Abstract:The paper addresses the relationship between institutional distance of regulation and Chinese enterprises’ overseas market entry modes.It focuses on the impact of favorable and unfavorable institutional distance on enterprises’ decision-making. Based on the above, the paper examines the impact of the interaction between the openness of a host country’s market and institutional distance on multinationals’ overseas equity entry modes. The research finds that in the case of favorable regulative institutional balance, foreign enterprises tend to build a joint-venture subsidiary, as the regulative institutional differences between the host country and the mother country increase. In the case of unfavorable regulative institutional balance, foreign enterprises tend to set up a wholly-owned subsidiary, as the institutional difference between the host country and the mother country increase. Besides, the openness of the host country plays a significantly regulatory role in the two above pairs of relationships
李康宏,林润辉,李 娅,周常宝. 管制制度落差对中国跨国公司进入模式的影响[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2016(9): 78-84.
Li Kanghong,Lin Runhui,Li Ya,Zhou Changbao. The Effect of Regulative Institutional Distance on Chinese Overseas Subsidiaries’ Choice of International Entry Modes. , 2016(9): 78-84.
[1]HKANSON L,AMBOS B.The antecedents of psychic distance[J].Journal of international management,2010,16(3):195-210.
[2]GLOBERMAN S,SHAPIRO D.Governance infrastructure and US foreign direct investment[J].Journal of international business studies,2003,34(1):19-39.
[3]LUO Y,TUNG R L.International expansion of emerging market enterprises:a springboard perspective[J].Journal of international business studies,2007,38(4):481-498.
[4]CUERVO-CAZURRA A,GENC M E.Obligating,pressuring,and supporting dimensions of the environment and the non-market advantages of developing-country multinational companies[J].Journal of management studies,2011,48(2):441-455.
[5]LI P Y,MEYER K E.Contextualizing experience effects in international business:a study of ownership strategies[J].Journal of world business,2009,44(4):370-382.
[6]DUNNING J H.Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in an age of alliance capitalism[J].Journal of international business studies,1995,26(3):461-491.
[7]贾鹏.中国企业对外直接投资进入模式影响因素选择[D].中南大学,2008(56).
[8]CHAN C,ISOBE T,MAKINO S.Which country matters?institutional development and foreign affiliate performance[J].Strategic management journal,2008,29(11):1179-1205.
[9]DUNNING J H.Location and multinational enterprise:a neglected factor[J]Journal of international business studies,1998,29(1):45-66.
[10]BERRY H.Shareholder valuation of foreign investment and expansion[J].Strategic management journal,2006,27(12):1123-1140.
[11]COEURDEROY R,MURRAY G.Regulatory environments and the location decision:evidence from the early foreign market entries of new-technology-based firms[J].Journal of international business studies,2008,39(4):670-687.
[12]WU J.Diverse institutional environments and product innovation of emerging market firms[J].Management international review,2013,53(1):39-59.
[13]JAVORCIK B,WEI S.Corruption and cross-border investment in emerging markets:firm level evidence[J]. Journal of international money and finance,2009,28(4):605-624.
[14]CHAN C M,MAKINO S.Legitimacy and multi-level institutional environments:implications for foreign subsidiary ownership structure[J].Journal of international business studies,2007,38(4)621-638.
[15]SCHWENS C,EICHE J,KABST R.The moderating impact of informal institutional distance and formal institutional risk on SME entry mode choice[J].Journal of management studies,2011,48(2):330-351.
[16]CHEN Y R,YANG C,HSU,et al.Entry mode choice in China’s regional distribution markets:institution vs.transaction costs perspectives[J].Industrial marketing management,2009,38(7):702-713.
[17]DUNNING J H,LUNDAN S.Multinational enterprises and the global economy[M].Cheltenham:Edward Elgar,2008.
[18]MAKINO S,PAUL W B.Local ownership restrictions,entry mode choice and FDI performance:Japanese overseas subsidiaries in Asia[J].Asia Pasific journal of management,1998,15(2):119-136.
[19]DOW D,LARIMO J.Challenging the conceptualization and measurement of distance and international experience in entry mode choice research[J].Journal of international marketing,2009,17(2):74-98.
[20]NAOKI A.The ownership structure of foreign subsidiaries and the effect of institutional distance:a case study of Japanese firms[J].Asia Pacific business review,2012,18(2):259-274.
LARIMO J.Form of investment by Nordic firms in world markets[J].Journal of business research,2003,56(10):791-803.
LARIMO J.Mode of entry in foreign direct investments:behaviour of finnish firms in OECD markets.Proceedings of the University of Vaasa.Discussion Papers,vol.232.University of Vaasa:Vaasa,1997.
BROUTHERS K D,BROUTHERS L E.Acquisition or greenfield start-up? Institutional,cultural and transaction cost influences[J].Strategic management journal,2000,21(1):89-97.
[24]FAGRE N,WELLS L T.Bargaining power of multi-nationals and host governments,Journal of international business studies,1982,13(2):9-23.
GOMES-CASSERES B.Firm ownership preferences and host government restrictions:an integrated approach,Journal of international business studies,1990,21(1):1-27.
[26]HENNART J F,PARK Y-R.Greenfield vs.acquisition:the strategy of Japanese investors in the United States[J].Management science,1993,39(9):1054-1070.
KING A A,SHAVER J M.Are aliens green?Assessing foreign establishments’ environmental conduct in the United States[J].Strategic management journal,2001,22(11):1069-1086.