A re-examination of China’s share issue privatization

Previous studies show that in contrast to evidence that share issue privatization (SIP) in most other countries have improved firm profitability, China’s SIP of the 1990s had no such effect. We argue that the main reason for the failure of China’s SIP is likely to have been the weak institutional environment in place at that time. We examine China’s SIP in a more recent period in which the institutional environment was greatly improved. Using a matching sample method, we find that SIP firms continued to experience negative post-SIP profitability changes in our sample period. However, their performance decline was significantly less than that of their matched non-SIP SOEs. We also find that the introduction of the independent director rule helped to improve firm performance. Our results reconcile the findings of the SIP effect in China with international evidence and illustrate the importance of a developed capital market to ensuring the success of privatization schemes.     

Determinants of state equity ownership,and its effect on value/performance: China's privatized firms

Evidence on the relationship between state ownership and performance in China's privatized firms is convex, concave and linear. Hence, the nature of this relationship is not resolved. This study examines this relationship for a larger, more recent sample of 4315 firm year observations of privatized Chinese firms during 1996–2003. Results support the hypothesis of a convex relationship between state ownership and performance showing benefits from strong privatization and state control. Not only is ownership structure found to affect performance, but also ownership concentration and balance of power jointly affect performance. Chinese firms with mixed control show significantly poorer performance than state or private controlled firms affirming the problem of ambiguity of ownership control, property rights, agency issues, profits and welfare objectives. New determinants of state ownership in China's firms are strategic importance, legal ownership, profitability, and market performance. Privatization benefits because there is a causal relation between ownership and performance.     

Can corporatization improve the performance of state-owned enterprises even without privatization?

This paper examines an important reform program in China concerning State Owned Enterprises (SOEs), namely, corporatization without privatization. It finds that corporatization has had a significantly positive impact on SOE performance. It further shows that the sources of efficiency engendered by corporatization can be traced to the reform of the internal governance structure of these firms. The results indicate that, even without privatization, corporate governance reform is potentially an effective way of improving the performance of SOEs; such reforms represent a policy alternative for countries seeking to restructure SOEs without massive privatization. The results also suggest that it may be optimal for governments to carry out corporatization of SOEs before eventual privatization.     

Does Government Subsidy Affect Firm Survival? Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing Firms

ABSTRACT

This article applies a matching approach to deal with the selection bias and use the complementary log-log model to analyze the impacts of subsidy on Chinese manufacturing firms’ survival from 1998 to 2007. Our empirical results show that government subsidies significantly decrease the likelihood of firm exit. However, the effect decreases as the level of subsidies increases for private and foreign firms, but displays a nonlinear relationship across subsidy levels for SOEs. We also show the effects vary across the levels of institutional quality measured by the prevalence of rent seeking and government intervention. Further results suggest that the potential channels include increased investment in intangible and fixed assets as well as enhanced profitability.     

Investment efficiency,state-owned enterprises and privatisation: Evidence from Viet Nam in Transition

Our research firstly tests the difference in investment efficiency between state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and private firms and secondly evaluates the effect of privatisation and equitisation policies on the investment efficiency of former state owned enterprises (SOEs). We use a novel dataset from Viet Nam which covers large and non-listed SMEs across construction, manufacturing, and service sectors. Our methodology uses a structural model to test the relationship between Tobin's Q and capital spending. While evident differences in investment efficiency are found across heterogeneous groups of private firms (size, industry, financially constrained and location), we find no evidence of investment spending being linked to marginal returns by SOEs across all sectors and size classes. However, former SOEs that have been privatised and equitized with a minority state shareholding display positive links between Q and investment. In fact, the link is stronger for these firms than for private firms. Differences are also evident across size and sector highlighting that the method of divestment chosen by government shareholders has a differential impact on efficiency across groups of firms and industries.     

Operating and stock market performance of state-owned enterprise privatizations: The Spanish experience

We investigate the operating and stock market performance of Spanish state-owned enterprises (SOEs) privatized through public share issue offerings (SIPs) from 1990 to 2001, when the last SIP was conducted. We compare the performance of SOEs and privately-owned firms. We find significant operating improvements in Spanish SOEs after the privatization. Specifically, they show significant increases in income efficiency, real sales and employment. Spanish governments tried to minimize the foregone proceeds when selling SOE shares and underpriced them lower than private firms. We relate these results with the pressure of the Maastricht Treaty fiscal criteria, as well as lower information asymmetries between firms and investors. Finally, we do not find long-term abnormal stock market performance after SIPs.     

SHORT‐TERM EFFECTS OF PRIVATIZATION ON OPERATING PERFORMANCE IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

In this article I use a sample of 178 Czech firms that were in the first wave of voucher privatization to test changes in efficiency and profitability. Based on a previous study's methodology, nonparametric tests reveal that efficiency and profitability decreased immediately following privatization. This is in contrast to earlier studies that find privatization increases these measures. Changes in firms' operations do not vary significantly by size or ownership but do vary by industry type, with nonmanufacturing firms having more positive (or less negative) changes after privatization. Evidence indicates that in spite of the disappointing findings, positive operating performance changes are taking place, such as a decrease in employment. JEL classification: G32, L33, 052     

Partial Privatization and Firm Performance

Most privatization programs begin with a period of partial privatization in which only non‐controlling shares of firms are sold on the stock market. Since management control is not transferred to private owners it is widely contended that partial privatization has little impact. This perspective ignores the role that the stock market can play in monitoring and rewarding managerial performance even when the government remains the controlling owner. Using data on Indian state‐owned enterprises we find that partial privatization has a positive impact on profitability, productivity, and investment.     

