Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Preface -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- About the Authors -- Abbreviations -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- List of Boxes -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- 1.1 Definitions -- 1.2 SOEs with Mixed Ownership: A Theoretical Perspective -- 1.3 SOEs with Mixed Ownership in Emerging Markets: A Practical View -- 1.3.1 Vietnam -- 1.3.2 China -- 1.4 Mixed-Ownership SOEs: An Opportunity or Threat? -- 1.5 The Empirical Research -- References -- Chapter 2: Changing Role of State-Invested Enterprises in Emerging Markets -- 2.1 Economic Reform in Vietnam and the Changing Role of the State -- 2.1.1 SOEs in the Economy of Today -- 2.1.2 A Quest for New Growth -- 2.2 Economic Reform in China and the Changing Role of the State -- 2.3 Discussion -- 2.4 Conclusion -- Appendix 1: Key Economic Indicators for the Role SOEs in the Vietnamese Economy -- Appendix 2: SIEs in Vietnam, Breakdown by Size -- Appendix 3: Vietnamese SOEs in the Economy from 2000 to 2019 -- Appendix 4: Vietnamese SOEs' Contribution to the Total Output by Sector -- Appendix 5: Other Vietnamese SOE's Indicators -- References -- Chapter 3: Beyond the Local Economy -- 3.1 Emerging Market m-SOEs -- 3.1.1 China -- China's OFDI -- China's Standing in the Global Supply Chain -- 3.1.2 Vietnam's OFDI -- 3.2 State Influence of m-SOEs' OFDI and Governance -- 3.2.1 Concerns of State Influence on m-SOEs -- 3.2.2 Governance Concerns of m-SOEs -- Governance Interference and the Agency Problem -- 3.3 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 4: Corporate Governance of State-Invested Enterprises -- 4.1 The Literature on State Ownership and Corporate Governance -- 4.1.1 The State as a Shareholder: A New Perspective of Agency Theory -- The State Shareholder and Managers: The Principal-Agent Relationship -- The State Shareholders and Other Shareholders: The Principal-Principal Conflict.

This article critically evaluates the value of the contemporary analysis of the 'emerging market' business group found in international literature for studying the institution in India. It argues that this value is limited by the top-down and ahistorical approach most of that analysis tends to adopt. The article shows that while business groups have been a common feature of the Indian corporate scene, they do not conform to the static conceptions of the business group found in the current literature. The article also presents a critical review of the influential functional explanation of developing country business groups as responses to 'institutional voids'. It argues that this theory neither explains the institution of the group nor does it really shed light on the phenomenon of concentration expressed through that institution.

This article suggests that the business history of emerging markets should be seen as an alternative business history, rather than merely adding new settings to explore established core debates. The discipline of business history evolved around the corporate strategies and structures of developed economies. The growing literature on the business history of emerging markets addresses contexts that are different from those of developed markets. These regions had long eras of foreign domination, had extensive state intervention, faced institutional inefficiencies, and experienced extended turbulence. This article suggests that this context drove different business responses than are found in the developed world. Entrepreneurs counted more than managerial hierarchies; immigrants and diaspora were critical sources of entrepreneurship; illegal and informal forms of business were common; diversified business groups rather than the M-form became the major form of large-scale business; corporate strategies to deal with turbulence were essential; and radical corporate social-responsibility concepts were pursued by some firms.