Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

How Transition Paths Differ: Enterprise Performance in Russia and China

Contents:

Author Info

  • Sumon Bhaumik
  • Saul Estrin

    ()

Abstract

We use enterprise data to analyse and contrast the determinants of enterprise performance in China and Russia. We find that in China, enterprise growth and efficiency is associated with rapid increases in factor inputs, but not correlated with ownership or institutional factors. However, in Russia, enterprise growth is not associated with increases in factor quantity (except for labor) or quality. The main determinants of company performance are instead demand and institutional factors at a regional level. We explore possible interpretations of these results, including the impact of institutional and managerial quality.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Publications/WorkingPapers/wp744.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan in its series William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series with number wp744.

as in new window
Length: pages
Date of creation: 01 Jan 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2005-744

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 724 E. University Ave, Wyly Hall 1st Flr, Ann Arbor MI 48109
Phone: 734 763-5020
Fax: 734 763 5850
Email:
Web page: http://www.wdi.umich.edu
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: enterprise performance; privatization in Russia and China.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Dewatripont, Mathias & Roland, Gerard, 1995. "The Design of Reform Packages under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1207-23, December.
  2. Nicholas Barberis & Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1995. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," NBER Working Papers 5136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Parker, Elliott, 1997. "The effect of scale on the response to reform by Chinese state-owned construction units," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 331-353, April.
  4. Angelucci, Manuella & Bevan, Alan & Estrin, Saul & Fennema, Julian A & Kuznetsov, Boris & Mangiarotti, Giovanni & Schaffer, Mark E, 2002. "The Determinants of Privatized Enterprise Performance in Russia," CEPR Discussion Papers 3193, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. J. Stiglitz, 1999. "Whither Reform? Ten Years of the Transition," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 7.
  6. Lawrence J. Lau & Yingyi Qian & Gerald Roland, 1997. "Reform Without Losers: An Interpretation of China's Dual-Track Approach to Transition," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 137, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  7. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116.
  8. Estrin, Saul & Wright, Mike, 1999. "Corporate Governance in the Former Soviet Union," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 395-397, September.
  9. Stanley Fischer & Alan Gelb, 1991. "The Process of Socialist Economic Transformation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 91-105, Fall.
  10. Blanchard, Olivier & Kremer, Michael, 1997. "Disorganization," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 112(4), pages 1091-1126, November.
  11. Blanchard, O. & Aghion, P., 1996. "On insider privatization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 759-766, April.
  12. Tsui, Kai-yuen, 1996. "Economic reform and interprovincial inequalities in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 353-368, August.
  13. J Earle & S Estrin & L Leshchenko, 1996. "Ownership Structures," CEP Discussion Papers dp0315, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  14. Saul Estrin, 2003. "Measuring the Impact of Russian Privatisation at the Turn of the Century: An Introduction to the Symposium," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 45(2), pages 109-116, June.
  15. Ellman,Michael, 1989. "Socialist Planning," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521358668, October.
  16. Djankov, Simeon & Murrell, Peter, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," CEPR Discussion Papers 3319, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  17. Jefferson, Gary H. & Rawski, Thomas G. & Zheng, Yuxin, 1996. "Chinese Industrial Productivity: Trends, Measurement Issues, and Recent Developments," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 146-180, October.
  18. Jeffry M. Netter & William L. Megginson, 2001. "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 321-389, June.
  19. Saul Estrin, 2002. "Competition and Corporate Governance in Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 101-124, Winter.
  20. Qian, Yingyi & Roland, Gerard & Xu, Chenggang, 1999. "Why is China different from Eastern Europe? Perspectives from organization theory," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1085-1094, April.
  21. Jan Svejnar, 2002. "Transition Economies: Performance and Challenges," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 3-28, Winter.
  22. Daniel Berkowitz & David N. DeJong, 2005. "Entrepreneurship and Post-socialist Growth," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(1), pages 25-46, 02.
