Does public money drive out private? Evidence from government regulations of industrial overcapacity governance in urban China

Cheng, Bo; Christensen, Tom; Ma, Liang; Yu, Junli

doi:10.1016/j.iref.2021.07.012

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To investigate whether the ESG performance of firms with different property rights is affected by environmental regulation, we use the quasi‐natural experiment of the “Environmental Protection Law” revision implemented in 2015. Referring to Bertrand and Mullainathan (2003, 2004) and Cheng et al (2021), the difference‐in‐difference (DID) model is constructed as follows:

italicESG goodbreak= α goodbreak+ β_{1} italicPOST goodbreak\times italicSOE goodbreak+ β_{2} italicPOST goodbreak+ β_{3} italicSOE goodbreak+ \sum β_{k} italicControls goodbreak+ italicFirm goodbreak+ italicYear goodbreak+ italicIndustry goodbreak+ ε

where the dependent variable ( ESG ) in model () represents the firm's ESG performance disclosure. According to Chang et al (2021), the ESG rating level contains the indicators of environment (E), social responsibility (S), and corporate governance (G), which are quarterly regular evaluation and dynamic tracking estimations by Shanghai Huazheng Index Information Service Limited Corporation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To investigate whether the ESG performance of firms with different property rights is affected by environmental regulation, we use the quasi-natural experiment of the "Environmental Protection Law" revision implemented in 2015. Referring to Mullainathan (2003, 2004) and Cheng et al (2021), the difference-indifference (DID) model is constructed as follows:…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does environmental regulation affect firms' ESG performance? Evidence from China

Cheng

2022

Manage Decis Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking the advantage of the revise "Environmental Protection Law" implemented in China as an exogenous shock event, we evaluate the impact of environmental regulation on firms' ESG performance by the difference-in-difference approach. We find that this policy improves state-owned firms' ESG performance. Additionally, our results demonstrate that better ESG performance encourages firms' stock liquidity, and the stock liquidity of state-owned firms with high ESG performance is stronger than that of private firms after the policy. These findings highlight the importance of environmental regulation, which provide significant meanings for encouraging firms' social responsibility, formulating ESG related policies, and promoting sustainable development.

show abstract

italicESG goodbreak= α goodbreak+ β_{1} italicPOST goodbreak\times italicSOE goodbreak+ β_{2} italicPOST goodbreak+ β_{3} italicSOE goodbreak+ \sum β_{k} italicControls goodbreak+ italicFirm goodbreak+ italicYear goodbreak+ italicIndustry goodbreak+ ε

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does environmental regulation affect firms' ESG performance? Evidence from China

Cheng

2022

Manage Decis Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, enterprises that are beneficiaries of industrial policies are able to gain preferential access to a range of resources, such as collaborative environments, investment prospects, and capital. This strategic support reasonably reduces their R&D costs and enhances their risk resistance capabilities [95,107]. Secondly, when the potential for knowledge spillover is high, government support serves as an effective public policy instrument.…”

Section: Industrial Policy Support and Cooperation Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Effects of Multi-Governance Mechanisms throughout the Dynamic Evolution of the Cooperative Innovation Network

Wang,

Xie,

Geng

2024

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainable evolution of cooperative innovation networks is determined to a great extent by the effectiveness of their governance mechanisms. In this study, we draw from social network and stakeholder theories to emphasize two types of mechanisms that coordinate cooperative innovation: the internal drivers of transitivity and status, which are endogenous mechanisms of network embeddedness, and the external drivers of association autonomy, industrial policy support, and institutional environment establishment, which are the governing effects of external stakeholders. We constructed cooperative innovation networks using a dataset on joint applications for patents in China’s electronics information industry during 2006–2018 and applied a Stochastic Actor-Oriented Model (SAOM) for analytical purposes. The findings show that as networks evolve, the effect of transitivity on cooperative innovation first slightly decreases and then intensifies. The influence of status and industrial policy support intensifies first and then weakens. The impact of association autonomy remains stable, and institutional environment establishment on cooperative innovation intensifies. We also provide theoretical and managerial implications for the dynamic evolution of cooperative innovation networks.

show abstract

“…Government agencies nurture non‐competitive subordination in some social organizations (Mattar et al, 2022). Under this model, social organizations adopt embedded strategies to seek the allocation and recognition of government resources (Cheng et al, 2021).…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the impact of pure market, government, and social organization interaction on the effectiveness of public service procurement

Li,

Lv,

Liu

2023

Manage Decis Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study employs qualitative comparative analysis to investigate the effects of different interaction modes, namely, functional substitution and strategic cooperation, on the effectiveness of public service procurement. It reveals that the interaction between the government and social organizations in China's current public service procurement presents a composite form, combining functional substitution and strategic cooperation. Government support for social organizations plays a critical role in procurement effectiveness. The greater the government support, the higher the effectiveness of public service procurement. The study finds that “pure market” and “pure competition” do not necessarily contribute positively to the effectiveness of public service procurement.

show abstract

Does public money drive out private? Evidence from government regulations of industrial overcapacity governance in urban China

Cited by 5 publications

References 38 publications

Does environmental regulation affect firms' ESG performance? Evidence from China

Does environmental regulation affect firms' ESG performance? Evidence from China

Exploring the Effects of Multi-Governance Mechanisms throughout the Dynamic Evolution of the Cooperative Innovation Network

Assessing the impact of pure market, government, and social organization interaction on the effectiveness of public service procurement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About