IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i10p2964-d558586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Mixed-Ownership Reform Drive the Green Transformation of SOEs?

Author

Listed:
  • Runsen Yuan

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Chunling Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Nian Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Muhammad Asif Khan

    (Department of Commerce, Faculty of Management Sciences, University of Kotli, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Kotli 11100, Pakistan)

  • Xiaoran Sun

    (Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK)

  • Nosherwan Khaliq

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

Abstract

In the construction of ecological civilization, green innovation has become an important driving force for the sustainable development of state-owned enterprises (SOEs). This paper uses panel data of state-owned listed enterprises from 2008 to 2019 to explore mixed-ownership reform’s influence on the green transformation of SOEs and its specific mechanisms. The results show that the diversity of mixed shareholders, the depth of mixed equity, and the restriction of mixed equity significantly promote the SOEs’ green innovation. Moreover, there are distinctions in the impact of the shareholding ratio of heterogeneous shareholders on green innovation. Only the increase in the shareholding ratio of foreign shareholders has a positive correlation with green innovation. The mechanism tests indicate that the mixed-ownership reform plays a governance role in the green transformation of SOEs by optimizing the reasonable allocation of environmental protection subsidies and propelling environmental social responsibility’s active performance. Our study further subdivides the significant promotion effect of mixed-ownership reform on green innovation, finding that it only exists in the SOEs in heavily polluting industries and regions with a high degree of marketization. Finally, we find that the ownership structure adjustment caused by the mixed-ownership reform has improved SOEs’ environmental management system and facilitated its sustainable development capabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Runsen Yuan & Chunling Li & Nian Li & Muhammad Asif Khan & Xiaoran Sun & Nosherwan Khaliq, 2021. "Can Mixed-Ownership Reform Drive the Green Transformation of SOEs?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:10:p:2964-:d:558586
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/10/2964/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/10/2964/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simeon Djankov & Peter Murrell, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 739-792, September.
    2. Wang, Yang & Zhang, Yifei, 2020. "Do state subsidies increase corporate environmental spending?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Boubakri, Narjess & El Ghoul, Sadok & Guedhami, Omrane & Hossain, Mahmud, 2020. "Post-privatization state ownership and bank risk-taking: Cross-country evidence," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    4. Horbach, Jens & Rammer, Christian & Rennings, Klaus, 2012. "Determinants of eco-innovations by type of environmental impact — The role of regulatory push/pull, technology push and market pull," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 112-122.
    5. Caiming Wang & Jian Li, 2020. "The Evaluation and Promotion Path of Green Innovation Performance in Chinese Pollution-Intensive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Montmartin, Benjamin & Herrera, Marcos, 2015. "Internal and external effects of R&D subsidies and fiscal incentives: Empirical evidence using spatial dynamic panel models," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1065-1079.
    7. Joseph P. H. Fan & T. J. Wong & Tianyu Zhang, 2013. "Institutions and Organizational Structure: The Case of State-Owned Corporate Pyramids," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(6), pages 1217-1252, December.
    8. Shun-Pin Chuang & Sun-Jen Huang, 2018. "The Effect of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility on Environmental Performance and Business Competitiveness: The Mediation of Green Information Technology Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 991-1009, July.
    9. Roychowdhury, Sugata, 2006. "Earnings management through real activities manipulation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 335-370, December.
    10. Choi, Suk Bong & Lee, Soo Hee & Williams, Christopher, 2011. "Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: Evidence from China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 441-452, April.
    11. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez‐De‐Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 1999. "Corporate Ownership Around the World," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(2), pages 471-517, April.
    12. Hyacinthe Y. Somé & Marcelo Cano‐Kollmann & Ram Mudambi & Jean‐Claude Cosset, 2021. "The effect of privatization on the characteristics of innovation," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 50(3), pages 875-898, September.
    13. Yu-Shan Chen & Shyh-Bao Lai & Chao-Tung Wen, 2006. "The Influence of Green Innovation Performance on Corporate Advantage in Taiwan," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 67(4), pages 331-339, September.
    14. Wang, Yang & Ashton, John K. & Jaafar, Aziz, 2019. "Does mutual fund investment influence accounting fraud?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 142-158.
    15. Zhenghui Li & Gaoke Liao & Khaldoon Albitar, 2020. "Does corporate environmental responsibility engagement affect firm value? The mediating role of corporate innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1045-1055, March.
    16. Nola Hewitt-Dundas, 2006. "Resource and Capability Constraints to Innovation in Small and Large Plants," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 257-277, April.
    17. Vivian W. Fang & Xuan Tian & Sheri Tice, 2014. "Does Stock Liquidity Enhance or Impede Firm Innovation?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(5), pages 2085-2125, October.
    18. Boubakri, Narjess & Cosset, Jean-Claude & Guedhami, Omrane & Saffar, Walid, 2011. "The political economy of residual state ownership in privatized firms: Evidence from emerging markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 244-258, April.
    19. Radic, Mislav & Ravasi, Davide & Munir, Kamal, 2021. "Privatization: implications of a shift from state to private ownership," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108992, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Horbach, Jens, 2008. "Determinants of environmental innovation--New evidence from German panel data sources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 163-173, February.
    21. Kesidou, Effie & Demirel, Pelin, 2012. "On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical evidence from the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 862-870.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Di Wang & Daozhi Zhao & Fang Chen, 2023. "Research on Financing Strategy of Green Energy-Efficient Supply Chain Based on Blockchain Technology," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Ping Wang & Hua Bu & Fengqin Liu, 2022. "Internal Control and Enterprise Green Innovation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Iwona Bąk & Katarzyna Cheba, 2022. "Green Transformation: Applying Statistical Data Analysis to a Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Yu, Lu & Liu, Yinwei & Niu, Yiran & Xiao, Zumian, 2023. "Greener together: The impact of China's mixed-ownership reform on firm carbon emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    5. Lai, Zhixuan & Lou, Gaoxiang & Ma, Haicheng & Chung, Sai-Ho & Wen, Xin & Fan, Tijun, 2022. "Optimal green supply chain financing strategy: Internal collaborative financing and external investments," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 253(C).
    6. Paulius Šūmakaris & Renata Korsakienė & Deniss Ščeulovs, 2021. "Determinants of Energy Efficient Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    7. Xinyue Hao & Fanglin Chen & Zhongfei Chen, 2022. "Does green innovation increase enterprise value?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 1232-1247, March.
    8. Dilawar Khan & Muhammad Nouman & József Popp & Muhammad Asif Khan & Faheem Ur Rehman & Judit Oláh, 2021. "Link between Technically Derived Energy Efficiency and Ecological Footprint: Empirical Evidence from the ASEAN Region," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, June.