  23. Groves, Theodore & Yongmiao Hong & John McMillan & Barry Naughton, 1995. "China's Evolving Managerial Labor Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 873-92, August.
  24. Yuanzheng Cao & Yingyi Qian & Barry R. Weingast, 1999. "From federalism, Chinese style to privatization, Chinese style," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 7(1), pages 103-131, March.
  25. Bennett, John & Estrin, Saul & Maw, James, 2001. "Mass Privatisation and Partial State Ownership of Firms in Transition Economics," CEPR Discussion Papers 2895, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  26. Li, Huagang, 1999. "State factories in transition--openness, competition, and productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 429-462, April.
  27. Jefferson, Gary H. & Rawski, Thomas G. & Li, Wang & Yuxin, Zheng, 2000. "Ownership, Productivity Change, and Financial Performance in Chinese Industry," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 786-813, December.
  28. Stephen Nickell, 1993. "Competition and Corporate Performance," CEP Discussion Papers dp0182, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  29. Roman Frydman & Cheryl Gray & Marek Hessel & Andrzej Rapaczynski, 1999. "When Does Privatization Work? The Impact Of Private Ownership On Corporate Performance In The Transition Economies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(4), pages 1153-1191, November.
  30. Woo, W.T., 1993. "The Art of Reforming Centrally-Planned Economies: Comparing China, Poland and Russia," Papers 93-09, California Davis - Institute of Governmental Affairs.
  31. Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Enterprise performance and management turnover in the Czech Republic," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1115-1124, April.
  32. John Earle & Saul Estrin, 2003. "Privatization, Competition, and Budget Constraints: Disciplining Enterprises in Russia," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-22, March.
  33. Granick, David, 1990. "Chinese State Enterprises," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226305882, September.
  34. John Bennett & Saul Estrin & James Maw, 2005. "Why did Transition Economies Choose Mass Privatization?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 567-575, 04/05.
  35. Huang, Yiping & Duncan, Ron, 1997. "How Successful Were China's State Sector Reforms?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 65-78, February.
  36. Estrin, Saul & Wright, Mike, 1999. "Corporate Governance in the Former Soviet Union: An Overview," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 398-421, September.
  37. Groves, Theodore, et al, 1994. "Autonomy and Incentives in Chinese State Enterprises," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(1), pages 183-209, February.
  38. Commander, Simon & Dolinskaya, Irina & Mumssen, Christian, 2002. "Determinants of barter in Russia: an empirical analysis," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 275-307, April.
  39. Peter Oppenheimer & Brigitte Granville, 2001. "Russia’s Post-Communist Economy," World Economics, World Economics, Economic & Financial Publishing, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE, vol. 2(1), pages 149-168, January.
  40. Gary H. Jefferson & Thomas G. Rawski, 1994. "Enterprise Reform in Chinese Industry," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 47-70, Spring.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. repec:wdi:papers:2011-1029 is not listed on IDEAS
  2. Bhaumik, Sumon K. & Dimova, Ralitza & Gang, Ira N., 2014. "Is Women's Ownership of Land a Panacea in Developing Countries? Evidence from Land-Owning Farm Households in Malawi," IZA Discussion Papers 7907, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  3. Sumon Kumar Bhaumik & Shubhashis Gangopadhyay & Shagun Krishnan, 2006. "Reforms, Entry and Productivity: Some Evidence from the Indian Manufacturing Sector," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 822, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  4. Craig P. Aubuchon & Subhayu Bandyopadhyay & Sumon Kumar Bhaumik, 2012. "The extent and impact of outsourcing: evidence from Germany," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue July, pages 287-304.
  5. Chen, Shiyi & Jefferson, Gary H. & Zhang, Jun, 2011. "Structural change, productivity growth and industrial transformation in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 133-150, March.
  6. Bat Batjargal & Bat Batjargal, 2005. "Comparative social capital: Networks of entrepreneurs and investors in China and Russia," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp783, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  7. Sumon Bhaumik & Ralitza Dimova & Subal C. Kumbhakar & Kai Sun, 2012. "Does Institutional Quality Affect Firm Performance? Insights from a Semi-Parametric Approach," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1029, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2005-744. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Laurie Gendron).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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