Search results

This research seeks to understand the drivers of outward foreign direct investments (FDIs) by state-owned emerging economy firms, the characteristics of their overseas FDI projects and investment locations, and the effects of home and host institutions on the market entry strategies, taking into account the legitimacy of state ownership.

The discussion is based on a comprehensive review of conceptual and empirical literature, as well as case studies available from recognized journals in the field.

State-owned emerging economy firms pursue outward FDIs to respond to policy incentives of the home government and to reduce its political influence over the firm. FDI projects are often large and risky and have low business values. They often enter countries where state ownership is perceived as more legitimate while engaging in legitimacy-building activities in these countries. When their home country has a high level of institutional restrictions, they are less likely to use acquisitions or hold high levels of equity control in foreign subsidiaries. To strengthen local legitimacy, they often use greenfield investments or share equity control with local firms in foreign subsidiaries, particularly when the host country is endowed with strategic assets or when it has a high level of institutional restrictions. However, when having high levels of state ownership or strong political connections, they often commit a high level of resources and hold a high level of equity control in foreign subsidiaries.

The literature mostly investigates the FDI of firms that are structurally separate from the institutions. When the institutions are endogenous as presented in this research, their strategic choices are substantially influenced by noncommercial political motives and perception on their political image.

The paper aims to examine the sufficient and necessary conditions upon which the innovative “partial shock model” was implemented in China.

The study employs a multi‐method approach, involving a case study of Wuhan city in 2004.

Evidence suggests that implementation of the partial shock model in state‐owned small and medium‐sized enterprises (SOSMEs) is not only essential, but also feasible. More than 1,000 enterprises in Wuhan have restructured properties, and hundreds of thousands of workers have changed their state‐owned identity, which has resulted in positive social and economic outcomes in SOSMEs.

The paper suggests that there is a need to combine business reorganisation with government's timely intervention so as to overcome potential problems such as unjust occupation of state assets and unfair distribution among different enterprises in the same city.

The paper explores the distinct Chinese experiences in reforms of SOSMEs, which is a relatively under‐researched area of entrepreneurship.

This paper aims to inform strategies to enhance public procurement opportunities for women-owned small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). To do so, the study examines two research questions: To what extent are women-owned enterprises under-represented among SME suppliers to government; and Do barriers to public procurement – as perceived by SME owners – differ across gender?

The study draws on the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm and on theories of role congruity and social feminism to develop the study’s hypotheses. Empirical analyses rely on comparisons of a sample of 1,021 SMEs that had been suppliers to government and 9,376 employer firms that had not been suppliers to government. Data were collected by Statistics Canada and are nationally representative. Logistic regression analysis was used to control for systemic firm and owner differences.

Controlling firm and owner attributes, majority women-owned businesses were underrepresented as SME suppliers to government in some, but not all sectors. Women-owned SMEs in Wholesale and Retail and in Other Services were, ceteris paribus, half as likely as to be government suppliers as counterpart SMEs owned by men. Among Goods Producers and for Professional, Scientific and Technical Services SMEs, there were no significant gender differences in the propensity to supply the federal government. “Complexity of the contracting process” and “difficulty finding contract opportunities” were the obstacles to contracting cited most frequently.

The limitations of using secondary analyses of data are well documented and apply here. The findings reflect only the perspectives of “successful bidders” and do not capture SMEs that submitted bids but were not successful. Furthermore, the survey did not include questions about sub-contractor enterprises, data that would likely provide even more insights about SMEs in government supply chains. Accordingly, the study could not address sub-contracting strategies to increase the number of women-owned businesses on government contracts. Statistics Canada’s privacy protocols also limited the extent to which the research team could examine sub-groups of small business owners, such as visible minorities and Indigenous/Aboriginal persons. It is also notable that much of the SME literature, as well as this study, define gender as a dichotomous (women/female, men/male) attribute. Comparing women/female and men/males implicitly assumes within group homogeneity. Future research should use a more inclusive definition of gender. Research is also required to inform about the obstacles to government procurement among the population of SMEs that were unsuccessful in their bids.

The study provides benchmarks on, and directions to, enhance the participation of women-owned SMEs or enterprises in public procurement. Strategies to support women-owned small businesses that comply with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are advanced.

The study offers insights to reconcile economic efficiency and social (gender equity) policy goals in the context of public procurement. The “policy-practice divides” in public procurement and women’s enterprise policies are discussed.

