has on the firm and whether ERM processes change critical risk interdependencies. Proponents argue that an additional benefit of initiating ERM is that it allows firms to seize opportunities by allowing managers to better identify and more effectively assess capital needs and improve capital allocation (COSO, 2021). Understanding whether or not ERM is achieving its stated goals is an important question. First, significant resources, both corporate and governmental are being expended on understanding, developing and implementing ERM programs. Second, even if ERM provides a consistent process for risk identification it is possible that the benefits are not significant enough to bee evident in the firm’s financial performance. ERM is not a costless activity, and as such, if it fails to deliver observable benefits, its implementation may be called into question. As a preview of our results we find little evidence that adoption of ERM results in significant changes in our sample firms. However, when we examine a subset of firms for whom the market perceived ERM adoption as most beneficial, we find some evidence of risk reduction. 2. Hypothesis Development In a frictionless capital market with no asymmetric information, risk management at the firm level should be a negative NPV project. However, Stulz (1996, 2021) and Nocco and Stulz (2021) present arguments under which risk management activities could be value increasing for shareholders when agency costs, market imperfections and information asymmetries interfere with the operation of perfect capital markets. Although risk is generally considered to be the possibility of outes that deviate from what was expected, it is primarily negative outes that are of most concern to firms. Stulz (1996, 2021) argues that any potential value creation role for risk management is in the reduction or elimination of “costly lowertail outes.” Lower tail outes are primarily negative earnings and cash flow shocks and can have both direct and indirect costs. Direct costs are incurred in events such as bankruptcy and financial distress when the firm must make outlays to creditors, lawyers and courts. Indirect costs of as