Fig 3 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This article analyzes the ownership structure of state-owned companies and their role in the Russian economy. Using a sample of 114 of the largest Russian companies, we estimated direct and indirect state participation as a percentage of shareholdings for direct and indirect federal property during the time period of 2006–2014. We used two methods...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... should be noted that in each case the length of chain of ownership used for the calculation of indirect ownership was determined to be subject to the ability to identify stakes (shares) based on the companies' official statements. A more gene- ral view of the methodology for analyzing the hierarchical structure of owner- ship is presented in Figure 3. An analysis of the ownership structure begins with the company under review and ends with the state (top-down). ...
Context 2
... calculation of the indirect share begins with the state and ends with the company for which the estimate is made (bottom-up). Each element of this structure (the vertex is provided in Figure 3) corresponds to the holding company and the connections (edge weight) characterize its share in the higher-level company. The analysis ends when all terminal elements are owned by anonymous or private owners, or the state or when the set hierarchy level is reached. ...
Context 3
... next stage identifies separate chains in the hierarchy, which terminate with the state, by identifying all possible routes between the two vertexes, i.e., the company under review and the state. These chains are highlighted in bold lines in Figure 3. Subsequently, all chains in the ownership structure between the company under review and the state are included in the calculation. ...
Similar publications
The article proposes a method of joint analysis of multidimensional financial time series based on the
evaluation of the set of properties of stock quotes in a sliding time window and the subsequent averaging of
property values for all analyzed companies. The main purpose of the analysis is to construct measures of joint
behavior of time series rea...
Citations
... Therefore, in order to understand the peculiarities of market reactions on companies' involvement in CSR activities and earnings management, it is important to take into account the role of political institutions that operate in the national environment, especially in the emerging country like Russia, where due to the communist tradition the state exerts total control over all the aspects of the society (Li et al., 2014) and where the government plays a significant role in setting rules to create norms for organizations' CSR behavior (Campbell, 2007). Russian economy is characterised by a significant presence of companies controlled by the state (Abramov et al., 2017). State owned companies represent around 40% of the market value of all publicly listed companies in Russia (Abramov et al., 2017) and contribute to 70% of the total public sector (Panibratov and Klishevich, 2018). ...
... Russian economy is characterised by a significant presence of companies controlled by the state (Abramov et al., 2017). State owned companies represent around 40% of the market value of all publicly listed companies in Russia (Abramov et al., 2017) and contribute to 70% of the total public sector (Panibratov and Klishevich, 2018). Marquis and Qian (2014) claim that in emerging markets state ownership might be associated with an increased risk of financial misreporting as state owned companies are not inclined to adopt strong governance mechanisms. ...
Purpose
This paper explores the relationship between earnings management and firms' value through the moderating effect of the missing elements – corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure and state ownership in Russian companies. The main argument of the paper is that CSR disclosure can be used as a mitigating mechanism to weaken the negative relationship between earnings manipulation and market value. Additionally test whether state ownership is an important moderating factor in this relationship are conducted as state has always played an important role in the emerging Russian market.
Design/methodology/approach
The hypotheses are tested on panel data for 223 publicly listed Russian firms for the period 2012–2018. A number of robustness tests are used to check the obtained results for consistency. Following previous research GMM method is employed to address endogeneity concerns.
Findings
Supported by stakeholder theory, it is observed that firms that disclosed more CSR information experience a weaker negative relationship between earnings management and market value because investors and other stakeholders positively evaluate a positive CSR image. This negative effect of earnings management on market value is even weaker for state-owned companies as market participants appreciate involvement of state-owned companies in CSR activities and place greater expectations on these firms to be responsible without clear understanding whether these actions are “window dressing” for this type of companies or not.
Originality/value
The study results provide new insights into the relation between earnings management, firm's value, CSR disclosure and state ownership in emerging-market firms. The paper highlight the importance of considering country-specific factors, such as state ownership, while analysing the market reaction on CSR disclosure and earnings management since the institutional peculiarities may help to explain differences in the obtained results.
... This makes certain companies in certain industries like the railway, construction, and utility dominant on the local market and makes it difficult for private enterprises to enter the market. Abramov et al. (2017) identified that the share of state ownership in enterprises accounts for 70 % in the nuclear power industry, airports, diamond mining, and the military-industrial complex in Russia. This is called state capitalism. ...
Innovation is an essential component of a company's survival in this competitive world of business. Firms in free and competitive marketplaces are compelled to adopt more efficient production techniques and provide customers with new and improved products. This research examines the impact of competition on innovation in free and competitive marketplaces. The study is motivated by the Russian government's goal of increasing productivity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to 32% of gross domestic product. The study employed the Logit model to analyze the data from the World Bank Enterprise Survey. The findings reveal that fierce competition has a significant negative effect on innovation. Specifically, competition reduces product, process, and new product innovation by 5%, 3%, and 3.5% respectively. The step-by-step innovation model indicates that competition stimulates innovation in firms operating in contestable markets. Additionally, higher levels of competition negatively affect new product innovation. These results suggest that intense competition may impede firms' ability to innovate, particularly in the areas of product development, process improvement, and introducing new products. However, competition acts as a driving force that compels firms to innovate in order to maintain their competitiveness in the market. Consequently, increased competition may lead to a diversion of resources towards research and development (R&D), potentially limiting firms' capacity to introduce new products.
