Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v17y2001i1p168-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Effects of Performance Contracts: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Shirley, Mary M
  • Xu, Lixin Colin
Abstract
Performance contracts (PCs)--contracts signed between the government and state enterprise managers--have been used widely in developing countries. China's experience with such contracts was one of the largest experiments with contracting in the public sector, affecting hundreds of thousands of state firms, and offered a rare opportunity to explore how PCs work. On average, PCs did not improve performance and may have made it worse. But China's PCs were not uniformly bad; in fact, PCs improved productivity in slightly more than half of the participants. PC effects were on average negative because of the large losses associated with poorly designed PCs. Successful PCs were those that featured sensible targets, stronger incentives, longer terms, managerial bonds, and were in more competitive industries. Selecting managers through bidding was not associated with performance improvement. Good PC features were more often observed in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) under the oversight of local governments, that faced more competition, that were smaller in size, and that had better previous performance. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Shirley, Mary M & Xu, Lixin Colin, 2001. "Empirical Effects of Performance Contracts: Evidence from China," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 168-200, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:17:y:2001:i:1:p:168-200
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barberis, Nicholas & Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1996. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 764-790, August.
    2. Boardman, Anthony E & Vining, Aidan R, 1989. "Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 1-33, April.
    3. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. O'Toole, Conor M. & Morgenroth, Edgar L.W. & Ha, Thuy T., 2016. "Investment efficiency, state-owned enterprises and privatisation: Evidence from Viet Nam in Transition," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 93-108.
    2. Doan, Anh-Tuan & Lin, Kun-Li & Doong, Shuh-Chyi, 2020. "State-controlled banks and income smoothing. Do politics matter?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    3. Gong, Stephen X.H. & Cullinane, Kevin & Firth, Michael, 2012. "The impact of airport and seaport privatization on efficiency and performance: A review of the international evidence and implications for developing countries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 37-47.
    4. Saibal Ghosh, 2010. "How Did State‐Owned Banks Respond To Privatization? Evidence From The Indian Experiment," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(3), pages 389-421, September.
    5. Hingorani, Archana & Lehn, Kenneth & Makhija, Anil K., 1997. "Investor behavior in mass privatization: The case of the Czech voucher scheme," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 349-396, June.
    6. John S. Earle, 1999. "Post-Privatisation Ownership Structure and Productivity in Russian Industrial Enterprises," Working Papers 1999.19, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    7. Ghosh, Saibal, 2008. "Does divestment matter for firm performance?: Evidence from the Indian experience," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 372-388, December.
    8. Sun, Qian & Tong, Wilson H. S., 2003. "China share issue privatization: the extent of its success," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 183-222, November.
    9. Harper, Joel T., 2002. "The performance of privatized firms in the Czech Republic," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 621-649, April.
    10. Meenakshi Parida & S. Madheswaran, 2021. "Effect of firm ownership on productivity: empirical evidence from the Indian mining industry," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(1), pages 87-103, April.
    11. Ghulam, Yaseen, 2017. "Long-run performance of an industry after broader reforms including privatization," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 745-768.
    12. 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.
    13. Ann P. Bartel & Ann E. Harrison, 1999. "Ownership versus Environment: Why are Public Sector Firms Inefficient?," NBER Working Papers 7043, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Marwan Mohamed Abdeldayem & Saeed Hameed AL Dulaimi, 2019. "Privatisation as a Worldwide Tool of Economic Reform: A Literature Review," International Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(2), pages 66-84, June.
    15. Eskil Goldeng & Leo A. Grünfeld & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2008. "The Performance Differential between Private and State Owned Enterprises: The Roles of Ownership, Management and Market Structure," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(7), pages 1244-1273, November.
    16. Sumit K. Majumdar, 2008. "Why Privatize? The Decline of Public Ownership in India and its Impact on Industrial Performance," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 9(2), pages 293-336, September.
    17. Máximo Torero, 2002. "Peruvian Privatization: Impacts On Firm Performance," Research Department Publications 3169, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    18. Yurii Perevalov & Ilya Gimadii & Vladimir Dobrodei, 2000. "Does Privatisation Improve Performance of Industrial Enterprises? Empirical Evidence from Russia," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 337-363.
    19. Alan Bevan & Saul Estrin & Mark E. Schaffer, 1999. "Determinants of Enterprise Performance during Transition," CERT Discussion Papers 9903, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    20. Chen, Gongmeng & Firth, Michael & Rui, Oliver, 2006. "Have China's enterprise reforms led to improved efficiency and profitability?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 82-109, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:17:y:2001:i:1:p:168-200. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.