IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/worbus/v35y2000i4p379-400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Different paths to economic reform in Russia and China: causes and consequences

Author

Listed:
  • Buck, Trevor
  • Filatotchev, Igor
  • Nolan, Peter
  • Wright, Mike

Abstract

Economic reform in Russia has been described as 'shock therapy' because rapid industrial privatization, price liberalization and democratic reforms of the political system were introduced simultaneously. However, shock therapy led to insider control of most manufacturing firms, with important consequences for foreign investment. In contrast, China's 'gradualist' reforms, without privatization or significant democratization, facilitated foreign joint ventures as the dominant means of reforming State-owned enterprises incrementally. This paper proposes an explanation for these contrasting reform paths in Russia and China and then traces their consequences for inward foreign domestic investment (FDI), exporting and for corporate governance in the short and long term. The impact of national level policies on enterprises is demonstrated in a matched pair of cases in Russia and China. Conclusions are drawn for policy, for practice and for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Buck, Trevor & Filatotchev, Igor & Nolan, Peter & Wright, Mike, 2000. "Different paths to economic reform in Russia and China: causes and consequences," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 379-400, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:worbus:v:35:y:2000:i:4:p:379-400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951600000444
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey D. Sachs & Andrew Warner, 1995. "Economic Reform and the Process of Global Integration," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 26(1, 25th A), pages 1-118.
    2. Bruce Kogut & Harbir Singh, 1988. "The Effect of National Culture on the Choice of Entry Mode," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 19(3), pages 411-432, September.
    3. Estrin, Saul & Wright, Mike, 1999. "Corporate Governance in the Former Soviet Union," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 395-397, September.
    4. Trevor, Igor, Mike Buck Filatotchev Wright, 1998. "Agents, Stakeholders and Corporate Governance in Russian Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 81-104, January.
    5. Otto Andersen, 1993. "On the Internationalization Process of Firms: A Critical Analysis," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 24(2), pages 209-231, June.
    6. Sachs, J.D. & Woo, W.T., 1994. "Structural Factors in the Economic Reforms of China, Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union," Papers 94-01, California Davis - Institute of Governmental Affairs.
    7. Estrin, Saul & Wright, Mike, 1999. "Corporate Governance in the Former Soviet Union: An Overview," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 398-421, September.
    8. Scott Shane, 1994. "The effect of national culture on the choice between licensing and direct foreign investment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(8), pages 627-642, October.
    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. Puffer, Sheila M. & McCarthy, Daniel J., 2003. "The emergence of corporate governance in Russia," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 284-298, November.
    2. Saul Estrin & Martha Prevezer, 2011. "The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 41-67, March.
    3. Mike Wright & Igor Filatotchev & Robert E. Hoskisson & Mike W. Peng, 2005. "Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 1-33, January.
    4. Ichiro Iwasaki, 2007. "Enterprise Reform And Corporate Governance In Russia: A Quantitative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(5), pages 849-902, December.
    5. Bell, J.H.J., 1996. "Joint or Single Venturing? : An Electric Approach to Foreign Entry Mode Choice," Other publications TiSEM 06f84735-3cf5-432f-8bc8-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Filatotchev, Igor & Wright, Mike & Uhlenbruck, Klaus & Tihanyi, Laszlo & Hoskisson, Robert E., 2003. "Governance, organizational capabilities, and restructuring in transition economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 331-347, November.
    7. Varsakelis, Nikos C., 2001. "The impact of patent protection, economy openness and national culture on R&D investment: a cross-country empirical investigation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1059-1068, August.
    8. Apostolov, Mico, 2010. "Corporate Governance in Macedonia – micro and macro analysis," MPRA Paper 27914, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Derek Jones & Panu Kalmi & Niels Mygind, 2005. "Choice of Ownership Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from Estonia," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 83-107.
    10. repec:dgr:rugsom:05g07 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. John T. Steen & Peter W. Liesch, 2007. "A note on Penrosean growth, resource bundles and the Uppsala model of internationalisation," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 193-206, March.
    12. Klaus E Meyer, 2000. "International Production Networks and Enterprise Transformation in Central Europe," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 42(1), pages 135-150, April.
    13. Drogendijk, H.J., 2001. "Expansion patterns of Dutch firms in Central and Eastern Europe : Learning to internationalize," Other publications TiSEM 18571cef-0dd0-46ff-82aa-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Mai Thai & Li Chong, 2013. "Dynamic experimental internationalization: Strategy of SMEs from a transition economy," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 370-399, December.
    15. Arjen H. L. Slangen & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Jean-Francois Hennart, 2011. "The Impact of Cultural Distance on Bilateral Arm’s Length Exports," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 875-896, December.
    16. Schnytzer, Adi & Andreyeva, Tatiana, 2002. "Company performance in Ukraine: is this a market economy?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 83-98, June.
    17. Wright, Mike & Filatotchev, Igor & Buck, Trevor & Bishop, Kate, 2002. "Foreign partners in the Former Soviet Union," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 165-179, October.
    18. Gravier-Rymaszewska, Joanna & Tyrowicz, Joanna & Kochanowicz, Jacek, 2010. "Intra-provincial inequalities and economic growth in China," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 237-258, September.
    19. Jones, Derek C. & Mygind, Niels, 1999. "The Nature and Determinants of Ownership Changes after Privatization: Evidence from Estonia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 422-441, September.
    20. Saul Estrin & Alan A. Bevan & Boris Kuznetsov & Mark E. Schaffer & Manuela Angelucci & Julian Fennema & Giovanni Mangiarotti, 2001. "The Determinants of Privatised Enterprise Performance in Russia," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 452, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    21. Keith D. Brouthers & Liang Chen & Sali Li & Noman Shaheer, 2022. "Charting new courses to enter foreign markets: Conceptualization, theoretical framework, and research directions on non-traditional entry modes," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(9), pages 2088-2115, December.

    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:eee:worbus:v:35:y:2000:i:4:p:379-400. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620401/description#description .

    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.