The study is among the first to use a feminist lens to examine the associations between gender of SME ownership and public procurement, while controlling for other salient owner and firm attributes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine borrowing capacity (BC) of government-owned firms and whether real earnings management (REM) activities moderate the sensitivity of firm BC to government ownership.

A simultaneous equation analysis is applied to study 210 Tunisian non-financial firms over the 2001–2014 period.

The empirical results provide substantial evidence indicating that government-owned firms have higher BC and significant REM than other firms; the relationship between government ownership and firm BC is partially moderated by REM activities.

The findings imply that the implicit credit guarantee of government is not necessarily the unique determinant of firm BC and highlight the role of lenders in monitoring discretionary real transactions in government-owned and protected firms. These implications should be taken in to account by public sector policy makers. In particular, the findings predict that the current government accounting reform in Tunisia on the basis of IPSAS will, probably, improve information quality, but it is still insufficient to control real activities in public institutions.

This study extends a growing research stream on the relationship between BC and government ownership by focusing on the moderating effect of REM on this relationship and by considering the endogeneity issue. The findings provide evidence that government-owned firms use REM practices to improve their BC. Examining these practices in developing countries provides an opportunity to evaluate the efficiency of their public sector reforms and their effect on a firm’s performance and financing decisions.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of state ownership on financial reporting quality regarding the characteristics of conservatism and earnings management.

Using a large sample of public and private European firms during the period 2003-2010, the authors test the hypotheses following Ball and Shivakumar’s (2005) model for conservatism and the modified Jones (1991) model proposed by Dechow and Sloan (1995) for earnings management. To ensure that the results are robust, the authors conduct sensitivity analysis with regard to potential endogeneity and selection bias.

The authors find that state-owned firms are less conservative than non-state-owned firms, which is consistent with the idea that there is less need for accounting conservatism due to government protection. The authors also show that capital markets play an important role in shaping the relation between state ownership and earnings management. Among public firms, the authors find that state-owned firms have higher abnormal accruals and worse accruals quality than non-state-owned firms, which suggests that state-owned firms are not immune to capital market pressures.

The study has two limitations. First, as state-owned and non-state-owned firms face quite different incentive structures, management behavior might be determined by factors that have yet to be identified. Second, prior research results suggest an inverted U-shape relation between ownership concentration and earnings management (Ding et al., 2007). It would be interesting to investigate the impact of different levels of state ownership on earnings quality.

As the paper investigates the role of state ownership on earnings quality using a sample of European firms, it brings new insights regarding the role of state ownership in accounting quality and firm performance. In addition, it considers the role of capital markets in the relation between the quality of financial reporting and ownership by considering a sample with both public and private firms.

The study contributes to the debate about state intervention in the corporate sector, by extending the knowledge of the effects of government ownership on earnings quality by using a large sample of European firms. Furthermore, the authors also introduce the effect of capital market forces on managers’ behavior in state-owned and non-state-owned companies by analyzing private and publicly listed firms.

In this exploratory multiple case study, we aim to compare the internationalization of two state-owned enterprises (SOEs) owned by subnational governments with three owned by central governments in Latin America. This study provides a contextualized answer to the question: What are the differences in the internationalization of subnationally owned SOEs compared to central SOEs? This study finds that the speed and diversification of these two types of SOEs’ internationalization differ because they have a different expansion logic. Subnationally owned SOEs have a gradual and diversified expansion following market rules. Central government’s SOEs are specialized and take more drastic steps in their internationalization, which relates to non-market factors.

This study builds an exploratory qualitative comparative case analysis that uses multiple sources of data and information to develop a comprehensive understanding of SOEs through process tracing.

The study posits some assumptions that are confirmed in the case analysis. This study finds relevant differences between sub-national (SSOEs) and central authority (CSOEs’) strategies. SSOEs’ fewer resources and needs to increase income push them to follow a gradual market-driven internationalization and to diversify abroad. CSOEs non-gradual growth is justified by non-market factors (i.e. national politics). CSOEs do not diversify abroad due to the broader set of constituencies they have to face.

Given the exploratory comparative case study of this research, the findings are bounded by the particularities of the cases and their region (Latin America). This paper and its findings can be useful for theory building but it does not claim any generalization capacity.

This study adds complexity into the SOEs phenomenon by distinguishing between different types of SOEs. This paper contributes to the study of subnational phenomena and its effect in SOEs’ internationalization process, which is an understudied topic. To the authors’ best knowledge, this is among the first studies that explore subnational SOEs in Latin America.

