IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i7p6216-d1115906.html

Relationship between Diversification, Institutional Environment and Growth: A Study of Agricultural Companies in China

Author

Listed:
  • Haixia Zuo

    (School of Economics and Management, Shihezi University, Shihezi 832003, China)

  • Wanming Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Shihezi University, Shihezi 832003, China)

  • Syed Shah Alam

    (Graduate School of Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

Abstract

China’s economic growth has been heavily driven by its agriculture-related industries. This growth has been attributed to several factors, including government policies, technological advancements, and changing consumer preferences. This research aims to shed light on the underlying mechanisms that have enabled agriculture-related listed companies to thrive in China’s rapidly evolving economic landscape. Specifically, this study examines the role of the institutional environment, diversification strategy, and Confucian culture in the growth of these companies. Based on the institutional basic view theory, transaction cost theory, principal–agent theory, brand theory, and enterprise growth theory, this study uses empirical research to analyse the diversification strategy and growth of 204 agriculture-related listed companies from 2010 to 2019. The study selected companies listed as Class A in agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery with complete data and more than three years of history. The selection also covered those whose income from agriculture accounted for more than 50% of the total in 2021, or those with the highest income related to agriculture accounting for over 30% of the total income. The collected data is analysed with SPSS and Stata. The results showed that the formal institutional environment significantly suppresses the diversification strategy of agriculture-related listed companies, while the Confucian culture in the informal institutional environment significantly promotes it. The interaction between the formal and informal institutional environments has a complementary effect on the choice of diversification strategy. The study also finds that diversification strategy significantly suppresses the growth of agriculture-related listed companies, and the formal institutional environment has a more significant inhibitory effect on the diversification strategy of agriculture-related listed companies. In the informal institutional environment, Confucian culture plays a more significant role in promoting the diversification strategy of agriculture-related listed companies. The output of this study is an empirical investigation of the level of institutional setting and diversity production, which could aid in sustainable development and revitalisation of rural communities. Applying the results of this study could help managers anticipate future policy changes and adjust their strategies accordingly, while also assisting companies in developing new products and services that meet changing demand.

