IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

How Transition Paths Differ: Enterprise Performance in Russia and China

  • Bhaumik, Sumon Kumar
  • Estrin, Saul

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 labour) 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.

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.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=4937
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 4937.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Feb 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:4937
Contact details of provider: Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information: Email:


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. 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.
  2. Daniel Berkowitz & David DeJong, 2001. "Entrepreneurship and Post-Socialist Growth," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 406, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  3. J Earle & S Estrin & L Leshchenko, 1996. "Ownership Structures," CEP Discussion Papers dp0315, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  4. Blanchard, O. & Aghion, P., 1996. "On insider privatization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 759-766, April.
  5. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-46, August.
  6. 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.
  7. Nicolas Barberis & Maxin Boycho & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1995. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1721, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  8. Lawrence J. Lau & Yingyi Qian & Gerard Roland, 1997. "Reform without Losers: An Interpretation of China's Dual-Track Approach to Transition," Working Papers 97048, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  9. 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.
  10. Yuanzheng Cao & Yingyi Qian & Barry R. Weingast, 1997. "From Federalism, Chinese Style to Privatization, Chinese style," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 126, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  11. Jan Svejnar, 2002. "Transition Economies: Performance and Challenges," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 3-28, Winter.
  12. Saul Estrin & Alan A. Bevan & Boris Kuznetsov & Mark E. Schaffer & Manuela Angelucci & Julian Fennema & Giovanni Mangiarotti, 2001. "The Determinants of Privatised Enterprise Performance in Russia," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 452, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. Djankov, Simeon & Murrell, Peter, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," CEPR Discussion Papers 3319, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  16. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, June.
  17. Granick, David, 1990. "Chinese State Enterprises," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226305882.
  18. Dewatripont, Mathias & Roland, Gérard, 1993. "The Design of Reform Packages Under Uncertainty," CEPR Discussion Papers 860, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. E, S & G, A & S, I, 1995. "Shocks and Adjustment by Firms in Transition: A Comparative Study," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 131-153, October.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
  26. 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.
  27. John S. Earle & Saul Estrin, . "Privatization, Competition, and Budget Constraints: Disciplining Enterprises in Russia," Upjohn Working Papers and Journal Articles jse20032, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
  28. 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.
  29. Li, Huagang, 1999. "State factories in transition--openness, competition, and productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 429-462, April.
  30. Saul Estrin, 2002. "Competition and Corporate Governance in Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 101-124, Winter.
  31. Blanchard, O & Kremer, M, 1996. "Disorganization," Working papers 96-30, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  32. Woo Wing Thye, 1994. "The Art of Reforming Centrally Planned Economies: Comparing China, Poland, and Russia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 276-308, June.
  33. J. Stiglitz, 1999. "Whither Reform? Ten Years of the Transition," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 7.
  34. 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.
  35. 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.
  36. 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.
  37. 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.
  38. 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.
  39. Estrin, Saul & Wright, Mike, 1999. "Corporate Governance in the Former Soviet Union," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 395-397, September.
  40. Tsui, Kai-yuen, 1996. "Economic reform and interprovincial inequalities in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 353-368, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:4937. 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: ()

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.