【正文】 the emerging market firms tend to payout approximately the same as their US counterparts but the much greater depth in the US stock market values these dividends much higher. This again is an indicator of the relative underdevelopment of stock markets in these countries. Interestingly again Malaysia is closest to the USA with a median dividend yield of %, while the big difference in the Korean mean and median dividend yields is mainly a function of time: in the earlier period the moribund state of Korean markets lead to high dividend yields that were erased by the end of the period. A major conclusion from the discriminant analysis and the sample statistics is that there is greater dividend instability, in the sense of unpredictability, in our sample of emerging market firms than there is in the US control sample. This is consistent with our prior theorizing that bank centric financial systems place less weight on the dividend as either a signaling or premitment device. Contrary to our financial systems taxonomy, this conclusion is as valid for Korea and Malaysia, which we regarded as ‘‘most like the US’’ as it is for Jordan, which we regarded as the most developed bank oriented system. In all these emerging markets it appears that other control mechanisms serve the dividend signaling and agency reduction role it play in the US arms length capital markets system. This paper examined the dividend behavior of panies in eight emerging markets between 1980 and 1990, and pared the results to those for 100 US panies. We reached the following conclusions: 1) Generally it is more difficult to predict dividend changes for these emerging market firms. The quality of firms cutting dividends were much more similar to those increasing dividends, than for the US control sample. 2) Regression results suggested that current dividends are much less sensitive to past dividends than for the US control sample of firms. 3) The Lintner model does not work very well for this sample of emerging market firms, with adjusted R squares of the Lintner regression model well below what we expect for US firms. These results provide support for the substitute theory of dividends over the plement theory in our sample of emerging market firms. In other words, the results support the premise that the institutional structures of these developing countries make corporate dividend policy a less viable mechanism for signaling future earnings, and for reducing agency costs than for US firms operating in capital markets with arm’s length transactions. Source： Aivazian , Laurence Booth ,Sean Cleary . “Dividend policy and the organization of capital markets “.J. of Multi. Fin. Manag. 13 (2020) .. 譯文： 股利政策和組織的資本市場 多年來，公司如何制定他們的股利政策對(duì)于財(cái)務(wù)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家是個(gè)難題。事實(shí)上這樣的結(jié)果與事實(shí)經(jīng)驗(yàn)是相悖的，更不用說實(shí)證研究了，這被 費(fèi)希爾 然而 ,在布倫南模型中股利越高稅務(wù)越高。米勒和莫迪里阿尼明確表明股利的變化產(chǎn)生信息的影響。在這種情形下 ,保證高股利政策下減弱管理投機(jī)機(jī)會(huì)和加強(qiáng)資本市場的相互影響。例如 ,如果公司緊緊地抓住這一點(diǎn)，可能是比支付股利更加容易和成本更低的交流信息的方式。我們將認(rèn)為這些組織的金融體系的差別顯著影響公司金融股利政策 ,特別是將股利作為一個(gè)信號(hào)傳遞和約束。 股利信號(hào)模型提供有價(jià)值股利政策觀點(diǎn)。在之后的情形里 ,紅利削減表明 ,相應(yīng)的收益永久下降 ,而不是暫時(shí)的和周期性的。在這樣一個(gè)框架，外部人員可能更喜歡高股利政策 :比今天從資本收益高度不確定的未來投資獲得股息更好。 這兩個(gè)觀點(diǎn)的暗示著，股利發(fā)放更高的地方就有分散 外部投資者 ,只要公司連續(xù)需要股權(quán)資本 ,從而迫使對(duì)資本市場產(chǎn)生作用。銀行關(guān)系通常需要申請季度財(cái)務(wù)信息以標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的格式 ,以及定期拜訪工地貸款官員 ,使貸款官員熟悉公司。在本質(zhì)上，這個(gè)行為與股息支付有相同的約束作用。由于有較少強(qiáng)調(diào) (費(fèi)用 )信息收集和與暨南拉詹的過程討論。 我們假設(shè)把這種股利發(fā)放角色叫做替補(bǔ) ,在這種意義上的分紅代替與外部投資者直接通信 ,包括債務(wù)和股權(quán)。它是企業(yè)集團(tuán)“業(yè)內(nèi)“網(wǎng)絡(luò) ,由于管理層和投資者之間的密切聯(lián)系。在這種情況下 ,雖然盡管與銀行有密切聯(lián)系和緊緊地握性質(zhì)的公司 ,但支付股息以吸引資本是必要的 , 替代的假設(shè) ,我們希望能更可能的在交易資本市場上預(yù)測股利為外部投資者提供保證 ,傳達(dá)公司的經(jīng)營是正確的。 這些假設(shè)存在內(nèi)在 聯(lián)系 ,但如果我們發(fā)現(xiàn)答案是一致的，我們認(rèn)為這是支持“替代”理論對(duì)股利政策。由于這個(gè)原因 , 隨著標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差，中值和平均都會(huì)被記錄下來。 八個(gè)新興市場的比率的平均支出與美國公司 ,相似 ,而只有土耳其公司明顯較高 ,和巴基斯坦公司較低。有趣的是 ,馬來西亞是最接近又美國平均股息率 ,而韓國和中值 股息收益率有 2%差異，主要是時(shí)間的作用：在前期垂死掙扎的韓國市場導(dǎo)致高股息收益率 , 直到當(dāng)時(shí)才消除。 本文調(diào)查了在八個(gè)新興市場的公司在 1980 至 1990 年的股利行為，并與 100個(gè)美國的公司相比較。 3)林特勒模型對(duì)新興市場公司的效果并不十分明顯，具有變 R 方格林特勒回歸模型大大低于我們期待的像美國公司一樣?？死?. 《股利政策和組織的資本市場》 ,跨國公司財(cái)務(wù)管理雜志 ,2020（ 13）： 101121.