IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apbizr/v5y1999i3-4p94-118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management in the Chinese Construction Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Ping Lan

Abstract

One important aim of economic reform in China is to allow state-owned enterprises to be more market driven. This contribution, based on an industry competition model and four cornerstones for indicating economy transformation, scrutinizes the major changes taking place in the Chinese construction industry. It finds that the behaviour of key stakeholders such as managers, contractors, government, suppliers, clients, and new entrants in the industry has dramatically changed. However, a contractual chain within the industry is far from complete, and relationships between the main stakeholders are problematic. Thus, further reforms are needed to maintain industry's orderly development.

Suggested Citation

  • Ping Lan, 1999. "Management in the Chinese Construction Industry," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3-4), pages 94-118, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:apbizr:v:5:y:1999:i:3-4:p:94-118
    DOI: 10.1080/13602389900000006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13602389900000006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13602389900000006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Granick, David, 1990. "Chinese State Enterprises," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226305882, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Herrmann-Pillath, Carsten & Libman, Alexander & Xiaofan, Yu, 2010. "State and market integration in China: A spatial econometrics approach to 'local protectionism'," Frankfurt School - Working Paper Series 137, Frankfurt School of Finance and Management.
    2. Sean M. Dougherty & Robert H. McGuckin, 2001. "The Effect of Ownership Structure and Jurisdictional Governance on Productivity in Chinese Enterprises," Economics Program Working Papers 02-01, The Conference Board, Economics Program, revised Jan 2002.
    3. Carsten Herrmann-Pillath, 2006. "Cultural Species and Institutional Change in China," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 539-574, September.
    4. Zhang, Xiaobo, 2006. "Asymmetric property rights in China's economic growth," DSGD discussion papers 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Bhaumik, Sumon Kumar & Estrin, Saul, 2007. "How transition paths differ: Enterprise performance in Russia and China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 374-392, March.
    6. Qian, Yingyi & Xu, Cheng-Gang, 1993. "Why China's economic reforms differ: the m-form hierarchy and entry/expansion of the non-state sector," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3755, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Subhash C. Ray & Zhang Ping, 2001. "Technical Efficiency of State Owned Enterprises in China (1980-1989): An Assessment of the Economic Reforms," Working papers 2001-05, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    8. I Eng & Y Lin, 1996. "Seeking Competitive Advantage in an Emergent Open Economy: Foreign Direct Investment in Chinese Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(6), pages 1113-1138, June.
    9. Yingyi Qian & Gerard Roland & Chenggang Xu, 1999. "Coordinating Changes in M-form and U-form Organizations," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 284, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    10. Brigitte Granville & Judith Shapiro, 2008. "Scratch a Would-Be Planner: Robbins, Neoclassical Economics and the End of Socialism," Working Papers 11, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Business and Management, Centre for Globalisation Research.
    11. Yingyi Qian & Gerard Roland & Chenggang Xu, 2006. "Coordination and Experimentation in M-Form and U-Form Organizations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(2), pages 366-402, April.
    12. Qian, Yingyi & Roland, Gerard & Xu, Cheng-Gang, 2003. "Coordinating tasks in M-form and U-form organisations," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3746, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Dwight H. Perkins, 1994. "Completing China's Move to the Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 23-46, Spring.
    14. Raiser, Martin, 1995. "Decentralisation, autonomy and efficiency: Inconsistent reforms and enterprise performance in China," Kiel Working Papers 689, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    15. Jeffrey Sachs & Wing Thye Woo & Xiaokai Yang, 2000. "Economic Reforms and Constitutional Transition," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 1(2), pages 423-479, November.
    16. Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1993. "Why China's economic reforms differ: the M‐form hierarchy and entry/expansion of the non‐state sector," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 1(2), pages 135-170, June.
    17. Cheng, Yuk-Shing & Chung, Kim-Sau, 2013. "Too many mothers-in-law?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 69-76.
    18. Huang, Yasheng, 1996. "Central-local relations in china during the reform era: The economic and institutional dimensions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 655-672, April.
    19. Jean-Francois Huchet & Xavier Richet, 2002. "Between Bureaucracy and Market: Chinese Industrial Groups in Search of New Forms of Corporate Governance," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 169-201.
    20. Sumon Bhaumik & Saul Estrin, 2003. "Why Transition Paths Differ: Russian and Chinese Enterprise Performance Compared," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 525, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:apbizr:v:5:y:1999:i:3-4:p:94-118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/FAPB20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.