State Capitalism, Chinese‐Style: Strategic Value of Sectors, Sectoral Characteristics, and Globalization

Hsueh, Roselyn

doi:10.1111/gove.12139

Cited by 46 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A second issue for inquiry concerns specific configurations of joint appointments. Patterns of joint appointments may vary not only between different administrations but also among state firms in different industries, depending on central leaders' assessments about their "perceived strategic value" (Hsueh 2011; Hsueh 2016). Are joint appointments between top Party and managerial positions more widespread in central state-owned enterprises in industries that the State Council has tapped for "absolute control" by the state than in more competitive sectors?…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Firm Control

Leutert¹

2018

chinaperspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How has the Xi Jinping administration recentralised authority over China's politics and economy? Studies of Xi's rule often suggest that his "core leader" status, revolutionary heritage, and informal network of loyalists underpin this consolidation of central control. In contrast, this article focuses on the state sector to highlight how the Xi administration's recentralisation of authority is grounded in existing governance mechanisms and techniques: central leading small groups, the cadre management system, Party committees, and campaigns. Using policy documents and an original dataset on central state-owned enterprise leaders, I provide evidence that the Xi administration has leveraged each of these four methods to reclaim central authority relative to the preceding Hu Jintao administration. These findings contribute to scholarship on adaptive authoritarian governance and economic reform in China by underscoring that administrations can use existing instruments of central control in divergent ways.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Firm Control

Leutert¹

2018

chinaperspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, corporations do not always play the "provider" role in global governance. Rather, sometimes they inhibit the expansion of global governance and mobilize to defeat transnational rules pertaining to labor, environment, health, and safety (Bartley, 2018a) because they profit from cross-national regulatory differences (Bartley, 2014(Bartley, , 2018bHsueh, 2011Hsueh, , 2012Hsueh, , 2016Vogel, 2008Vogel, , 2010. Global businesses do so either by incorporating in tax and investment havens or by gravitating to sourcing destinations with less stringent enforcement of labor and environmental laws (Berliner, Greenleaf, Lake, Levi, & Noveck, 2015;Mayer & Phillips, 2017;Seabrooke & Wigan, 2017).…”

Section: Business Management and Global Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Corporations at a crossroads: How multilevel governance interactions shape participation and effort in private governance regimes

Hsueh

2019

Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that the interactions between firm agency in corporate management and the multilevel governance structures in which firms operate condition firms' participation and effort in private governance regimes. Empirically, I examine the Fortune Global 500 firms' decisions about participation and the extent of participation in the Carbon Disclosure Project during 2011–2015. Given firms' strategic considerations, the efficacy of corporate management structures and practices is conditioned by domestic regulatory and global regime contexts, and this efficacy varies across developed and developing countries. In developed countries, corporate, domestic, and global governance positively reinforce each other as drivers of private regulation on climate change. These governance levels are complements not substitutes. By contrast, the main drivers of participation and effort in developing countries are corporate management structures and practices, the stringency of domestic regulatory institutions, and their interactions. This article's results are robust to alternative specifications, including an alternative modeling approach.

show abstract

“…As of today, one finds a substantial amount of scholarly output explicitly addressing state capitalism in political science (e.g. Hsueh, 2016; Lanoszka, 2016; McNally, 2013; Naughton and Tsai, 2015), in sociology (e.g. Chua, 2016; Lin, 2011), in economics (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The many lives of state capitalism: From classical Marxism to free-market advocacy

Sperber

2019

History of the Human Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State capitalism has recently come to the fore as a transversal research object in the social sciences. Renewed interest in the notion is evident across several disciplines, in scholarship addressing government interventionism in economic life in major developing countries. This emergent field of study on state capitalism, however, consistently bypasses the remarkable conceptual trajectory of the notion from the end of the 19th century to the present. This article proposes an intellectual-historical survey of state capitalism’s many lives across different ensembles of writing: early Marxist pronouncements on state capitalism at the time of the Second International; theories of state capitalism evolved in the first half of the 20th century in response to the European experience of war and fascism; dissident portrayals of the Soviet Union as state-capitalist; post-Second World War theories of state-monopoly capitalism in the Western Bloc; examinations of state capitalism as a development strategy in ‘Third World’ nations in the 1970s and 1980s; and finally, today’s scholarship on new patterns of state capitalism in emerging economies. Having contextualized each of these strands of writing, the article goes on to interrogate definitional and conceptual boundaries of state capitalism. It then maps out essential institutional features of state-capitalist configurations as construed in the literature. In sharp contrast to 20th-century theories of state capitalism, present-day scholarship on the topic tends to retreat from the integrated critique of political economy, shifting its problematics of state-market relations to meso- and micro-levels of analysis.

show abstract

State Capitalism, Chinese‐Style: Strategic Value of Sectors, Sectoral Characteristics, and Globalization

Cited by 46 publications

References 31 publications

Firm Control

Firm Control

Corporations at a crossroads: How multilevel governance interactions shape participation and effort in private governance regimes

The many lives of state capitalism: From classical Marxism to free-market advocacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About