Political connections,tax benefits and firm performance: Evidence from China

This paper investigates the different effects of political connections on the firm performance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and privately owned enterprises. Using data on Chinese listed firms from 1999 to 2007, we find that private firms with politically connected managers outperform those without such managers, whereas local SOEs with connected managers underperform those without such managers. Moreover, we find that private firms with politically connected managers enjoy tax benefits, whereas local SOEs with politically connected managers are prone to more severe over-investment problems. Our study reconciles the mixed findings of previous studies on the effect of political connections on firm performance.     

The financial and operating performance of China's newly listed H-firms

This study compares pre- and post-listing financial and operating performance for a complete sample of H-firms that are incorporated in Mainland China and listed in Hong Kong between 1993 and 2000. Theoretically, there are two major opposing influences on the performance change of these newly listed firms: negative initial public offering (IPO) effect and positive privatization effect. Our major findings are: (1) the IPO effect dominates the privatization effect, so that the H-firms experienced a significant decrease in profitability and operating efficiency after listing, and (2) the performance of a control sample of newly listed private firms declined more than that of the H-firms, probably because the positive privatization effect somewhat offset the negative IPO effect for the H-firms. This paper is the first to document the positive effect of privatization in oversea listed Chinese companies.     

民营化、融资约束与企业创新——来自中国工业企业的证据

本文研究国有企业民营化对企业创新的影响及其影响机制。利用中国工业企业数据库,以民营化企业为实验组、以国有企业为对照组进行双重差分检验,结果发现,国有企业民营化显著抑制了企业创新,而融资约束是抑制民营化企业创新的重要因素。进一步检验发现,融资约束对民营化企业创新的抑制作用主要存在于金融发展水平较低的地区,而在金融发展水平较高的地区,这种抑制作用并不明显。本文的研究结果从融资约束的角度拓展了民营化影响企业创新的相关研究,且从民营化的角度为金融市场如何影响企业创新提供了新的视角。此外,本文有助于澄清有关民营化的争议,为进一步深化混合所有制改革、加强金融对民营企业的支持以促进民营企业的创新和发展提供理论依据和政策参考。     

Government Stakes as an Insurance Policy: Evidence from Seasoned Equity Offerings of Chinese Firms

While privatization has attracted much more attention in the literature, one type of reverse privatization, a privately-controlled firm inviting government ownership as its minority shareholders, is neglected in the literature. Using large-scale census firm data from China, we investigate the determinants of this kind of reverse privatization and its impact on firm performance. We find that (1) the decision of reverse privatization by Chinese private firms is affected by local political risk, firm-level financial characteristics, and industry-level characteristics, (2) the reverse privatization significantly affects the firm’s performance, which is measured in different proxies but the effects are not consistent, and (3) moreover, we find that the benefit of reverse privatization decreases as government ownership increases. Our results suggest that the prevalence of reverse privatization in China is a political outcome, which is affected by the trade-off of political risk and political privilege. Our work suggests that political risk and political considerations are the main driving factors of privatization, or its opposite, reverse privatization. Reverse privatization, to some extent, is a rational choice in some transition economies. Our findings offer clear policy implications to the nationalization phenomenon taking place around the world recently.     

Privatization,financial development,property rights and growth

This study analyzes how prevailing institutional arrangements i.e., property rights, contracting rights, political institutions, and corporate governance practices affect privatized firms’ performance, capital markets development, and economic growth. Most of the studies surveyed show that privatization enhances privatized firms performance, efficiency, and profitability, which percolates to economic growth. Privatized firms performed better in countries with better regulatory and legal frameworks. Partial privatization may be beneficial in countries with weak institutions, namely, the French civil law countries. The stronger the economic and the governing institutions, the easier it is for privatized firms to thrive and contribute to economic growth. Overall, privatization allows firms to achieve improved efficiency while driving the development of the financial sector.     

Long-run performance of an industry after broader reforms including privatization

Research on the impacts of broader reforms, including privatization on firms’ long-run financial and operational performance, is extremely important but only occasionally performed. This study evaluates the long-run financial performance, total factor productivity, efficiency and technology of Pakistani cement manufacturing firms. We conclude that privatized firms have in fact achieved significant productivity growth in the long run due to technological progress compared to no growth in the pre-reform period. Interestingly, however, better productive performance has not contributed to long-run profitability and income efficiency gains, thereby casting serious doubt on the long-run financial benefits of reforms, including privatization.     