    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. Tariq, Adeel & Badir, Yuosre F. & Tariq, Waqas & Bhutta, Umair Saeed, 2017. "Drivers and consequences of green product and process innovation: A systematic review, conceptual framework, and future outlook," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 8-23.
    2. Muscio, Alessandro & Nardone, Gianluca & Stasi, Antonio, 2013. "Drivers of Eco-Innovation in the Italian Wine Industry," 2013 International European Forum, February 18-22, 2013, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 164752, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    3. Jana Hojnik & Mitja Ruzzier & Tatiana Manolova, 2017. "Eco-Innovation and Firm Efficiency: Empirical Evidence from Slovenia," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 11(3), pages 103-111.
    4. Alexandra Rese & Anke Kutschke & Daniel Baier, 2016. "Analyzing The Relative Influence Of Supply Side, Demand Side And Regulatory Factors On The Success Of Collaborative Energy Innovation Projects," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-43, February.
    5. Ying Guo, 2023. "External Knowledge Acquisition and Green Innovation in Chinese Firms: Unveiling the Impact of Green Dynamic Capabilities," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, July.
    6. Runsen Yuan & Chunling Li & Xinjie Cao & Nian Li & Nosherwan Khaliq, 2022. "Research on the Influence of Mixed-Ownership Reform on Exploratory Innovation of SOEs: The Mediation Effect of Agency Conflict and Financing Constraint," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    7. Jana Hojnik, 2017. "In Pursuit of Eco-innovation," UPP Monograph Series, University of Primorska Press, number 978-961-7023-53-4.
    8. Magdalena Pichlak, 2021. "The Drivers of Technological Eco-Innovation—Dynamic Capabilities and Leadership," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Pinget, Amandine, 2016. "Spécificités des déterminants des innovations environnementales : une approche appliquée aux PME [Specificities of determinants for environmental innovation : an approach applied to SMEs]," MPRA Paper 80108, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Forcadell, Francisco Javier & Úbeda, Fernando & Aracil, Elisa, 2021. "Effects of environmental corporate social responsibility on innovativeness of spanish industrial SMEs✰,✰✰,★,★★," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    11. Albitar, Khaldoon & Al-Shaer, Habiba & Liu, Yang Stephanie, 2023. "Corporate commitment to climate change: The effect of eco-innovation and climate governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    12. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    13. Caroline Danièle Mothe & Thuc Uyen Nguyen-Thi, 2017. "Persistent openness and environmental innovation: An empirical analysis of French manufacturing firms," Post-Print hal-01609129, HAL.
    14. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    15. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    16. Joana Costa, 2021. "Carrots or Sticks: Which Policies Matter the Most in Sustainable Resource Management?," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    17. Justin Doran & Geraldine Ryan, 2016. "The Importance of the Diverse Drivers and Types of Environmental Innovation for Firm Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 102-119, February.
    18. Pereira, Ángeles & Vence, Xavier, 2012. "Key business factors for eco-innovation: an overview of recent firm-level empirical studies," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    19. Patricia Laurens & Christian Le Bas & Stéphane Lhuillery & Antoine Schoen, 2017. "The determinants of cleaner energy innovations of the world’s largest firms: the impact of firm learning and knowledge capital," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 311-333, May.
    20. Donghong Li & Yi‐Chuan Liao & Pengcheng Ma, 2022. "Contingent view on the relationship between proactive environmental strategy and corporate performance: Toward stakeholder engagement," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1605-1616, September.

    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:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:10:p:2964-:d:558586. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.