The effect of corruption distance and market orientation on the ownership choice of MNEs: Evidence from China

Journal of International Management

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 162-174

  Duanmu, Jing Lin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

China; Corruption distance; Market orientation; MNEs; Ownership choice

Indexed keywords

EID: 79954933206     PISSN: 10754253     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.intman.2011.01.003     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Abed G., Gupta S. Governance, Corruption and Economic Performance 2002, International Monetary Fund, Washington DC.
2. Ahlquist J., Prakash A. FDI and the cost of contract enforcement in developing countries. Policy Science 2010, 43:181-200.
3. Aizenman J., Spiegel M. Institutional efficiency, monitoring costs and the investment share of FDI. Review of International Economics 2006, 14(4):683-697.
4. Anderson E., Gatignon H. Modes of foreign entry: a transaction cost analysis and propositions. Journal of International Business Studies. 1986, 17:1-26.
5. Anderson C., Tverdova Y. Corruption, political allegiance, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies. American Journal of Political Science. 2003, 47:91-109.
6. Asiedu E., Esfahani H. Ownership structure in foreign direct investment projects. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 2001, 83(4):647-662.
7. Boycko M., Shleifer A., Vishny R. Privatizing Russia 1995, Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press.
8. Caves R.E. Multinational Enterprises and Economic Analysis 1996, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
9. Chen S., Hennart J. Japanese investors' choice of joint ventures versus wholly owned subsidiaries: the role of market barriers and firm capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies 2002, 33(1):1-18.
10. Cheung S. A Simplistic General Equilibrium Theory of Corruption. Contemporary Economic Policy. XIV 1996, 1-5.
11. Chuck K., Tadesse S. The MNC as an agent of change for host-country institutions: FDI and corruption. Journal of International Business Studies. 2006, 37:767-785.
12. di Mauro F. The Impact of Economic Integration on FDI and Exports: a Gravity Approach 2000, CEPS Working Paper Series. No. 156.
13. Dunning J. Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in an age of alliance capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies. 1995, 26(3):462-491.
14. Egger P., Winner H. How corruption influences foreign direct investment: a panel data study. Economic Development and Cultural Change. 2006, 54(2):459-486.
15. Erramilli K.M. Nationality and subsidiary ownership patterns in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies. 1996, 26:225-248.
16. Esther S., Jose P., Louis H. Strategic variables that influence entry mode choice in service firms. Journal of International Marketing 2007, 15(1):67-91.
17. Forlano D., Parthasarathy M., Keaveney S. Managerial risk perceptions of international entry-mode strategies. International Marketing Review 2008, 25(3):292-311.
18. Gomes-Casseres B. Firm ownership preferences and host government restrictions: an integrated approach. Journal of International Business Studies 1990, 21(1):1-22.
19. Grossman S.J., Hart O. The cost and benefits of ownership: a theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy 1986, 94(4):691-719.
20. Grossman G., Helpman E. Managerial incentives and the international organization of production. Journal of International Economics 2004, 63:237-262.
21. Habib M., Zurawicki L. Corruption and foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies. 2002, 33(2):291-307.
22. Hakkala K., Norback P., Svaleryd H. Asymmetric Effects of Corruption on FDI: Evidence from Swedish Multinational Firms. The Research Institute of Industrial Economics 2005, Working paper. 641.
23. Johnson J., Paul F. The internalization of the firm: four Swedish cases. Journal of Management Studies. 1975, 12(30):305-322.
24. Kaufmann D., Wei S. Does Grease Money Speed Up the Wheels of Commerce 1999, The World Bank and Harvard University.
25. Kirkman B., Lowe K., Gibson C. A quarter century of culture's consequences: a review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede's culture value framework. Journal of International Business Studies 2006, 37(3):285-320.
26. Kogut B., Singh H. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies. 1988, 19(3):411-432.
27. Lambert-Mogiliansky A., Majumdar M., Radner R. Strategic analysis of petty corruption: entrepreneurs and bureaucrats. Journal of Development Economics. 2007, 83:351-367.
28. Leamer E., Levinsohn J. International Trade Theory: the Evidence. Handbook of International Economics 1995, Vol. 3. Elsevier, Amsterdam. G. Grossmon, K. Rogoff (Eds.).
29. Lee S., Oh K. Corruption in Asia: pervasiveness and arbitrariness. Asia Pactific Journal of Management. 2007, 24:97-114.
30. Makino S., Neupert K.E. National culture, transaction costs and the choice between joint venture and wholly owned Subsidiary. Journal of International Business Studies. 2000, 31(4):705-713.
31. Markusen J.R., Maskus K.E. Discriminating among alternative theories of the multinational enterprise. Review of International Economics 2002, 10(4):694-707.
32. Mauro P. Corruption and growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1995, 110:681-712.
33. McSweeney B. Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: a triumph of faith - a failure of analysis. Human Relations. 2002, 55(1):89-118.
34. Monnte A., Papagni E. The determinants of corruption in Italy: regional panel data analysis. European Journal of Political Economy. 2007, 23:379-396.
35. Morschett D., Schramm-Klein H., Swoboda B. Decades of research on market entry modes: What do we really know about external antecedents of entry mode choice. Journal of International Management 2010, 16(1):60-77.
36. Murphy K., Shleifer A., Vishny R. The allocation of talent: implications for growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 1991, 106:503-530.
37. O'Donnell, S., 1997. Headquarters Use of Monitoring, Incentives and Normative Control in the Foreign Subsidiary: The Role of International Interdependence in an Agency Theory Framework. University of South California Ph.D. Dissertation.
38. Pan Y. Equity ownership in international joint ventures: the impact of source country factors. Journal of International Business Studies. 2002, 33:375-384.
39. Pfeffer J., Salancik G. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective 1978, Harper & Row, New York.
40. Root H. Corruption in China: has it become systemic. Asian Survey 1996, 36(8):741-757.
41. Siegel J., Licht A., Schwarts S. Egalitarianism, Cultural Distance, and FDI: A New Approach. Social Science Network Electronic Paper 2006.
42. Smarzynska B., Wei S. Corruption and Cross-border Investment: Firm-level Evidence. William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series No. 494 2002.
43. Tekin-Koru A. Corruption and the ownership composition of the multinational firm at the time of entry: evidence from Turkey. Journal of Economics and Finance. 2006, 30(2):251-269.
44. Teng B. The WTO and Entry Modes in China. Thunderbird International Business Review. 2004, 46(4):381-400.
45. Tihanyi L., Griffith D., Russell C. The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance: a metal-analysis. Journal of International Business Studies 2005, 36(3):270-283.
46. Uhlenbruck K., Rodriguez P., Doh J., Eden L. The impart of corruption on entry strategy: evidence from telecommunication projects in emerging economics. Organization Science 2006, 17(3):402-414.
47. Wu S. Corruption and cross-border investment by multinational firms. Journal of comparative economics. 2006, 34:839-856.
48. Zhao H., Luo Y., Suh T. Transaction cost determinants and ownership-based entry mode choice: a meta-analytical review. Journal of International Business Studies 2004, 35(6):524-544.