Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:15:01.078Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Property Rights, Deregulation, and Entrepreneurial Development in a Transition Economy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2017

Wubiao Zhou
Wubiao Zhou*
Affiliation:
Newcastle University Business School, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article investigates the relative roles of formal property rights institutions versus deregulated markets in entrepreneurial development, based on China's market transition. Empirically, it is not yet known which set of institutions matters more for entrepreneurship, particularly in the long run, despite the existence of well-established theoretical arguments for each. Using provincial-level panel data from China's transition economy, this study has the following findings: On average, both formal protection of property rights and deregulated markets have positive effects on entrepreneurial development; yet, as market transition progresses, the effect of formal protection of property rights increases, while that of deregulated markets decreases. These results are robust to both multiple model specifications and an endogeneity test using an instrumental variable approach. Overall, therefore, while both sets of institutions indeed play positive roles in entrepreneurial development, property rights institutions may be more fundamental in the long run.

摘要:

摘要:

基于中国的市场转型, 本文研究正式的产权机制对比创业发展中解除管制的市场的相对作用。实证上, 现在还不知道那种机制, 特别是从长期来看, 对企业家精神更为重要, 尽管支持每种机制的完善的理论观点都存在。使用从中国转型经济中的省级平行数据, 这项研究有以下发现:平均而言, 正式的产权保护和解除管制的市场两者都对创业发展有积极作用; 然而, 随着市场转型的推进, 正式的产权保护的作用增加, 而解除管制的市场的作用降少。这些结果对多模型规范和用工具变量法做的内生性测试两者都是稳健的。总体上, 因此两种机制在创业发展中确实都能起到积极的作用, 但从长远来看, 产权机制可能是更根本的。

यह शोध पत्र चीन के बाजारोन्मुख संक्रमण के आधार पर उद्यमिता के विकास में औपचारिक संपत्ति अधिकार संस्थानों व अविनियमित बाज़ारों के तुलनात्मक योगदान का अनुसंधान करता है. आनुभविक तौर पर दोनों ही संस्थान संकुलों पर उपलब्ध प्रामाणिक तर्कों की उपलब्धि के बावजूद यह नियत नहीं है कि किसका उद्यमिता उत्थान पर विशेष तौर पर लम्बी अवधि में अधिक प्रभाव है. चीनी परिवर्तनशील अर्थव्यवस्था से प्रान्त-स्तरीय बहु-आयामी दीर्घकालीन आकड़ों (पैनल डाटा) के आधार पर इस शोध के निम्न निष्कर्ष हैं: औसतन उद्यमिता विकास पर औपचारिक संपत्ति अधिकारों कि रक्षा तथा अविनियमित बाजार- दोनों का सकारात्मक प्रभाव है; इसके बावजूद बाजारोन्मुखता के विकास के साथ औपचारिक संपत्ति रक्षा का प्रभाव बढ़ता है और अविनियमित बाज़ारों का प्रभाव घटता है. यह परिणाम बहुल आदर्श विनिर्देश और निमित्त चर पद्धति के आधार पर किया गए अन्तर्जात आधारित परीक्षण पर सुदृढ़ निकलते हैं. इसलिए जहाँ उद्यमिता विकास में दोनों ही प्रकार के संस्थानों का सकारात्मक योगदान है, दीर्घकालीन परिप्रेक्ष्य में संपत्ति अधिकार संस्थान अधिक महत्वपूर्ण हो सकते हैं.

