Search results

The study aims to analyze the level of the disclosure of corporate governance practices by the companies that belong to the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries according to normative recommendations and coercive requirements considering the enforcement of laws and norms in the different legal systems and to explain it in the light of the institutional theory approach.

The practices disclosed by a sample of the 20 largest companies listed on the stock exchanges of each of the BRICS countries were analysed, and the 52 practices recommended by UNCTAD (2009) were used as a parameter. The corporate governance practices of the companies were confronted with the laws, rules and norms that require or recommend their adoption and disclosure.

China has 49 practices required by own national law in face of 52 recommended by UNCTAD/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) followed by South Africa with 44, Russia with 33, Brazil with 28 and India with 24. Brazil has 47 practices recommended by own national governance code in face of 52 recommended by UNCTAD/Intergovernmental Working group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting (ISAR), followed by Russia with 45, China with 44, South Africa with 41 and India with 22. It was found that Brazil has the higher median of number of companies disclosing corporate governance practices with 17, followed by India with 13, Russia with 11, South Africa and China with 7.

This research shows that more studies are necessary using the institutional theory to investigate how the normative and coercive pressures influence the disclosure of corporate governance information considering the enforcement of laws and norms in the different legal systems.

The differences observed in this study about normative and coercive forces are presented as an opportunity in the legal sphere of some countries to implement mechanisms to increase their level of enforcement.

This research contributes to various audiences such as governmental institutions, professional associations, market institutions to better understand their role in the improvement of the adoption of corporate governance practices and disclosure of information related to it.

This chapter argues that there are a number of different versions of decoupling hypotheses and that rapid swings in their popularity are due largely to herding in popular mental models and shifts in short-run correlations. It is important to not put too much emphasis on such changes of correlations since these can vary substantially depending on the patterns of shocks. There are substantial differences in the effects of contagion during the current crisis on growth rates of both advanced and emerging economies, including Brazil, Russia, India, and China (the BRICs). Our estimates suggest that while countries like China and India have been able to maintain high growth rates, their short falls from trends have not been greatly smaller than for the United States itself. Thus, their decoupling has not been as great as many popular analyses have suggested.

Russia is one of the leaders in outward FDI from emerging market economies and at the same time Russian MNCs have their specific features. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze characteristics of Russian MNCs by researching relationship between specificities of Russian economic and political model, on the one hand, and specific features of Russian MNCs, on the other hand.

For these researches, traditional instruments of neoclassical theory are basically used.

The principal finding is that specific characteristics of Russian MNCs reflect specificities of Russia’s economic and political model. To some extent, they correlate with characteristics of MNCs of other two leading emerging economies – China and India.

Russian MNCs operate in line with principal theories of FDI, that is, on the basis of their country and firms’ comparative advantages. However, they possess specific features: many of them are state-controlled MNCs; private MNCs are controlled by oligarchs; all of them have tight relations with offshores and offshore conduit countries. The comparison with China and India shows that some of these specific features are typical of Chinese and Indian MNCs to more or less extent.

The empirical part of the chapter analyzes scope, industrial and geographical profiles of Russian MNCs, their motivation and management, impact on Russian economy and regional integration.

National MNCs with their offshore affiliates are the leading tax evasion economic agents in Russia. Moreover, stable FDI outflow reduces gross capital formation in Russia which is insufficient (19–25% of GDP) for substantial economic growth by standards of emerging economies in this decade (from 4.3 to −3.8 in Russia, from 6.8 to 9.5 in China, from 5.1 to 7.3 in India).

The principal value (originality) of the chapter is its comparatively detailed review of main aspects of Russian MNCs’ worldwide activity made from the point of view of its connection to Russia’s economic and political model.

This paper aims to examine and compare the nature and extent of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting practices of companies in developing (BRICS [Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa]) and developed (the USA and the UK) countries.

Content analysis is conducted on the annual reports and websites of 325 companies listed on stock exchanges of developing markets and of developed markets (Brazil – IBrX 100, 46 companies; Russia – Broad Market Index, 50 companies; India – BSE 100, 50 companies; China – SSE 180, 29 companies; South Africa – FTSE/JSE All Share index, 50 companies; the USA – NYSE 100, 50 companies; the UK – FTSE 100, 50 companies). Descriptives are used to calculate company wise and item wise scores. T-test analysis is applied to check for significant differences between mean scores of developing and developed countries.

The findings of the study reflect that developed countries have higher CSR disclosure scores than developing countries. Overall, mean CSR disclosure score of developed countries is 53.5%, followed by that of the developing countries at 49.4%. Developed countries take lead in CSR disclosure for all the five categories, namely, human resources, community, environment, customer and product and others. The results of independent sample T-test suggest that mean disclosure score of developing nations is significantly different from developed nations.

As suggested by the results, the gap in the CSR disclosure scores between developing and developed group of countries is not an alarming one. However, developing countries should practice CSR in spirit and not just in letter. Focus should not be on just filling the pages in black and white, rather the essence of CSR should be attained for balanced development of the country. For instance, though developing country like India has high score of CSR disclosure in contrast to each of the developed country taken in the sample, yet the country is still battling with several issues such as poverty, over-population, corruption, poor standard of working conditions for the employees and environmental conservation. Sustenance should focus upon renewable sources of energy; efforts of employees should be acknowledged offering flexible working hours; consumer trust should be built by communicating authentic and accurate information about the product. As developing countries encounter several social and environmental problems, companies must endeavor to build a healthy nation keeping in mind the welfare of all stakeholders by practicing CSR.

This study overcomes the limitations of prior cross-country studies by taking a better representative sample with greater number of countries belonging to identifiable group of “developing” and “developed” nations and thus attempts to improve generalization and authenticity of results.

Entrepreneurship development in Nigeria requires the adoption and assimilation of enterprise development models from nations with replicable success stories. Technology incubation centre (TIC) is one of the potent mechanisms that launched the “BRIC nations” – Brazil, Russia, India and China – to global prominence as the five biggest emerging economies. This paper attempts to unveil the potentials of TICs as novel tools for entrepreneurship development and actualisation of the Vision 20:2020 in Nigeria.

The authors adopt analytical and discursive approaches using qualitative and quantitative data sourced from Industrial policy documents, Goldman Sachs report, online databases of government agencies, Vision 20:2020 policy document and published articles on the subject matter. The generated data were subjected to content and thematic analyses, on the basis of which relevant conclusions were drawn.

The findings from the research indicate that there are 37 TICs in Nigeria with very weak socio-economic impact on job creation, wealth creation and industrial development in Nigeria. However, for the BRIC nations, adopted as comparative models, TICs have impacted positively on job creation, wealth creation and economic development of the five nations.

The paper is essentially discursive and subjective. Further research on this subject matter should explore empirical analysis for an objective assessment of the situation.

This paper underscores the need for harmonisation of policy objectives with policy implementation. At present, there are gaps between TIC policy objectives and woeful performance of the 37 TICs in Nigeria.

For Nigeria, to enhance job creation, wealth creation and economic development in the society, there is the need for functional TICs at local, institutional, regional, state and national levels.

The paper unveils the gap between economic theory and practical model implementation in developing economy (Nigeria). It is a major contribution to the functionalist and structuralist debates on why policies fail.