Search results

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.

In the 40 years of reform and opening-up toward a more rational micro-economic structure, the proportion of output of state-owned enterprises shows a declining trend. Over the past decade, on one hand, the operational efficiency of state-owned enterprises has tended to be low as compared to other ownership enterprises; on the other hand, the asset–liability ratio of state-owned enterprises has risen against the trend, and still remains high under the recent national policy of “deleveraging.” The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This indicates that the inefficiency of state-owned enterprises that once hindered China’s economic development has not yet been fundamentally solved, and the task of deepening state-owned enterprises reform is still arduous.

In the process of establishing China’s modern economic system, there will be some “new state-owned enterprises” growing into world-class ones. This requires more effort in enhancing the capacity for independent innovation, improving the level of organizational control, expanding international market opportunities and fulfilling enterprise social responsibilities with high standards.

It is more appropriate for China to have a micro-economic structure in which public ownership predominates and diverse forms of ownership enjoy common prosperity and development.

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.

This paper aims to attempt to empirically investigate the impact of privatization on the performance of central public sector enterprises in India. Further attempt is made to explore whether privatization is a necessary or sufficient condition for improvement of performance of central public sector enterprises.

The scope of the study is limited to financial and operating performance analysis of 206 central public sector enterprises in India. Multiple regression analysis has been used to determine the magnitude and direction of relationship between dependent and independent variables and identify variables other than privatization which affects performance.

The study found that financial and operational performance of firms has improved significantly due to privatization. Further, firm-specific factors and other parallel reforms adopted by enterprises have significantly influenced their performance. The established regression model is highly significant with F-ratio of 31.825 at 99% significance level. The degree of explanation of the model is robust with adjusted R² at 0.956 implying that only 4.40% of explanation in the dependent variable cannot be explained by designated independent/explanatory variables.

The study would be useful to public policymakers to reach to a policy view on whether further disinvestment/privatization of central public sector enterprises need to be continued, and if so, then to what extent and direction.

State ownership has been common especially in industries with restricted competition. In Russia, state-controlled firms represent around 41 percent of the market value of all listed firms (Deloitte, 2015). Yet, there is a significant gap in the literature regarding the effects of various forms of government control in listed firms. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap by exploring the impact of the complexity of state ownership and competition on the performance of Russian listed firms.

The sample consists of data for 72 firms (360 firm-years) in the Russian MOEX broad market index during 2011–2015. The complexity of state ownership is captured by studying forms of state control including majority/minority, direct/indirect, federal/regional, mixed structures and golden shares.

The authors find significant differences in performance relating to different forms of state ownership. State control is negatively related to firm valuation and the sales/employees ratio. Performance is weakest when state ownership takes the form minority, regional or direct ownership. State control through golden shares typically outperforms other state-controlled firms. The authors find indications of employment prioritization beyond the economical optimum. In addition, the relation between state ownership and profitability becomes positive in sectors where state firms appear to enjoy lower competition.

While the effects of state ownership have been studied on many markets, there is a lack of studies on the effects of different forms, or the complexity, of state ownership beyond direct and indirect ownership. The authors contribute to the literature on the performance effects of state ownership by studying a multitude of forms of governmental ownership as well as the role of competition in Russia. Especially the profitability of state-controlled firms is significantly affected by industry characteristics. Implications of the results are discussed both from firm and policy maker perspectives.

Research dealing with earnings management in the public-sector context is expanding. This paper aims to review the existing literature to understand how research is developing and points out gaps deserving further investigation.

This study uses the structured literature methodology to investigate the state-of-the-art and future directions of the literature on earnings management in the public sector. In total, 78 articles were explored.

The critical analysis of the literature shows that different but related streams of literature are emerging, focused on both a macro- and a micro-level perspective (mainly local governments and state-owned enterprises).

This study is the first that offers a comprehensive review of the literature on the emerging topic of earnings management in the public-sector context. The structured literature review enables the identification of future directions for the literature in this field.

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 implementation of reform and opening up, China has made remarkable achievement in terms of economic reform and development. China’s path, as well as its experience, has simultaneously gained worldwide concerns. Developing the market economy against the backdrop of socialism brings conclusions from China’s achievement, deepens knowledge of China’s pathway and builds a socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics. That is the way to realise a basic socialist system, especially with regards to the organic integration of public ownership and market economy. This combination determines the future of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the success or failure of economic restructuring. Therefore, it requires consideration and in-depth study. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The goal of economic restructuring is to establish and develop the socialist market economy. Its main content can be summarised in two parts. The first is the relationship between plan and market or government and market. The second is compatibility or combination of public ownership and market economy. The former is one of the superficial problems, relevant to resource allocation method or economic operation mechanism. The latter stems from deep-rooted problems, represented by ownership or the underlying economic system. These two work together to form the organic integrity of socialist market economy where both similarities and contrasts coexist.

The shared ideal of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the lofty goals of communism will then become empty words. In this sense we can say that, whether we can realise the unity and opposition between public ownership and market economy and better integrate advantages of socialist system with strengths of market economy, will to a large extent determine the future and destiny of the socialist market economy.

As previously mentioned, the relationship between plan and market or government and market are part of resource allocation methods or economic operation mechanism. Compatibility and combination, however, with public ownership and market economy are part of an ownership or basic economic system. Science reveals the nature and developmental law of the socialist market economy. An in-depth study must be conducted on the relationship between public ownership and market economy.

Korea and China have promoted a bilateral FTA since 2005 to upgrade their economic relationships. If the Korea-China FTA is concluded, then trade between the two countries is likely to involve substantial changes both quantitatively and qualitatively. Offer lists submitted by Korea include steel, petrochemicals and machinery and those by China include some agricultural and marine products as well as nonferrous metals. Korea's interest in the Korea-China FTA has focused mainly on damage to the agricultural sector and there have been a lot of studies on the effects of the FTA on Korean agricultural sector. However, little is known about why China includes the nonferrous metals industry for early voluntary liberalization and its implications for the domestic economy. Nonferrous metals industry is one of China’s national strategic sectors and has a large supply excess in the country. This study targets the survey of Chinese nonferrous metals industry and trade structure and considers the problem of nonferrous metals in the context of negotiations for the Korea-China FTA and its implications for a higher-quality Korea-China FTA.