Sumário:

Sumário:

Este artigo investiga os papeis relativos das instituições de direitos de propriedade formal em relação a mercados desregulados no desenvolvimento empresarial, com base na transição de mercado na China. Empiricamente, ainda não se sabe que conjunto de instituições importa mais para o empreendedorismo, particularmente a longo prazo, apesar da existência de argumentos teóricos bem estabelecidos para cada um. Usando dados em painel ao nível provincial na economia de transição da China, este estudo tem as seguintes descobertas: em média, tanto a proteção formal dos direitos de propriedade quanto os mercados desregulados têm efeitos positivos no desenvolvimento empresarial; ainda assim, à medida que a transição de mercado avança, o efeito da proteção formal dos direitos de propriedade aumenta, enquanto que o efeito dos mercados desregulados diminui. Esses resultados são robustos tanto para as especificações de vários modelos quanto para um teste de endogeneidade usando uma abordagem com variável instrumental. No geral, portanto, enquanto ambos os conjuntos de instituições desempenham papéis positivos no desenvolvimento empreendedor, as instituições de direitos de propriedade podem ser mais fundamentais a longo prazo.

Аннотация:

АННОТАЦИЯ:

В этой статье исследуется роль формальных институтов, регулирующих права собственности, в сравнении с дерегуляцией рынков для развития предпринимательства в условиях переходной экономики Китая. Эмпирически пока неизвестно, какой тип институтов имеет большее значение для предпринимательства, особенно в долгосрочной перспективе, несмотря на наличие устоявшихся теоретических аргументов для каждого типа. На основании данных на уровне провинций в переходной экономике Китая, это исследование делает следующие выводы: в целом, как формальная защита прав собственности, так и дерегулирование рынков оказывают положительное влияние на развитие предпринимательства; однако, по мере перехода к рыночной экономике, значение формальной защиты прав собственности возрастает, в то время как значение дерегуляции рынков уменьшается. Эти результаты являются надежными, поскольку они соответствуют требованиям многоуровневой модели, а также проходят тест на эндогенность с использованием метода инструментальных переменных. В целом, соответственно, хотя оба типа институтов действительно играют положительную роль в развитии предпринимательства, формальные институты прав собственности могут быть более фундаментальными в долгосрочной перспективе.

Resumen:

RESUMEN:

Este artículo investiga los roles relativos de las instituciones formales de derechos de propiedad frente a los mercados desregulados en el desarrollo empresarial, basados en la transición del mercado chino. Empíricamente, aún no es conocido cuál es el conjunto de instituciones más importante para el emprendimiento, particularmente en el largo plazo, a pesar de la existencia de argumentos teóricos bien establecidos para cada uno. Usando un panel de datos a nivel provincial de la economía en transición China, este estudio tiene los siguientes hallazgos: En promedio, tanto para la protección formal de los derechos de protección como los mercados desregulados tienen efectos positivos en el desarrollo empresarial; sin embargo, a medida que avanza la transición del mercado, el efecto de la protección formal de los derechos de propiedad aumenta, mientras que los de los mercados desregulados disminuye. Estos resultados son robustos tanto para especificaciones de múltiples modelos y una prueba de endogeneidad usando un enfoque de variables instrumentales. En general, por consiguiente, mientras ambos conjuntos de instituciones en efecto juegan roles positivos en el desarrollo empresarial, las instituciones de derechos de propiedad pueden ser más fundamentales en el largo plazo.

