Search results

This paper aims to conduct research on the role of vertical interlocks of executives in blocking adverse loops between research and development (R&D) investment and the cost of equity capital and explore the action path of vertical interlocks of executives. This paper also analyzes the differences in the effect of vertical interlocks of chairman, vertical interlocks of chief executive officer (CEO) and vertical interlocks of CEO duality.

This paper uses 28,078 firm-year samples from Chinese A-share listed companies to study the impact of R&D investment on the cost of equity capital using univariate group analysis and multiple regression methods. This paper analyzes the role of vertical interlocks of executives in reducing the positive impact of R&D investment on the cost of equity capital by constructing interaction variables, by using group testing method to analyze the differences in the vertical interlocks of executives. This study also uses propensity score matching and instrumental variables to conduct robustness tests.

The vertical interlocks of executives can block adverse loops between R&D investment and the cost of equity capital. The role of executive vertical interlocks is more prominent in non-state-owned firms, mainly exerting the resource effect that supports the innovation of non-state-owned firms, including the information resource effect and the financial resource effect. Through heterogeneity analysis, this paper discovered that the role of vertical interlocks of chairman is greater than that of the CEO and the CEO duality.

Based on the perspective of the correlation effect generated by vertical interlocks of executives, this paper analyzes the path of promoting corporate innovation. This provides new empirical evidence for studying the collaborative governance effect of vertical interlocks of executives “supervision effect, financial resource effect and information resource effect.” This study provides useful insights for regulatory authorities to regulate and guide development of the vertical interlocks of executives.

This study aims to examine the dynamic effect of FinTech on financial stability, with the moderating role of green finance (GF), its dimensions and mechanisms in the context of the spillover effects of the COVID-19 shock. This study used balanced panel data from 148 countries, including 76 developed and 72 emerging nations, from 2005 to 2022.

The research utilized the dynamic two-step system (GMM), and robustness was performed with the bootstrapped panel quantile regression.

The findings reveal that FinTech significantly affects financial stability across the entire sample. The overall composite of GF boosts financial stability by improving financial soundness. The GF dimensions, such as environmental, resource and financial, positively influence FS, while the GF economic dimension hurts FS. The moderating role and all interaction terms of GF dimensions with FinTech contribute positively and significantly to FS. While the interaction term GF resources with FinTech negatively impacts FS, indicating that countries should utilize resources more efficiently. Additionally, the COVID-19 spillover effect negatively influences FS across all samples. In advanced countries, FinTech and green finance positively affect FS. In emerging countries, green finance (except for the resource dimension) and FinTech interactions enhance financial stability, (except for the environmental dimension), leading to environmental hazards from their highly intensive industrial carbon policies.

The findings suggest that policymakers should prioritize promoting the adoption of initiatives related to FinTech and green finance by integrating sustainable transition finance policy frameworks to maintain stability and foster low-carbon economies for a sustainable future.

Improved financial stability has more significant social effects, such as better investment instruments, confidence and economic growth. Policymakers can leverage these findings to establish resilient financial ecosystems, fostering sustainable economic development and decreasing the risk of financial crises.

This study offers novel insights into how FinTech and multi-dimensional green finance effect financial stability in advanced and emerging nations. It provides unique insights into context-specific dynamics and enhances the literature on financial stability.

This study aims to unravel the complex coopetitive interactions in supply chains. It delves into the paradoxical relationship between cooperative and competitive interactions among supply chain entities, offering a comprehensive exploration of coopetition’s manifestations and management across various supply chain types.

The study uses a three-phase methodology, beginning with a scoping review to establish a theoretical framework, followed by a systematic literature review yielding 130 papers and concluding with correspondence analysis using similarity indexes. This approach facilitates a deep dive into the diverse aspects of coopetition, including its drivers, practices, outcomes and associated risks.

The research identifies three distinct types of coopetition in supply chains: technology-based, socially based and channel-based. These models are underscored by specific drivers and outcomes, with technology-based coopetition focusing on market competitiveness and operational capacity, socially based on trust and power dynamics and channel based on product characteristics. The study introduces five propositions for further investigation and provides a comprehensive typology of coopetition within supply chains.

The study’s findings are limited by the scope of the existing literature and the chosen academic databases. Future research should empirically validate the proposed coopetition configurations and propositions, exploring their applicability in other, less studied supply chains.

The study offers practitioners a valuable typology and framework to understand and manage coopetition in their respective supply chains. This typology serves as a decision-making tool for identifying suitable coopetition strategies and maximizing their benefits while mitigating associated risks.

This study stands out for its unique approach to categorizing coopetition in supply chains, offering a novel typology that goes beyond the manufacturer’s perspective. It fills a significant gap in the literature by providing a broad view of coopetition, considering various supply chain types and their respective coopetitive dynamics.