IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdf/wpaper/2008-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Peripherality and the Impact of SME Takeovers

Author

Listed:

Abstract

New Economic Geography models typically predict centripetal economic development. One process by which this might be brought about is if large companies based in the core of the economy buy up and remove small dynamic enterprises from peripheral regions, thereby suppressing development outside the core. This hypothesis is investigated by analysing the very large UK administrative firm-level Business Structure Database. Contrary to the experience of big firms, more productive small businesses are more subject to takeover - although this effect is weaker if they are located in peripheral regions than in the core. Takeovers also increase the chances of a small and medium size enterprise (SME) closing, but the exit consequence is greater for the core region. Takeovers raise productivity after acquisition in all regions but by less for the most productive SMEs. Ignoring any productivity gains to acquiring firms, the positive impact in the core region during the years considered is slightly larger than in the periphery, principally because takeovers are more common in the core. As this impact is a contributor to regional divergence, policy should aim to improve the operation of the market for SMEs in the periphery.

Suggested Citation

  • Foreman-Peck, James & Nicholls, Tom, 2008. "Peripherality and the Impact of SME Takeovers," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2008/9, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section, revised Jul 2012.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdf:wpaper:2008/9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carbsecon.com/wp/E2008_9.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boyan Jovanovic & Peter L. Rousseau, 2002. "The Q-Theory of Mergers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 198-204, May.
    2. King, Gary & Zeng, Langche, 2001. "Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 137-163, January.
    3. Ronan G. Powell, 1997. "Modelling Takeover Likelihood," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(7‐8), pages 1009-1030, September.
    4. James Foreman-Peck, 1995. "Smith And Nephew In The Health Care Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 172.
    5. Sang V. Nguyen & Michael Ollinger, 2006. "Mergers and Acquisitions and Productivity in the U.S. Meat Products Industries: Evidence from the Micro Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(3), pages 606-616.
    6. Greenhut, M L & Ohta, H, 1976. "Related Market Conditions and Interindustrial Mergers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 267-277, June.
    7. Richard Disney & Jonathan Haskel & Ylva Heden, 2003. "Restructuring and productivity growth in uk manufacturing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 666-694, July.
    8. William J. Baumol, 2004. "Entrepreneurial Enterprises, Large Established Firms and Other Components of the Free-Market Growth Machine," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 9-21, August.
    9. Ronan G. Powell, 1997. "Modelling Takeover Likelihood," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(7‐8), pages 1009-1030, September.
    10. Carl Davidson & Ben Ferrett, 2007. "Mergers in Multidimensional Competition," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 695-712, November.
    11. Robert H. McGuckin & Sang V. Nguyen, 1995. "On Productivity and Plant Ownership Change: New Evidence from the Longitudinal Research Database," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(2), pages 257-276, Summer.
    12. J. Scott Long & Jeremy Freese, 2006. "Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, edition 2, number long2, March.
    13. Palepu, Krishna G., 1986. "Predicting takeover targets : A methodological and empirical analysis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 3-35, March.
    14. Stiglitz, Joseph E & Weiss, Andrew, 1981. "Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 393-410, June.
    15. Stephen W. Salant & Sheldon Switzer & Robert J. Reynolds, 1983. "Losses From Horizontal Merger: The Effects of an Exogenous Change in Industry Structure on Cournot-Nash Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(2), pages 185-199.
    16. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Donald Siegel, 1987. "Productivity and Changes in Ownership of Manufactoring Plants," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 643-684.
    17. Nakosteen, Robert A & Zimmer, Michael A, 1987. "Determinants of Regional Migration by Manufacturing Firms," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(2), pages 351-362, April.
    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. Csaba Burger, 2022. "Defaulting Alone: The Geography of Sme Owner Numbers and Credit Risk in Hungary," MNB Occasional Papers 2022/144, Magyar Nemzeti Bank (Central Bank of Hungary).

    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. James Foreman-Peck & Tom Nicholls, 2013. "SME takeovers as a contributor to regional productivity gaps," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 359-378, August.
    2. Erik Lehmann & Thorsten Braun & Sebastian Krispin, 2012. "Entrepreneurial human capital, complementary assets, and takeover probability," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 589-608, October.
    3. Powell, Ronan & Yawson, Alfred, 2005. "Industry aspects of takeovers and divestitures: Evidence from the UK," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 3015-3040, December.
    4. Ronan Powell & Alfred Yawson, 2012. "Internal Restructuring and Firm Survival," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 435-467, December.
    5. Athanasios Tsagkanos & Antonios Georgopoulos & Costas Siriopoulos & Evangelos Koumanakos, 2008. "Identification of Greek Takeover Targets and Coherent Policy Implications," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 180-192, February.
    6. Robin Nuttall, 1999. "An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of the Threat of Takeover on UK Company Performance," Economics Series Working Papers 1999-W05, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Christine Brown & Carlson Fung, 2009. "Keiretsu Affiliation And Stock‐Market‐Driven Acquisitions," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 32(4), pages 479-503, December.
    8. Rouine, Ibtissem, 2018. "Target country's leadership style and bidders' takeover decisions," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 17-29.
    9. Mehrez Ben Slama & Dhafer Saidane & Hassouna Fedhila, 2012. "How to identify targets in the M&A banking operations? Case of cross-border strategies in Europe by line of activity," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 209-240, February.
    10. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2016. "Graduation and sell-out strategies in the Alternative Investment Market," Discussion Papers 4_2016, CRISEI, University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    11. Tunyi, Abongeh A. & Ntim, Collins G. & Danbolt, Jo, 2019. "Decoupling management inefficiency: Myopia, hyperopia and takeover likelihood," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-20.
    12. Abe De Jong & Philip T. Fliers, 2020. "Predicting Takeover Targets: Long-Run Evidence from the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 343-368, September.
    13. Boyan Jovanovic & Peter L. Rousseau, 2008. "Mergers as Reallocation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(4), pages 765-776, November.
    14. Graham, Michael & Martey, Emmanuel & Yawson, Alfred, 2008. "Acquisitions from UK firms into emerging markets," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 56-71.
    15. Kyoji Fukao & Keiko Ito & Hyeog Ug Kwon & Miho Takizawa, 2008. "Cross-Border Acquisitions and Target Firms' Performance: Evidence from Japanese Firm-Level Data," NBER Chapters, in: International Financial Issues in the Pacific Rim: Global Imbalances, Financial Liberalization, and Exchange Rate Policy, pages 347-389, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Humphery-Jenner, Mark L. & Powell, Ronan G., 2011. "Firm size, takeover profitability, and the effectiveness of the market for corporate control: Does the absence of anti-takeover provisions make a difference?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 418-437, June.
    17. Trimbath, S. & Frydman, H. & Frydman, R., 2000. "Corporate Inefficiency and the Risk of Takeover," Working Papers 00-14, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    18. Gomes, Mathieu, 2019. "Does CSR influence M&A target choices?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 153-159.
    19. Jyrki Ali-Yrkko & Ari Hyytinen & Mika Pajarinen, 2005. "Does patenting increase the probability of being acquired? Evidence from cross-border and domestic acquisitions," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(14), pages 1007-1017.
    20. Panayotis Dessyllas & Alan Hughes, 2005. "The revealed preferences of high technology acquirers: an analysis of the characteristics of their targets," Working Papers wp306, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    SMEs; takeovers; regional development; exits;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L23 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Organization of Production
    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cdf:wpaper:2008/9. 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: Yongdeng Xu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecscfuk.html .

    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.