Suggested Citation

  • Haixia Zuo & Wanming Li & Syed Shah Alam, 2023. "Relationship between Diversification, Institutional Environment and Growth: A Study of Agricultural Companies in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-25, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:6216-:d:1115906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/6216/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/6216/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirsten A. Cook & Andrea M. Romi & Daniela Sánchez & Juan Manuel Sánchez, 2019. "The influence of corporate social responsibility on investment efficiency and innovation," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3-4), pages 494-537, March.
    2. Li Liu & Gary Gang Tian, 2021. "Mandatory CSR disclosure, monitoring and investment efficiency: evidence from China," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(1), pages 595-644, March.
    3. Chao, Mike Chen-Ho & Kumar, Vikas, 2010. "The impact of institutional distance on the international diversity-performance relationship," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 93-103, January.
    4. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 2008. "Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," RAE - Revista de Administração de Empresas, FGV-EAESP Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo (Brazil), vol. 48(2), April.
    5. Huang, Jikun & Wang, Xiaobing & Zhi, Huayong & Huang, Zhurong & Rozelle, Scott, 2011. "Subsidies and distortions in China’s agriculture: evidence from producer-level data," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(01), pages 1-19.
    6. Chen Lin & Wei Shen & Dongwei Su, 2011. "Executive Pay at Publicly Listed Firms in China," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(2), pages 417-436.
    7. Jikun Huang & Jun Yang & Scott Rozelle, 2010. "China's agriculture: drivers of change and implications for China and the rest of world," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(s1), pages 47-55, November.
    8. Yang, Dan & Liu, Zimin, 2012. "Does farmer economic organization and agricultural specialization improve rural income? Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 990-993.
    9. Hongyun Han & Hui Lin, 2021. "Patterns of Agricultural Diversification in China and Its Policy Implications for Agricultural Modernization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Busenitz, Lowell W. & Barney, Jay B., 1997. "Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 9-30, January.
    11. Pingui Rao & Heng Yue & Xin Zhou, 2018. "Return predictability and the real option value of segments," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 167-199, March.
    12. Lei Chen & Zhi Jin & Yongqiang Ma & Hui Xu, 2019. "Confucianism, openness to the West, and corporate investment efficiency," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 25(3), pages 554-590, June.
    13. Raymond Fisman, 2001. "Estimating the Value of Political Connections," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1095-1102, September.
    14. Kearsley, Aaron & Riddel, Mary, 2010. "A further inquiry into the Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Environmental Kuznets Curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 905-919, February.
    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. Ahsan Akbar & Muhammad Usman & Teng Lin, 2024. "Institutional dynamics and corporate innovation: A pathway to sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 2474-2488, 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. Ilhan-Nas, Tulay & Okan, Tarhan & Tatoglu, Ekrem & Demirbag, Mehmet & Wood, Geoffrey & Glaister, Keith W., 2018. "Board composition, family ownership, institutional distance and the foreign equity ownership strategies of Turkish MNEs," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 862-879.
    2. Gorman, Gary G. & Rosa, Peter J. & Faseruk, Alex, 2005. "Institutional lending to knowledge-based businesses," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 793-819, November.
    3. Lindner, Thomas & Muellner, Jakob & Puck, Jonas, 2016. "Cost of Capital in an International Context: Institutional Distance, Quality, and Dynamics," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 234-248.
    4. Sheng Liu & Xin Gu & Xiuying Chen, 2024. "The ecological accountability reform and corporate investment efficiency: Evidence from a policy shock," Energy & Environment, , vol. 35(8), pages 4176-4194, December.
    5. Adetoun Adedotun Amubode & Hassanat Motunrayo Rauf-Lawal & Boiso Maria Owodiong-Idemeko, 2016. "Attitude of Couples and Marrigeable Singles in Establishing Joint Fashion Business," Journal of Management and Sustainability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 6(1), pages 192-205, March.
    6. Aflatooni, Abbas & Ghaderi, Kaveh & Mansouri, Kefsan, 2022. "Sanctions against Iran, political connections and speed of adjustment," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(PB).
    7. Michael Mayberry, 2020. "Good for managers, bad for society? Causal evidence on the association between risk‐taking incentives and corporate social responsibility," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(9-10), pages 1182-1214, October.
    8. John Ahlquist & Aseem Prakash, 2010. "FDI and the costs of contract enforcement in developing countries," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(2), pages 181-200, June.
    9. Santiago Kopoboru & Gloria Cuevas-Rodríguez & Leticia Pérez-Calero, 2020. "Boards that Make a Difference in Firm’s Acquisitions: The Role of Interlocks and Former Politicians in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Nazari, Jamal A. & Poursoleyman, Ehsan, 2025. "Beyond the tipping point: The nonlinear impact of material sustainability on investment efficiency," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    11. Obata, Seki & 小幡, 績 & オバタ, セキ, 2003. "Pyramid Business Groups in East Asia: Insurance or Tunneling?," CEI Working Paper Series 2002-13, Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    12. Patrick Velte, 2023. "Which institutional investors drive corporate sustainability? A systematic literature review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 42-71, January.
    13. Kyriacou, Kyriacos & Liu, Siming & Mase, Bryan, 2024. "Corruption and insider trading," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    14. Vishnu K. Ramesh & A. Athira, 2023. "Real effects of social trust on firm performance during COVID‐19," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(1), pages 671-693, January.
    15. Shi, Haina & Xu, Haoping & Zhang, Xin, 2018. "Do politically connected independent directors create or destroy value?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 82-96.
    16. Demid Chernenko, 2019. "Capital structure and oligarch ownership," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 383-411, November.
    17. Jaehong Lee & Eunsoo Kim, 2020. "The Influence of Corporate Environmental Responsibility on Overinvestment Behavior: Evidence from South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.
    18. Christophe Bonnet & Peter Wirtz, 2011. "Investor Type, Cognitive Governance and Performance in Young Entrepreneurial Ventures:A Conceptual Framework," Working Papers CREGO 1110301, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    19. Kshitij Awasthi & Rejie George, 2021. "Influence Capital in Boards: a study of ex-bureaucrats in India," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1525-1559, December.
    20. Monika Dahiya & Shveta Singh & Neeru Chaudhry, 2024. "Unveiling the role of corporate social responsibility on the efficiency of capital investments and their speed of adjustment: Insights from India," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 1963-1988, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:6216-:d:1115906. 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.