Clearing the fog for an overall view on state-owned enterprises: quality of aggregate holdings reporting by public administrations in 12 countries

Abstract

In the context of current debates on sustainable public service provision, austerity, debts and cutback management, the governance and management of and in state-owned enterprises is a crucial issue. An aggregate holdings report is an important tool for public administrations to provide accountability and the necessary overall view on the institutional service provision structures of core administration and state-owned enterprises. On the basis of a developed quality index with 175 test criteria, this study analyses the diffusion of aggregate holdings reports in 17 countries and the quality of 12 existing reports at the national level. First, the study provides a conceptual contribution for assessing aggregate holdings reports and future research on the issues of the model categories. Second, for an empirical contribution, the analysis enhances our state of knowledge on aggregate holdings report diffusion and quality patterns. Findings show that, in many cases, public administrations do not meet the requirements from theory and practice. Newer Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and European Union members reach comparably higher quality scores. This comparative study offers new insights that can enhance the sustainable public management and control of state-owned enterprises. Points for practitioners The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises, which were published after an intensive consultation process in 2005 and revised in 2015, demand public authorities to develop aggregate holdings reports that cover all SOEs, and make them a key disclosure tool directed to the general public and politicians. This study develops a quality model for assessing the quality of aggregate holdings reports. The model can also answer questions that are often raised in reform debates, such as ‘Which is the best aggregate holdings report?’ or ‘Which aggregate holdings report can I use as a reference to further develop my own aggregate holdings report?’. The model is a conceptual contribution and the empirical results can be used for international bench-learning. They are also useful for international organisations such as the European Union, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accounting and development aid/cooperation agencies in each country. The results of this study indicate that policymakers at the national and international levels should give more emphasis to the diffusion and quality of aggregate holdings reports and should reflect on establishing and revising legal obligations for aggregate holdings reports because the recommendations of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development guidelines, as a soft-law approach, are often not put into practice.

Role and Performance of Public Enterprises: A Case Study on the Strategic Relevance and Specificity of Enterprises at the German Federal Level

“…The debt ratio of PEs is generally higher than that of administrative units (Bertelsmann Foundation , , Schaefer and Papenfuß 2011, Papenfuß et al. ,b).…”

“…From the citizens´ perspective, the report gives access to information about public service provision (OECD , Papenfuß , Papenfuß et al. ,b).…”

“…In addition, the federal level can in some countries be perceived as a role model for other government levels with particular responsibilities (Papenfuß et al. ,b).…”

“…German PEs account for more than half of public sector investment. The debt ratio of PEs is generally higher than that of administrative units (Bertelsmann Foundation 2008, 2013, Schaefer and Papenfuß 2011, Papenfuß et al 2017a.…”

“…This forces the ownership entity to assess the relevance of public tasks and institutional arrangements regularly. From the citizens´perspective, the report gives access to information about public service provision (OECD 2015, Papenfuß 2014, Papenfuß et al 2017a.…”