Performance comparison of state-owned enterprises versus private firms in selected emerging Asian countries

被引:19
作者
Le, Thai-Ha [1 ,2 ]
Park, Donghyun [3 ]
Castillejos-Petalcorin, Cynthia [3 ]
机构
[1] Fulbright Univ Vietnam, Fulbright Sch Publ Policy & Management, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
[2] IPAG Business Sch, Paris, France
[3] Asian Dev Bank, Manila, Philippines
关键词
Performance comparison; State-owned enterprises; Private firms; Asia; J08; L32; L33; CORRUPTION; CHINA; INNOVATION; VIETNAM; GROWTH; CONSTRAINTS; TRANSITION; MANAGEMENT; OWNERSHIP; BUSINESS;
D O I
10.1108/JABES-08-2021-0116
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
PurposeThis policy paper compares the performance of state-owned enterprise (SOEs) versus private firms in selected emerging economies in Asia, focusing on a number of performance indicators. The indicators are internationally recognized quality innovation, product and/or service innovation, financing of operations, dealing with government regulations and labor performance. To the best of the authors' knowledge, there has been no such comparative study for these indicators between SOEs and private firms and across countries. Most studies of SOEs have been national case studies. As such, they give us little knowledge of how a country compares with other countries at similar stages of economic development. A cross-country comparative analysis can help us identify broader trends and patterns.Design/methodology/approach The authors compare and discuss the performance of SOEs versus private firms in a number of emerging Asian countries, namely China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. To do so, the authors use data from the 2018 World Bank Enterprise Survey (which is the latest available) for the period 2012-2015. The authors focus on a number of key performance indicators, namely internationally recognized quality innovation, product and/or service innovation, financing of operations, dealing with government regulations and labor performance.Findings The comparative analysis uncovers some interesting differences between the two types of firms. For example, somewhat surprisingly, SOEs tend to innovate more than private firms. However, the single most significant pattern the authors find is that in middle-income Asia both types of firms face formidable challenges with respect to doing business - e.g. scarcity of relevant training programs for employees. Therefore, the priority of policymakers must be to improve the overall business environment for all firms, regardless of their ownership structure.Research limitations/implicationsThe nature of this paper is a policy paper. This is because the data used in this study is survey data, conducted every four-five years (or more) for each country in the study and available for very few countries. As the data are not available for a continuous period of time, The authors could not conduct empirical research for this topic and thus made it a policy paper that presents a comparison across Asian countries as case studies.Originality/valueThe five selected Asian countries are interesting case studies for a comparative analysis since they are middle-income countries where SOEs play a significant role in the economy. Furthermore, state ownership is an important institutional dimension in emerging markets, and strong ties with the government can influence the performance of SOEs through various market and non-market channels. Despite the potential importance of the research theme, there is very little existing research on cross-country comparisons of the performance of SOEs vis-a-vis private firms. This could be explained by scarce data availability. With this in mind, the study attempts to shed some light on SOEs' performance and add to the rather limited literature.
引用
收藏
页码:26 / 48
页数:23
相关论文
共 81 条
[11]   When and how does business group affiliation promote firm innovation? A tale of two emerging economies [J].
Chang, Sea-Jin ;
Chung, Chi-Nien ;
Mahmood, Ishtiaq P. .
ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2006, 17 (05) :637-656
[12]   Performance feedback and firms' R&D frequency: a comparison between state-owned and private-owned enterprises in China [J].
Chen, Xin ;
Xie, En ;
Van Essen, Marc .
ASIAN BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT, 2021, 20 (02) :221-258
[13]   Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: Evidence from China [J].
Choi, Suk Bong ;
Lee, Soo Hee ;
Williams, Christopher .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2011, 40 (03) :441-452
[14]   Ethical Values and Environmentalism in China: Comparing Employees from State-Owned and Private Firms [J].
Chun, Rosa .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2009, 84 :341-348
[15]  
Danish SM, 2020, 2020 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BLOCKCHAIN AND CRYPTOCURRENCY (IEEE ICBC), DOI [10.1109/icbc48266.2020.9169419, 10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3]
[16]  
De Rosa D, 2015, JAHRB NATL STAT, V235, P115
[17]   Long-run costs of piecemeal reform: Wage inequality and returns to education in Vietnam [J].
Diep Phan ;
Coxhead, Ian .
JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE ECONOMICS, 2013, 41 (04) :1106-1122
[18]   Private vs state ownership and earnings management: Evidence from Chinese listed companies [J].
Ding, Yuan ;
Zhang, Hua ;
Zhang, Junxi .
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 2007, 15 (02) :223-238
[19]  
Emerging Markets Consulting, 2014, Survey of ASEAN Employers on Skills and Competitiveness
[20]   Political decentralization and corruption: Evidence from around the world [J].
Fan, C. Simon ;
Lin, Chen ;
Treisman, Daniel .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2009, 93 (1-2) :14-34