Keywords

Chinaderegulated marketsentrepreneurial developmentproperty rightsregionally decentralized systemtransition economy中国解除管制的市场创业发展产权区域放权系统转型经济चीनअविनियमित बाजारउद्यमिता विकासक्षेत्रवार विकेन्द्रीकरण व्यवस्थापरिवर्तनशील अर्थव्यवस्थाएंChinamercados desreguladosdesenvolvimento empreendedordireitos de propriedadesistema regionalmente descentralizadoeconomia de transiçãoКитайдерегулирование рынковразвитие предпринимательстваправа собственностисистема региональной децентрализациипереходная экономикаChinamercados desreguladosdesarrollo empresarialderechos de propiedadsistema regionalmente descentralizadoeconomía de transición
Type
Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 73 - 103
Copyright
Copyright © The International Association for Chinese Management Research 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. 2005. Unbundling institutions. Journal of Political Economy, 113 (5): 949–995.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. 2001. The Colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American Economic Review, 91 (5): 1369–1401.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. 2005. Institutions as a fundamental cause of long-run growth. Handbook of Economic Growth, 1: 385–472.Google Scholar
Acs, Z. J., & Szerb, L. 2007. Entrepreneurship, economic growth and public policy. Small Business Economics, 28 (2–3): 109–122.Google Scholar
Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. 2008. Institutions and entrepreneurship development in Russia: A comparative perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 23 (6): 656–672.Google Scholar
Alesina, A., & Spolaore, E. 2005. War, peace, and the size of countries. Journal of Public Economics, 89 (7): 1333–1354.Google Scholar
Baum, C. F., Schaffer, M. E., & Stillman, S. 2003. Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing. Stata Journal, 3 (1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Baumol, W. 1990. Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98 (5): 893–921.Google Scholar
Bowen, H., & De Clercq, D. 2008. Institutional context and the allocation of entrepreneurial effort. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 747–767.Google Scholar
Bruton, G., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H. 2010. Institutional theory and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34 (3): 421–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, N., & Rogers, T. 2007. Economic freedom and net business formation. Cato Journal, 27 (1): 23–36.Google Scholar
Capelleras, J. L., Mole, K. F., Greene, F. J., & Storey, D. J. 2008. Do more heavily regulated economies have poorer performing new ventures? Evidence from Britain and Spain. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 688–704.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, S., & Hadi, A. 2006. Regression analysis by example. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Chen, C. 1999. Local institutions and the transformation of property rights in Southern Fujian. In Walder, A. & Oi, J. (Eds.), Property rights and economic reform in China: 49–70. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
China Economic Weekly. 2015. Dai Guofang: The rise and failure of a Steel Giant (Yidai Xiaoxiong Daiguofang: Gangtie Dawang de Yunluo yu Jueqi). December 17.Google Scholar
China Statistical Bureau. 1998–2007. Zhongguo tongji nianjian (China Statistical Yearbooks.) Beijing: China Statistical Publishing House.Google Scholar
Chow, G. 2002. China's economic transformation. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Clarke, D. 2003. Economic development and the rights hypothesis: The China problem. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 51: 89–111.Google Scholar
Clarke, D. 2007. Legislating for a market economy in China. China Quarterly, 191: 567–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, T., & Linzer, D. 2015. Should I use fixed or random effects? Political Science Research and Methods, 3 (2): 399–408.Google Scholar
Demsetz, H. 1967. Toward a theory of property rights. American Economic Review, 57 (2): 347–359.Google Scholar
De Soto, H. 2000. Mystery of capital: Why capitalism triumphs in the west and fails everywhere else. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Dickson, B. J. 2003. Red capitalists in China. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dieterle, S., & Snell, A. 2013. Exploiting nonlinearities in the first stage regressions of IV procedures. [Cited 6 November 2013]. Available from URL: https://www.bath.ac.uk/economics/documents/external_seminar_papers/Exploiting_Nonlinearities_in_the_First_Stage_Regressions_of_IV_Procedures_210214.pdf .Google Scholar
Dixit, A. 2004. Lawlessness and economics: Alternate modes of governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Djankov, S., Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. 2002. The regulation of entry. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117 (1): 1–37.Google Scholar
Djankov, S., McLiesh, C., & Ramalho, R. 2006. Regulation and growth. Economics Letters, 92 (3): 395–401.Google Scholar
