A global perspective of entrepreneurship and innovation in China

Abstract

Purpose-This paper aims to study largely recent aspects of entrepreneurship and innovation in China. It synthesizes the research in the current special issue (SI) of Multinational Business Review (MBR) on this topic. In addition, this paper differs from other work on this topic in examining entrepreneurship and innovation from a more global standpoint with relevant international effects. Design/methodology/approach-The paper provides an overview of the literature on entrepreneurship, innovation and key related topics such as firm and economic growth, as well as linking this research to related international works. It also summarizes the papers of the SI. Findings-The authors' analysis suggests that the study of entrepreneurship and innovation should be placed in the context of a country's economic development and institutional environment as well as the firm internationalization trajectories and business models. In addition, the authors believe that a good understanding of economic growth in a transition economy like China (which is a key goal of China's recent emphasis on innovation) is facilitated by understanding the comparative advantages and disadvantages of an economy with respect to the global innovation system. Originality/value-The authors' study explores the local-global and parent-subsidiary connectivity and co-evolution of firm strategies and the institutional environment in entrepreneurship and innovation in emerging and transition economies. The authors summarize and synthesize the papers in this SI to provide the results as well as some directions for future research in the domain of entrepreneurship, innovation and new venture creation, which is believed to be a key engine of economic growth in the coming years.

China venture market overview

“…Chinese economic activity growth rate and technical potential are much bigger than in the US and OECD countries (Deutch, 2018). This point of view correlates with the opinion about the importance of separate power and harmony through mistakes, experiments, and diversity while others disagree with this fact and look at different institutions through the prism of encouragement and innovations obstacles (Ahlstrom et al, 2018).…”

“…Confirmation for this phenomenon is a significant increase in the number of M&A transactions in the high-tech sector, which began in 2016. In 2014, these were 851 transactions for $ 47.5 billion and 1,200 transactions in the amount of $ 947.5 billion in 2017, as well as an increase in the number of unicorns with a total of 55 companies by 2017 (Ahlstrom et al, 2018). As a result, investors only increase the volume of financing venture projects.…”

Regulation of the Crypto-Economy: Managing Risks, Challenges, and Regulatory Uncertainty

“…Moreover, the blockchain and cryptocurrency markets offer a natural setting for intersecting the law and technology and law and economics literatures as advocated by Butenko and LaRouche (2015). Inclusive institutions are critical for technological development and economic growth (Acemoglu and Robinson 2012;Ahlstrom et al 2018b;Tomizawa et al 2019). More work is needed to better understand how laws and institutions enable the most economic growth at the minimal expected costs with blockchain and cryptocurrencies.…”

Assets of origin? Chinese multinational enterprises amidst the Belt and Road Initiative

“…Whether the hypothesis of assets of origin holds for CMNEs in B&R countries is subject to empirical validation. This line of investigation will advance our understanding of what is “Chinese” about Chinese foreign direct investment and CMNEs (Ahlstrom, Yang, Wang, & Wu, ; Buckley et al, ; Deng, ; Deng, ; Deng, Yang, Wang, & Doyle, ) and how this translates into unique models and business strategies (Boisot & Meyer, ; Child & Rodrigues, ; Rui & Yip, ; Tan & Wang, ). In a broader sense, this hypothesis helps us understand how and why CMNEs, as examples of firms from emerging markets, differ from MNEs from developed economies (Bonaglia, Goldstein, & Mathews, ; Ramamurti, ) and whether they are theoretically distinct (Hernandez & Guillén, ) in terms of their motivation (Luo & Tung, ), strengths, weaknesses (Madhok & Keyhani, ), and strategy (Luo, Sun, & Wang, ), among other things.…”