Financial Management · 28 July 2018

企业风险管理的理论与实践：来自业内的证据

作者：Erasmo Giambona(Whitman School of Management at Syracuse University), John R. Graham(Duke University in Durham), Campbell R. Harvey(Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, Durham), Gordon M. Bodnar(Johns Hopkins University in Washington, DC)

摘要：我们调查了来自世界各地的1100多名风险管理者的风险管理策略。我们发现证据与一些传统的风险管理理论一致，但并非全部。然后，我们研究“为什么”或“为什么不”进行公司对冲，发现几乎90%的非金融公司的风险管理者对冲是为了增加预期现金流。我们还发现，70%到80%的风险管理者对冲是为了平滑盈余或满足股东的期望。我们的分析还表明，为了提高市场稳定性而实施的监管变化（例如，多德-弗兰克法案）可能会阻碍企业对冲。最后，我们提供了六个方面的风险对冲的证据：利率，外汇，商品，能源，信贷，地缘政治。我们发现，除了外汇以外的所有风险区域，经营对冲比金融对冲更常见。

The Theory and Practice of Corporate Risk Management: Evidence from the Field

Erasmo Giambona(Whitman School of Management at Syracuse University), John R. Graham(Duke University in Durham), Campbell R. Harvey(Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, Durham), Gordon M. Bodnar(Johns Hopkins University in Washington, DC)

ABSTRACT

We survey more than 1,100 risk managers from around the world regarding their risk management policies. We find evidence consistent with some traditional theories of risk management, but not with all. We then study “why” or “why not” firms hedge and find that almost 90% of risk managers in nonfinancial firms hedge to increase expected cash flow. We also find that 70% to 80% of risk managers hedge to smooth earnings or to satisfy shareholders’ expectations. Our analysis also suggests that regulatory changes implemented to increase market stability (e.g., Dodd‐Frank Act) could discourage corporate hedging. Finally, we provide evidence regarding hedging in six areas of risk: interest rate, foreign exchange, commodity, energy, credit, and geopolitical. We find that operational hedging is more common than financial hedging in all risk areas except foreign exchange.

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fima.12232

翻译：施懿