제조업 고정투자에 대한 시장집중도의 비선형적 영향 분석 (Non-linear Effects of Market Concentration on Fixed Investment in Korea’s Manufacturing Industry)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국경제연구학회
· 수록지 정보 : 한국경제연구 / 40권 / 4호 / 5 ~ 29페이지
· 저자명 : 노영진, 유재원, 권선희

초록

본고는 제조업의 고정투자에 시장집중도가 미치는 비선형적 영향을 분석하였다. 2000-2020년 상장기업자료를 이용하여 투자모형을 추정한 결과, 시장집중도가 높아지면 고정투자는 감소하다가 특정수준을 지나면서부터 투자가 증가하는 U자형의 비선형 관계가 존재하는 것으로 나타났다. 고정투자와 시장집중도간 비선형관계는 대기업계열사는 물론 비계열사, 수출기업, 그리고 주요 업종들에 두루 유효하다. 다만, 내수기업의 경우에는 유효하지 않은 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 국내시장에서 집중도가 높은 기업이라도 해외시장에서 높은 경쟁에 직면할 경우 투자가 활발하게 이루어지고 있음을 시사한다. 따라서 경쟁정책 추진에 있어서 국내시장에서 독과점에 의한 사회적 비용과 함께 세계시장에서 경쟁력 제고를 통한 경제적 이득을 균형있게 고려할 필요가 있을 것이다.

영어초록

This paper aims to clarify how the fixed investment in the manufacturing industry is affected by market concentration. Departing from the previous studies, we assume a nonlinear relationship between the two. Using firm-level data over the period from 2000 to 2020, we test the significance of market concentration as a separate explanatory variable from Tobin’s Q and cash flow. We show that there exists a U-shaped nonlinear relationship between market concentration and fixed investment. As market concentration increases, fixed investment decreases at first, but it increases after a certain level.
The nonlinear relationship between fixed investment and market concentration appears to be robust. First, it holds when the sample is divided into two categories: firms affiliated with large corporations and not. Meanwhile, the elasticity of investment to cash flow is significantly lower for those affiliates of large corporations. Therefore, that large corporations appear to be passive in fixed investment in spite of large cash holding. Second, a U-shaped nonlinear relationship between market concentration and investment holds for export corporations, but not for domestic corporations. This finding suggests that the more competitive the global market is, the more active fixed investment is. Finally, there exists a nonlinear relationship as well for Korea's main manufacturing industries such as computers, electronic and optical devices, chemicals and chemical products, and transportation eQuipment.
The policy implication of our paper is clear. In promoting competition policies, it is necessary to consider both the social costs of monopolies in the domestic market as well as economic benefits of enhancing competitiveness in the global market.

참고자료

· 없음