Productivity Growth and Ownership Change in China: 1998-2007

This paper studies the industry productivity dynamics in China’s manufacturing sector from 1998 to 2007, and in particular, explores to what extent the privatization of state-owned enter- prises (SOEs) contributes to the aggregate productivity growth. Our results show that, though non-SOEs on average are more productive than SOEs, the average productivity growth among SOEs is greater than their counterparts. Industry concentration, taxation, and credit market all account for this difference in growth between SOEs and non-SOEs. We find that industry productivity growth is mainly attributed to the growth of non-SOEs, entry of non-SOE firms, and the exit of SOEs. However, non-SOE firms that are transformed directly from SOEs make a small and negative contribution to industry productivity growth.Productivity Growth, Industry Dynamics, Ownership Change, Reallocation

Productivity growth and ownership change in China: 1998-2007

This paper studies the industry productivity dynamics in China’s manufacturing sector from 1998 to 2007, and in particular, explores to what extent the privatization of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) contributes to the aggregate productivity growth. Our results show that, though non-SOEs on average are more productive than SOEs, the average productivity growth among SOEs is greater than the privately-owned firms. Industry concentration, taxation, and credit market all account for this difference in growth between SOEs and non-SOEs. In addition, industry productivity growth is mainly attributed to the growth of non-SOEs, entry of non-SOE firms, and the exit of SOEs. However, non-SOE firms that are transformed directly from SOEs make a small but negative contribution to industry productivity growth.Productivity Growth, Industry Dynamics, Ownership Change, Reallocation

Productivity growth and ownership change in China: 1998-2007

This paper studies the industry productivity dynamics in China’s manufacturing sector from 1998 to 2007, and in particular, explores to what extent the privatization of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) contributes to the aggregate productivity growth. Our results show that, though non-SOEs on average are more productive than SOEs, the average productivity growth among SOEs is greater than the privately-owned firms. Industry concentration, taxation, and credit market all account for this difference in growth between SOEs and non-SOEs. In addition, industry productivity growth is mainly attributed to the growth of non-SOEs, entry of non-SOE firms, and the exit of SOEs. However, non-SOE firms that are transformed directly from SOEs make a small but negative contribution to industry productivity growth.Productivity Growth, Industry Dynamics, Ownership Change, Reallocation

STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES AND EQUITIZATION IN VIETNAM

Equitization (privatization) has been at the core of the policy debate in Vietnam over the last decade but the government’s attitude seems ambivalent. On the one hand, equitization is emphasized in policy statements. On the other, the progress on equitization has been relatively modest and SOEs continue to dominate the Vietnamese economy. This paper examines SOEs and the equitization process in Vietnam. We compare the development with guidelines from economic theory and with lessons from privatization programs in other countries. Equitization in Vietnam is found to target small SOEs and no larger ones, and it does not address the efficiency problem with state ownership since the state typically remains a controlling share of the equitized SOEs. Moreover, economic theory and experience from other countries suggest that the Vietnamese approach with diffused ownership in SOEs and in equitized firms; equitization to employees and management; and little participation of strategic investors, might not be the most efficient approach to public ownership and to equitization. We argue in this paper that Vietnam still has an opportunity to change its approach towards SOEs and equitization and thereby secure increased efficiency and economic growth.State Owned Enterprises; Privatization; Equitization; Vietnam

The Institutional Foundation of Foreign-Invested Enterprises (FIEs) in China

Foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs) are now an important component of the Chinese economy. Since 1992, the growth of FIEs has been exponential. However our understanding of the institutional factors driving the FIE growth remains limited. This paper uses data from 39 industries in China for a period of three years (1995-1997) to explore the institutional foundation of the FIE growth. Our findings suggest that the debt obligations on the part of the SOEs and the local control of the SOEs promote the growth of FIEs and that some of the foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows result in acquisition of existing assets and shift asset controls from SOEs to FIEs.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39649/3/wp264.pd

