Institutional Framework Of Corporate Governance With Reference To The Former Yugoslav Transition Economies
The importance of institutional factors, particularly corporate governance regimes for the successful sustainable development and market-based reform in transition economies has been emphasized in burgeoning literature that has developed. The issue of best practices in the field of corporate governance is particularly important and debated. It plays a crucial role and maintains fundamental importance in all developed economies. Since corporate governance in former Yugoslav transition economies was not developed in their most important functional segments, it is clear that it could not have contributed to economic efficiency. This paper examines the underlying causes for extremely reduced role of corporate governance in the mentioned countries. It starts with two hypotheses, namely: first, that the underdeveloped social, political and particularly economic institutional framework are the most significant causes of inefficient corporate governance in the surveyed countries, and second, that the established imbalance in relationships between propertycontrol- corporate governance has dominantly contributed to negative economic results and reduced business environment (in terms of employment, results, business barriers, a chronic lack of investments, etc.).
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.:
- Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1995.
"A Survey of Corporate Governance,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1741, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Zingales, Luigi, 1998.
CEPR Discussion Papers
1806, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Tirole, Jean, 1999.
CEPR Discussion Papers
2086, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Saul Estrin & Martha Prevezer, 2010. "The Role of Informal Institutions in Corporate Governance: Brazil, Russia, India and China Compared," Working Papers 31, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Business and Management, Centre for Globalisation Research.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mje:mjejnl:v:8:y:2012:i:4:p:27-41. 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: (Eryk Wdowiak)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.