Since the core issue of Chinese economics is to elucidate the logical relationship between socialism and the market economy, it necessitates a robust foundation for microeconomic analysis to uncover the behavioral patterns and characteristics of microeconomic agents in a socialist market economy and identify the conditions and methods for the functioning of market mechanisms.

The core issue of microeconomics with Chinese characteristics is to identify the economic logic of how market mechanisms play a decisive role in resource allocation under the basic socialist economic system based on China's reform.

The core issue in building the foundation of microeconomic analysis of Chinese economics is addressing the compatibility issue between SOEs and a market economy.

In the author’s view, this can be achieved under the logic of classified reform so as to build the microeconomic foundation for the effective functioning of a socialist market economy.

This study examines the impact of China’s mixed-ownership reform on the innovation of non-state-owned acquirers, with a particular focus on the impact on firms with high financing constraints, low-quality accounting information or less tangible assets.

We use a proprietary dataset of firms listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges to investigate the impact of mixed ownership reform on non-state-owned enterprise (non-SOE) innovation. We employ regression analysis to examine the association between mixed ownership reform and firm innovation.

The study finds that non-state-owned firms can improve innovation by acquiring equity in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) under the reform. Eased financing constraints, lowered financing costs, better access to tax incentives or government subsidies, lowered agency costs, better accounting information quality and more credit loans are underlying the impact. Additionally, cross-ownership connections amongst non-SOE executives and government intervention strengthen the impact, whilst regional marketisation weakens it.

This study adds to the literature on the association between mixed ownership reform and firm innovation by focussing on the conditions under which this impact is stronger. It also sheds light on the policy implications for SOE reforms in emerging economies.

The purpose of this study is to answer the research question: How do cooperative organizations perform when created by government fiat in an emerging market? Through the use of institutional and agency theory, this paper presents a comparative analysis of the efficiency of the cooperative form of organization and investor-owned firms-investigating how the social–political structures in a community affect the efficiency of cooperatives vis-à-vis investor-owned firms. This paper also attempts to offer a better understanding of how government quality and organizational size influence performance outcomes between different organizational forms specifically in the Philippines.

The empirical analysis of this study was conducted among electric distribution utilities in the Philippines. Firm-level data was generated for 133 distributors, consisting of 119 electric cooperatives and 14 investor-owned companies. Panel data regressions were ran to test all hypotheses.

Cooperative organizations operate at a less efficient rate than investor-owned firms in the Philippines, even when controlling for firm-specific factors such as size, customer density and profitability. In addition, the efficiency of these cooperative organizations is more strongly influenced by the quality of the local government than investor-owned firms.

Positive externalities generated by the propagation of cooperatives on local communities may be based primarily on our understanding of how cooperatives have functioned largely in western contexts. Within the context of Southeast Asia, where national socio-political structures may be more dysfunctional, this paper observes that there is an equivalent negative externality caused by the tendency of cooperatives to replicate the political mismanagement of the community around it.

Our purpose is to critically discuss the quality of governability and scrutiny of, as well as insight in, enterprises owned by local government. Our analysis is empirically grounded in an in-depth case study of one of Sweden’s 10 largest municipalities. The ambition is to highlight troublesome areas and danger zones when it comes to public owning of corporations. We have consulted diverse types of material: conducted document studies, as well as semi-structured in-depth interviews. In addition, we have conducted a survey directed to 156 individuals (which is the total population of councillors and members of municipal corporation boards in the municipality we have studied).

From an in-depth study of Sweden, we show that corporatising parts of local governments’ operations have serious implications for accountability. Our study therefore adds to the knowledge about hybrid organisations and the challenges dual logics of the private and public sector imposes on political governance as well as management. The result of this study is based on one single case study in one specific hybrid context. No empirical generalisation is aspired to. Instead the aim has been to – by way of an explorative approach – make an analytical contribution to our knowledge about hybrid organisations. Further studies are thus necessary in order to deepen our understanding of the hybrid context and the situations under which hybrid organisations operate and develop.

This study increases our knowledge regarding the challenges of governing hybrid organisations in general and enterprises owned by local government in particular. Therefore, the findings of this study are considered to be of support to politicians as well as civil servants involved in and responsible for the governance of hybrid organisations. We argue that it is important to carefully supervise this development in local government. As corporations owned and operated by local governments have increased in numbers, they are responsible for large values and services that are crucial for the modern society (water, waste management, energy, IT). Consequently, they are becoming ever more important players in their respective local economies. At the same time, concerns have been raised regarding how to govern hybrid organisations in order to secure accountability and to protect public sector values.