Comparison between static tradeoff theory and pecking order theory

정태적 절충이론과 자본조달순위이론의 비교

  • Park, Jung-Ju (School of Business Administration, Chung-Ang University)
  • Received : 2012.01.19
  • Accepted : 2012.03.14
  • Published : 2012.03.31

Abstract

This paper is an empirical study for the listed manufacturing companies in the Korea Stock Exchange during the sample period(2001-2010). The research is based on the target adjustment model(Shyam-Sunder and Myers(1999)) and the pecking order model(Frank and Goyal(2003)), and is aimed at reflecting the critical viewpoint of Chirinko and Singha(2000). An analysis in the model of Shyam-Sunder and Myers(1999) shows the value is too low to support the pecking order model in view of the following results. A target adjustment coefficient value is between 0 and 1, and is significant variable and explanatory power is very high, while deficit-in-funds coefficients close to 0. In addition, the result of an empirical test following the methodology used by Frank and Goyal(2003) does not support the pecking order theory.

본 논문은 2001년부터 2010년의 표본기간 동안 상장된 제조업을 대상으로 Shyam-Sunder and Myers(1999) 그리고 Frank and Goyal(2003)의 목표조정모델과 자본조달순위모델에 기초하여 Chirinko and Singha(2000)의 비판적인 관점이 반영된 실증분석 논문이다. Shyam-Sunder and Myers(1999)의 모형을 통해 분석한 결과, 목표 조정계수는 0과 1 사이에 값을 가지며 설명력이 높고 유의한 변수인 반면에 자금 부족분 계수는 0에 가까워 자본조달이론을 지지 하기에는 작은 값을 가졌다. 또한 Frank and Goyal(2003)의 방법론을 사용하여 실증분석한 결과 자본조달순위이론은 지지되지 않았다.

Keywords