规避与扭转微观企业的“脱实向虚”对企业创新的不利影响成为学界关注的焦点议题。本文基于2009—2017年中国A股非金融上市公司数据，实证检验了实体企业金融化的背后动机与对企业创新的影响，重点基于产业政策视角审视企业金融化与企业创新的微观机理。研究结果表明：（1）企业配置金融资产主要动机是“投机套利”，且金融化对于企业创新投入和产出存在显著的挤出效应，在区分四类金融资产后该结果依然成立；且企业在融资约束程度较弱的情境下挤出效应更为明显；（2）产业政策则可以显著弱化企业金融化对企业创新投入的挤出效应，体现为企业金融化与企业创新挤出的“拦路虎”效应，并主要通过政府补贴和行政管制两种路径发挥作用，且央地产业政策协同下在企业金融化与企业创新投入之间的抑制效应更为明显；（3）异质性分析结果表明，产业政策显著改善了金融化背景下非国有产权与高新技术行业下的企业创新活动。本文的研究为实体企业制定合理的投资决策以及政府基于产业政策等激励制度安排引导企业“脱虚向实”优化企业的创新环境提供现实依据。

    Since the 18th CPC National Congress, great achievements have been made in both innovation input and innovation output at the macro level, which cannot be separated from the continuous optimization on the innovation environment by our government. However, the reality that cannot be ignored is that since 2011, such phenomenon as "preferring virtual economy to real economy", "virtual hot but real cold", and "excessive financialization" gradually appears. Specifically, at the micro level, the proportion of financial assets of the enterprises is increasing, and financial assets have increasingly become an important and indispensable part of their balance sheet. On the one hand, since innovation is essentially a kind of behavior with higher market risk, longer investment cycle and greater uncertainty, enterprise could obtain considerable profits by investing in financial assets rather than just relying on innovation input. Thus, if the financialization of the enterprise is based on the motivation to alleviate the financing constraints in the process of innovation, it will have a positive impact on corporate innovation in the long run; On the other hand, if the financialization of the enterprise is based on the motivation of profit-seeking, it will have a negative impact on corporate innovation, and finally result in a lack of sustainable competitiveness in the long run. Therefore, it is of great significance to examine the exact motivation behind corporate financialization, "profit-seeking motivation" or "reservoir motivation"?
   Furthermore, how to avoid or reverse the adverse impact of firms′ "preferring virtual economy to real economy" on corporate innovation has become an increasingly important topic of the academic world, and industrial policy may be one of the various tools. However, there are two opposite views on the validity of industrial policy. Meanwhile, it is still unclear what kind of effect industrial policy has on the relationship between corporation financialization and corporate innovation. Therefore, starting from different motivations of financialization, enterprises may produce completely heterogeneous consequences by obtaining resource supply under the support of industrial policies.
    Based on A-share listed non-financial companies in China from 2009-2017, this paper empirically examines the motivations behind the financialization of entity enterprise and its impact on corporate innovation, focusing on examining the micro mechanism of how corporate financialization influence the corporation innovation from the perspective of industrial policy.
    The results show that: (1) The dominant motive of companies′ financial asset allocation is "speculation arbitrage", and there is a significant "crowding out" effect of financialization on corporate innovation input and innovation output in the current year and next two years. This still holds after dividing the financial assets into four types, such as available-for-sale securities, investment real estate, long-team investment on financial stocks, entrusted and trust investment. Besides, the "crowding out" effect is more sensitive when the firm′s financial constraint is weak. (2) Industrial policy can significantly weaken the "crowding out" effect of corporate financialization on corporate innovation input, which plays a role of "roadblock" between corporate financialization and corporate innovation mainly through government subsidies and administrative control. Meanwhile, this inhibition effect is more sensitive under the coordination of central industrial policy and local industrial policy, which means coordination of central and local industrial policies could also effectively weaken the negative effect of corporate financialization on corporate innovations. However, under the case of non-coordination of central and local industrial policies (central support while local not support, central not support while local support), we don′t find significant evidence that industrial policy could play a role of "Roadblock". (3) Heterogeneity analysis shows that industrial policy significantly weakens the "crowding out" effect of corporate financialization and improves the innovation activities of non-state-owned and high-tech enterprises, while the state-owned enterprises enlarge the "crowding out" effect of corporate financialization with a more obvious speculation incentive. This shows that the development of high-tech and non-state-owned enterprises need more guidance, support and supervision from the government.
    Our contribution is that: on the one hand, we first verify that there exists heterogeneous influence of the motivation behind the corporate financialization on corporate innovation. Next, we deeply excavate the mechanism of how industrial policy weaken the "crowding out" effect of corporate financialization from the perspective of innovation-simulation and resource-supply role of the industrial policy, which expands the prior research on the simple relationship between corporate financialization and innovation. On the other hand, since we find that the current government-leading industrial policies can make up for the companies′ lack of incentives for innovation, especially in China, an emerging economy with imperfect institutional environment, we provide a practical basis for the government to optimize innovation policies and industrial policies and build a more innovative environment to improve the enterprises′ capabilities of innovation input, innovation implementation, and innovation output.