Evaluation of financial support efficiency of bioagriculture and its influencing factors: Based on empirical evidence of listed companies

被引：0
|
作者：
Han C. [1 ,2 ]
Fan Y. [2 ]
Han C. [1 ,2 ]
Shi Y. [3 ]
机构：
[1] Economic College, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha
[2] State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing
[3] School of Finance, Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics, Lanzhou
来源：
Xitong Gongcheng Lilun yu Shijian/System Engineering Theory and Practice | 2024年 / 44卷 / 04期
关键词：
bio-agriculture; DEA-Malmquist-Tobit model; financial support efficiency; listed companies;
D O I：
10.12011/SETP2023-0500
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Biological agriculture is one of the important paths for agricultural power, and there is an urgent need to achieve high-quality development from the perspective of financial support. This study takes 40 listed biological agriculture companies in China as examples and uses the DEA-Malmquist-Tobit model to analyze the efficiency of financial support for biological agriculture and its influencing factors. The results indicate that there are fluctuations in the overall financial support efficiency of biological agricultural enterprises, and none of them have reached DEA effectiveness; the Malmquist index indicates that the overall efficiency of financial support for China’s biological agriculture showed an upward trend from 2012 to 2020, but financial innovation was insufficient; the Tobit model analysis found that the development status of financial markets, equity concentration, and company years have a significant positive impact on the efficiency of financial support for biological agriculture, which is an important way to promote financial support for the development of biological agriculture. However, the impact of enterprise size on financial support efficiency is significantly negative, which is related to the cost theory of “small-scale advantage”. Finally, it is recommended to promote the development of financial support for biological agriculture by optimizing the external support environment and strengthening the self construction of biological agriculture enterprises. © 2024 Systems Engineering Society of China. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码：1198 / 1209
页数：11
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [1] Min S, Wang X B., Complementing the shortcomings of bioagriculture and ensuring national food security[N], Science and Technology Daily
  • [2] Lin H C., The biological industry will become a pillar industry in China, Economic Daily
  • [3] Yang S., The Chinese academy of agricultural sciences released ten significant scientific and technological achievements made in the past decade, Guang Ming Daily
  • [4] Fang L., Financial support mechanism and efficiency evaluation of strategic emerging industry development: The case of Gansu province[J], Journal of Harbin University of Commerce, 2, pp. 28-37, (2018)
  • [5] Li S Q, Zhu P F, Liao H., Can government R&D subsidy stimulate enterprise R&D input? Dual-perspective heterogeneity analysis based on enterprise size and ownership[J], Systems Engineering — Theory & Practice, 42, 6, pp. 1591-1600, (2022)
  • [6] Zhang L, Wen T., Realistic dilemma, model innovation and policy coordination of rural financial development: Based on the perspective of industrial integration[J], Research on Financial and Economic Issues, 2, pp. 53-62, (2019)
  • [7] Gao Y, Zhao Z J., Possible direction and path selection of agricultural disruptive technological innovation in China[J], Reform, 11, pp. 98-108, (2020)
  • [8] Zhou M., The realistic challenge and countermeasure analysis of the development of biological pesticide in China[J], Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 37, 1, pp. 184-192, (2021)
  • [9] Li S Z., Trends in bioeconomic development: Building a biofood industry and bioenergy industry system[J], Frontiers, 14, pp. 14-26, (2022)
  • [10] Zhang G Z, Liu H, Lu F J, Et al., Ways and mechanism research on investing China’s insurance capital to the seed industry[J], Issues in Agricultural Economy, 38, 1, pp. 48-56, (2017)
1234