Djelic, M. L., Nooteboom, B., & Whitley, R. 2005. Introduction: Dynamics of interaction between institutions, markets and organizations. Organization Studies, 26 (12): 1733–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, G., & Wang, X. 2000. Zhongguo gediqu shichanghua xiangdui zhishu jincheng 2000 niandu baogao (NERI Index of Marketization of China's Provinces 2000 Report.) Beijing: China Economic Science Press.Google Scholar
Fan, G., & Wang, X. 2001. Zhongguo gediqu shichanghua xiangdui zhishu jincheng 2001 niandu baogao (NERI Index of Marketization of China's Provinces 2001 Report.) Beijing: China Economic Science Press.Google Scholar
Fan, G., & Wang, X. 2006. Zhongguo gediqu shichanghua xiangdui zhishu jincheng 2006 niandu baogao (NERI Index of Marketization of China's Provinces 2006 Report.) Beijing: China Economic Science Press.Google Scholar
Frye, T., & Shleifer, A. 1997. The invisible hand and the grabbing hand. The American Economic Review, 87 (2): 354–358.Google Scholar
Gartner, W., & Shane, S. 1995. Measuring entrepreneurship over time. Journal of Business Venturing, 10 (4): 283–301.Google Scholar
Gohmann, S., Hobbs, B., & McCrickard, M. 2008. Economic freedom and service industry growth in the United States. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32 (5): 855–874.Google Scholar
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. & Lounsbury, M. 2011. Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5 (1): 317–371.Google Scholar
Gregory, N., Tenev, S., & Wagle, D. 2000. China's emerging private enterprises. International Finance Corporation.Google Scholar
Gwartney, J., Lawson, R., & Gartzke, E. 2005. Economic freedom of the world: 2005 annual report. The Fraser Institute.Google Scholar
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. 1989. Organizational Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, J. A. 1978. Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 46 (6): 1251–1271.Google Scholar
Holz, C. 2004. China's statistical system in transition. Review of Income and Wealth, 50 (3): 381–409.Google Scholar
Huang, M. 2008a. Zhongguo minying qiye fazhan baogao, disan juan (The Development Report of Non-state-owned Enterprises in China, No. 4.). Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.Google Scholar
Huang, Y. 2008b. Capitalism with Chinese characteristics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huntington, S. P. 1968. Political order in changing societies. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Institute of Economic and Resource Management. 2003. Zhongguo shichang jingji fazhan baogao 2003 (Development Report of China's Market Economy 2003). Beijing: Beijing Shifan Daxue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. E., Klich, J., & Poznanska, K. 1999. Firm creation and economic transitions. Journal of Business Venturing, 14 (5–6): 427–450.Google Scholar
Jennings, P., Greenwood, R., Lounsbury, M., & Suddaby, R. 2013. Institutions, entrepreneurs, and communities. Journal of Business Venturing, 28 (1): 1–9.Google Scholar
Johnson, S., McMillan, J., & Woodruff, C. 2002. Property rights and finance. The American Economic Review, 92 (5): 1335–1356.Google Scholar
Lardy, N. 2014. Markets over Mao: The rise of private business in China. Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Li, X., & Ye, W. 2015. The construction and measurement of Guanxi culture across Chinese regions (Zhongguo Ge Diqu Guanxi Wenhua Zhishu Jiangou He Celiang). Unpublished Paper.Google Scholar
Long, J. S. 1997. Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Lu, J., & Tao, Z. 2010. Determinants of entrepreneurial activities in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 25 (3): 261–273.Google Scholar
Martinez, J. 2005. Equilibrium entrepreneurship rate, economic development and growth: Evidence from Spanish regions. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 17 (2): 145–161.Google Scholar
McMillan, J., & Woodruff, C. 2002. The central role of entrepreneurs in transition economies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16 (3): 153–170.Google Scholar
McMullen, J. S., Bagby, D., & Palich, L. E. 2008. Economic freedom and the motivation to engage in entrepreneurial action. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32 (5): 875–895.Google Scholar
Minniti, M. 2008. The role of government policy on entrepreneurial activity: Productive, unproductive, or destructive. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32 (5): 780–790.Google Scholar
Minniti, M., & Levesque, M. 2008. Recent development in the economics of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 23 (6): 603–612.Google Scholar
Montinola, G., Qian, Y., & Weingast, B. 1995. Federalism, Chinese style: The political basis for economic success. World Politics, 48 (1): 50–81.Google Scholar
Naughton, B. 2007. The Chinese economy: Transitions and growth. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nee, V., & Opper, S. 2009. Bureaucracy and financial markets. Kyklos, 62 (2): 293–315.Google Scholar
Nee, V., & Opper, S. 2012. Capitalism from below: Markets and institutional change in China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
North, D. 1990. Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
