This paper investigates how the structure of political institutions influences the effectiveness of corporate political lobbying by shaping the “veto points” and “entry points” that lobbying firms encounter and require, respectively, when attempting to influence public policies; in so doing, this study deepens our understanding of the strategic implications of institutional environments. Using large-sample and cross-country firm-level data, we find that the influence of firms’ lobbying activities on public policies is weakened when there are tighter constraints generated as a result of greater political (partisan) competition and more subnational government tiers. We find that the negative association between the effectiveness of lobbying and political (partisan) competition is particularly pronounced in countries with lower electoral accountability and that the negative association between the effectiveness of lobbying and subnational government tiers is particularly pronounced in more centralized political systems.
Purpose Firms influence a government to their advantage in one of two ways: either through lobbying a government to change the rule, or through bribing bureaucrats to circumvent the rule. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether and under what conditions do corporate political activities facilitate firm growth in a multinational context, especially in developing economies. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on the data of the World Bank’s Enterprise Survey, conducted by the World Bank in the 2002 to 2006 period in 12 countries. To deal with a multilevel structure, the authors applied multilevel regression as the main analysis method. Findings The analysis reveals that both political activities are prevalent in emerging markets, but they play very different roles on firm growth. The authors also find that the effect of lobbying is more pronounced in politically durable countries where firms can secure their vested benefits by lobbying. Originality/value The paper contributes to the corporate political activities literature by investigating the distinguishing and contingent role of bribery and lobbying on firm performance.
The economic impact of a public emergency, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, is often reduced by micro and small businesses (MSEs) undertaking sustainability-oriented innovation for public emergencies (SOIPE), which includes production and service innovation, information innovation, marketing innovation, and labor innovation. The originality of this study lies in its prediction and evaluation of COVID-19′s challenges and SOIPE’s requirements to have a keen observation and discovery ability. In this paper, we combined nominal group technique, fuzzy analytical hierarchy process, least squares, and a case study to investigate governance, economic, financial, sociocultural, and environmental sustainability and demonstrate the MSEs’ sustainability evaluation model. In a qualitative study and literature review, MSEs were found to use SOIPE in a variety of ways. Some studies focused on marketing innovation, while others were hampered by their limited understanding. From both a theoretical and empirical perspective, this study suggests that MSEs should identify their optimal SOIPE based on the impact and volatility of a public emergency. In addition, this study presents an assessment of the impact and environmental volatility of a public emergency, as well as MSEs’ SOIPE, which is more helpful for enterprises. Finally, this study creatively introduces the SOIPE of MSEs, which has important policy ramifications.
Shared growth effort, which is also known as mutual growth, has emerged as one of the most important keywords in Korean economy. This study examines whether a conglomerate’s shared growth effort evaluated by the Shared Growth Commission is valued by market investors. Using our full sample, we find that firms participating in shared growth evaluation have a higher firm value. The results from the full sample show that firm’s effort on shared growth is rewarded in the Korean capital market. However, after matching firms by size of sales and return on assets to better control for firm characteristics, we find that neither the participation nor a higher (lower) rating of the shared growth evaluation is associated with firm value. This implies that the result from the full sample may be capturing firm characteristics, instead of the effects of shared growth effort, thus market investors do not consider conglomerate’s shared growth effort as a value-enhancing strategy. Using a recently introduced shared-growth index, the findings in our study provide preliminary but important evidence on how creating shared value (CSV) is related to firm value.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.