Earnings‐based Delisting Regulations and Government Subsidies

This paper examines who receives government subsidies when a firm faces delisting risk and how subsidies affect such a firm's performance in China. It focuses on the accounting‐based delisting rule issued in 1998 that relies heavily on the profitability of firms. Using the probit model, this study finds that subsidies are less likely to be granted to a firm that has a higher risk of being delisted than a healthy firm, but are more likely to be granted to such a firm if it is state‐owned. It is also found that having a political connection increases a firm's chance of receiving subsidies, but such an effect disappears when a firm faces a delisting risk. In assessing the impact of a subsidy on firm performance, this study shows that a subsidy increases a firm's valuation and profitability for firms at delisting risk.     

Liberalization, corporate governance and the performance of privatized firms in developing countries

This paper seeks to provide an answer to the following question: when and how does privatization work? Using a sample of 230 firms headquartered in 32 developing countries, we document a significant increase in profitability, efficiency, investment and output. Our analysis shows that the changes in performance vary with the extent of macro-economic reforms and environment, and the effectiveness of corporate governance. In particular, economic growth is associated with higher profitability and efficiency gains, trade liberalization is associated with higher levels of investment and output, while financial liberalization is associated with higher output changes. Further, control relinquishment by the government is a key determinant of profitability, efficiency gains and output increases. Finally, we find higher improvements in efficiency for firms in countries in which stock markets are more developed and where property rights are better protected and enforced. These results for a sample of developing countries differ from those reported in a contemporaneous study by D'Souza et al. [D'Souza, J., Megginson, W.L., Nash, R.C., 2001. Why do privatized firms improve performance? Evidence from developed countries. Unpublished working paper. University of Oklahoma] which focuses on developed countries. These diverging findings suggest that privatization in developing countries indeed obeys to particular constraints and has a dynamic of its own.     

CEO turnover in China: the role of market-based and accounting performance measures

We investigate the relationship between chief executive officer (CEO) turnover and firm performance in China's publicly traded firms. We provide evidence on the use of accounting and market-based performance measures in CEO turnover decision. We also investigate the moderating roles of noise in performance measures, firm growth opportunities, state-owned enterprises, and corporate governance reform on the weights attached to these performance measures. We observe that Chinese listed firms rely more on accounting performance than on stock market performance when determining CEO turnover. Firms with noisier performance measures and larger growth opportunities rely less on both accounting performance and stock market performance in CEO replacement decision. State-controlled firms are more likely to use accounting performance to determine CEO turnover. Finally, we observe that the weight attached to the accounting performance measure is significantly reduced and the weight attached to the stock market performance measure is significantly increased after the governance reform. We also observe that the reform has different impact on state-owned firms and private firms in terms of the sensitivity of CEO turnover to firm performance.     

Corporate performance and CEO compensation in China

This paper examines the compensation of CEOs in China's listed firms. First, we discuss what is known about the setting of CEO compensation and then we go on to examine factors that may help explain variations in the use of performance related pay. In China, listed firms have a dominant or controlling shareholder and we argue that the distinct types of controlling shareholder have different impacts on the use of incentive pay. We find that firms that have a State agency as the major shareholder do not appear to use performance related pay. In contrast, firms that have private blockholders or SOEs as their major shareholders relate the CEO's pay to increases in stockholders' wealth or increases in profitability. However the pay–performance sensitivities for CEOs are low and this raises questions about the effectiveness of firms' incentive systems.     

The performance of privatized firms in the Czech Republic

With the growing importance of privatizations as a part of government policy, most empirical studies of these privatizations conclude that firm performance immediately improves following privatization. Privatization has been the most important part of the transition from the centrally planned economies of Central and Eastern Europe and has a larger impact on those economies than privatizations in other countries. However, few studies have looked at the performance of firms following mass privatization. This study uses 453 separate firms (101 firms privatized in both waves for a total of 554 observations), in the first and second waves of Czech voucher privatization. Using methodology from previous studies, we find that while the overall effects from privatization are positive, the effects vary by privatization wave, size, and industry. Firms privatized in the first wave performed worse (decline in performance following privatization) than firms privatized in the second wave. We also fail to find ownership concentration or debt as an important factor in restructuring the firm.I believe that the results are consistent with two hypotheses. First economic and political structure surrounding the privatization waves plays an important part in the success of privatization. Stable environments, both political and economic, help privatized firms restructure and improve operating performance as well as attract foreign investors and capital even in less developed countries, but in transitional economies undergoing mass privatization in rapidly changing and developing economic and political environments hinder firms from restructuring and improving performance following privatization. Results are also consistent with the hypothesis that firms with a longer preparation period prior to privatization, an “implicit seasoning”, improve performance following privatization.     

Lifting the Veil on Reverse Leveraged Buyouts: What Happens During the Private Period?

We document the different types of restructuring activities undertaken during the private period after the reverse leveraged buyout (RLBO) of previously public firms. Preceding the LBO, firm leverage significantly exceeds that of their peers, while their profitability is better than the industry. However, despite their superior performance, these firms are undervalued before going private. While private firms undertake value‐enhancement measures by increasing employee productivity, asset restructuring, decreasing cost of goods sold, and increasing ownership concentration. Enhanced valuation at the RLBO is a result of value capture, as well as efficiencies obtained from restructuring activities. We also identify factors determining the private period duration.