North, D., & Thomas, R. 1973. The rise of the western world: A new economic history. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
North, D., & Weingast, B. 1989. Constitutions and commitment: The evolution of institutional governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. Journal of Economic History, 49 (4): 803–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peltzman, S. 1989. The economic theory of regulation after a decade of deregulation. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics: 1–59.Google Scholar
Peng, Y. 2004. Kinship networks and entrepreneurs in China's transitional economy. American Journal of Sociology, 109 (5): 1045–1074.Google Scholar
Pistor, K., Raiser, M., & Gelfer, S. 2000. Law and finance in transition economies. The Economics of Transition, 8 (2): 325–368.Google Scholar
Puffer, S., McCarthy, D., & Boisot, M. 2009. Entrepreneurship in Russia and China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34 (3): 441–467.Google Scholar
Qian, Y. 2000. The process of China's market transition (1978–1998): The evolutionary, historical, and comparative perspectives. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 156 (1): 151–171.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. 1995. Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sobel, R. 2008. Testing Baumol: Institutional quality and the productivity of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 23 (6): 641–655.Google Scholar
Storey, D. 1994. Understanding the small business sector. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tan, J., Yang, J., & Veliyath, R. 2009. Particularistic and system trust among small and medium enterprises: A comparative study in China's transition economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (6): 544–557.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 1994. Threats and opportunities faced by private businesses in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 9 (6): 451–468.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 1996. In search of legitimacy: The private entrepreneur in China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 21 (1): 21–30.Google Scholar
Uzzi, B. 1996. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61 (4): 674–698.Google Scholar
Walder, A., & Oi, J. 1999. Property rights in the Chinese economy: Contours of the process of change. In Walder, A. & Oi, J. (Eds.), Property rights and economic reform in China: 1–26. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Whiting, S. 1999. The regional evolution of ownership forms: Shareholding cooperatives and rural industry in Shanghai and Wenzhou. In Walder, A. & Oi, J. (Eds.), Property rights and economic reform in China: 171–202. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Whyte, M. 2009. Paradoxes of China's economic boom. Annual Review of Sociology, 35: 371–392.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. 2002. Economic analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. 2013. Introductory econometrics: A modern approach. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Wu, X. 2006. Communist cadres and market opportunities: Entry into self-employment in China, 1978–1996. Social Forces, 85 (1): 389–411.Google Scholar
Xin, K. R., & Pearce, J. L. 1996. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 39 (6): 1641–1658.Google Scholar
Xu, C. 2011. The fundamental institutions of China's reforms and development. Journal of Economic Literature, 49 (4): 1076–1151.Google Scholar
Yuan, Y. 2007. The process and characteristics of private economy development in Zhejiang province, 8 January 2007. [Cited 6 November 2013]. Available from URL: https://sdc.zjdx.cn/quyjj/ShowAticle.asp?ArticleID=250Google Scholar
Zhou, W. 2009. Bank financing in China's private sector: The payoffs of political capital. World Development, 37 (4): 787–799.Google Scholar
Zhou, W. 2011. Regional deregulation and entrepreneurial growth in China's transition economy. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23 (9–10): 853–876.Google Scholar
Zhou, W. 2013. Political connections and entrepreneurial investment: Evidence from China's transition economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 28 (2): 299–315.Google Scholar
Zhou, W. 2014. Regional institutional development, political connections, and entrepreneurial performance in China's transition economy. Small Business Economics, 43 (1): 161–181.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Zhou supplementary material

Translated abstracts

Download Zhou supplementary material(File)
File 13.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhou supplementary material

Translated abstracts

Download Zhou supplementary material(File)
File 14.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhou supplementary material

Translated abstracts

Download Zhou supplementary material(File)
File 20.2 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhou supplementary material

Translated abstracts

Download Zhou supplementary material(File)
File 13.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhou supplementary material

Translated abstracts

Download Zhou supplementary material(File)
File 13.4 KB