Productivity Growth and Ownership Change in China: 1998-2007

This paper studies the industry productivity dynamics in China’s manufacturing sector from 1998 to 2007, and in particular, explores to what extent the privatization of state-owned enter- prises (SOEs) contributes to the aggregate productivity growth. Our results show that, though non-SOEs on average are more productive than SOEs, the average productivity growth among SOEs is greater than their counterparts. Industry concentration, taxation, and credit market all account for this difference in growth between SOEs and non-SOEs. We find that industry productivity growth is mainly attributed to the growth of non-SOEs, entry of non-SOE firms, and the exit of SOEs. However, non-SOE firms that are transformed directly from SOEs make a small and negative contribution to industry productivity growth

Efficiency, Technical Progress, and Best Practice in Chinese State Enterprises (1980-1994)

In spite of rapid economic growth and swift structural change during the last two decades, China’s industrial reform is far from complete, especially with regard to state enterprises (SOEs). Although troubled with huge financial losses, heavy debt, and substantial over-staffing, SOEs will continue to play a crucial part in the government policy to maintain social stability and economic growth in China. This study, based on samples of about 700 state enterprises during 1980-94, investigates productivity performance of the SOEs using Data Envelopment Analysis and Malmquist Index. Our empirical results show that average technical efficiency had been low among the sample SOEs. Considerable productivity growth was found, but it was mainly accomplished through technical progress rather than efficiency improvement. Regression analyses indicate that wage incentives and education had positive impacts on productivity growth, while large scale was an important determinant of whether an SOE was applying best practice technology. It is also shown that large SOEs were more likely to generate technical progress. These findings are consistent with the industrial structural adjustment program initiated by the government in 1994, which has focused on improving productive efficiency via redundancies and technology upgrading, and on building its best SOEs into conglomerates.Efficiency; productivity; technical progress; state enterprises; reform

ESTIMATING PRODUCTIVITY DYNAMICS DURING INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE: AN APPLICATION TO CHINESE STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES 1980-1994

We estimate the productivity dynamics of 680 industrial Chinese State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) between 1980 and 1994. During this time managerial autonomy over factor markets was introduced. The timing of autonomy varied across SOEs and take-up was an endogenous process: high-productivity SOEs where more likely to take managerial control. We allow for this by adapting an algorithm developed in Olley & Pakes (1996) in order to generate estimates of productivity dynamics that deal with both simultaneity and endogenous selection biases. Apart from offering a methodology to estimate productivity dynamics during endogenous institutional change, we demonstrate that SOEs in China obtained productivity gains from managerial autonomy over factor markets in the years before privatisation.

Characterizing the University of California's tenure-track teaching position from the faculty and administrator perspectives.

Teaching faculty are a potential mechanism to generate positive change in undergraduate STEM education. One such type of faculty is the Lecturer with Potential Security of Employment (L(P)SOE), a tenure-track faculty line within the University of California (UC) system. As a foundation for future studies, we sought to characterize individuals in the L(P)SOE position in terms of their background training, job expectations, and resources available for their success. Data were collected through an online survey completed by over 80% of STEM L(P)SOEs across the UC system, as well as interviews with over 20 deans and chairs in STEM departments at three UC campuses. From this work, we found that the majority of current L(P)SOEs were formally trained within their disciplines and not in an education field; however, they possessed substantial education experience, such as classroom teaching or participation in professional development opportunities. Expectations for time spent on teaching, research, and service are aligned between individuals within varying ranks of the L(P)SOE faculty and between L(P)SOEs and administrators. L(P)SOEs and administrators are also in agreement about what constitutes acceptable professional development activities. Interestingly, we identified differences that may reflect changes in the position over time, including increased start-up funds for more recently hired L(P)SOE faculty and a differing perspective on the role of discipline-based education research and scholarly activities between non-tenured and more senior L(P)SOEs. Overall, these data provide a snapshot of the L(P)SOE position that will aid in future work to identify the potential institutional impact of these individuals