... The CBR started quoting the share of 'state-controlled banks' in total banking assets, total loans and total deposits in the annual Banking Supervision Report since 2006 The market share of public banks may indeed have grown in 2014, but the growth reflected in the CBR numbers appears too swift to be organic, and there were no major bank 3 Abramov and his co-authors estimate direct and indirect state participation as a percentage of shareholdings for direct and indirect federal property (Abramov et al., 2017;Abramov et al., 2018, p.2 Sources: (CBR, 2019, p.19;CBR, 2018, p.17;CBR, 2017, p.25;CBR, 2016, p.24;CBR, 2015, p.19;CBR, 2014, p.22;Raiffeisen, 2020, p.39); own calculations The inclusion of VEB.RF banking numbers to commercial bank assets pushes adds another 2 to 3 percent to the combined share of public sector in banking. ...
This paper looks at the populations of state-owned banks and foreign-owned banks in Russia in dynamics from 1991 to 2023, focusing on the number of entities and their market shares. The paper also features subsamples within each of those two ownership types, thus improving the homogeneity of each sub-sample and the empirical results of their research. I monitor market entry and exit as well as banks changing hands and migrating from one category to another, which no other database creator offers. My database is meant to aide empirical research of Russian banking.
Keywords: Russia, banks, state ownership, state-owned bank, foreign ownership, foreign-owned bank, market share
JEL Classification Codes: G21, H82
Изучаются действовавшие в России банки с государственным участием и с иностранным участием, а именно их количество и доля рынка, в разбивке по годам за период с 1991 г. и до начала 2023 г. Внутри каждой из групп банков выделены подгруппы, благодаря чему повышается гомогенность выборки и улучшаются эмпирические результаты у исследователей. Учитывается появление новых банков данного типа и их уход с рынка, равно как и переход банка из одной подгруппы в другую, чего нет в других базах данных. Эта работа призвана помочь студентам, аспирантам и другим коллегам в их эмпирических исследованиях российских банков.
Дорогие коллеги! Пожалуйста, не забывайте ссылаться на этот документ:
Vernikov, A. (2023) Russian bank data: Breaking down the sample of banks by ownership. SSRN Working Paper Series No.2600738. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2600738
... These broad macroeconomic aggregates obscure just how much of a hand the state has in the microeconomics of firms, however, by not including state-run companies and their expenditures. A paper by Abramov et al. (2017) notes that, over 2006-2014, the state became involved either directly or indirectly with 52.5% of the Russian economy (with only 47.5% of the economy fully privately owned), while Radygin and Abramov (Chapter 7) show that, as of 2020, the state still comprised 51.1% of GDP in Russia. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) also concurred with these assessments, noting that employment in Russian state organs has grown to 50% of all employment, with a formal footprint of the Russian state of approximately 40% of the economy; more problematic was the fact that both state-owned enterprises were less efficient than their private counterparts and the pervasiveness of the government skewed incentives even in sectors where they were not directly involved, leading to high levels of concentration in the private sector as well (Di Bella et al., 2019). ...
... Deciding what states should do and not do remains a diffi cult task (Kettl, 2022;Abramov, Radygin and Chernova, 2017). Th e generally accepted role of the state in any country is complex (Stiglitz and Rosengard, 2015). ...
... Th e generally accepted role of the state in any country is complex (Stiglitz and Rosengard, 2015). Th is complexity stems from three determining factors: ecological , political and ideological (Abramov et al., 2017). Moreover, the role of the state depends on existing socioeconomic factors as well as long-term infl uences on current behaviour. ...
... Further, this role depends on people's ideas about what is right, appropriate, necessary and legitimate (Morgan and Shinn, 2014), as well as the willingness of the state to pay for public goods and services (Milicz, 2016). Th is explains why the role of the state has changed tremendously over time in most countries and has varied among countries at any given point in time (Abramov et al., 2017;Friedman and Friedman, 1980). ...
This paper responds to calls for more research into public entrepreneurship, for delivering public value as opposed to the narrower view of public goods, and for re-organising states for alternative post-capitalist governance by revisiting a long-term but unresolved academic debate: the role of the state (government). It presents conceptually relevant arguments from seminal and contemporary academic debates on the role of the state and state establishments. It demonstrates that an understanding of the role of the state is a starting point in the reorganisation of states and proposes a novel additional role that most states have not yet considered, as well as identifying the state establishments that are available to assist states in fulfilling the extended role. Propositions were developed to sustain the extended role and to indicate that the approach to re-imagining the role of the state adds value for academic, practice, and policymaker observers. The report concludes by providing avenues for further research opportunities.
... Dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2003, Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN) merupakan perusahaan negara yang sebagian besar modalnya dimiliki oleh negara melalui penyertaan secara langsung, dan berasal dari kekayaan negara yang dipisahkan. Lebih lanjut, tujuan didirkannya BUMN selain memperoleh keuntungan adalah sebagai alat dalam mewujudkan peran pemerintah sebagai pelaku ekonomi untuk memenuhi kebutuhan masyarakat dan pembangunan ekonomi (Abramov et al., 2017). ...
Pembangunan Ibu Kota Negara (IKN) Baru di Kaltim diprediksi menghabiskan anggaran Rp 466 triliun. Dalam hal ini, pemerintah memastikan 80% anggaran pembangunan IKN tidak berasal dari APBN melainkan dari skema lain seperti Kerjasama Pemerintah dengan Badan Usaha (KPBU), Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN), swasta, dan investor asing. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menilai tingkat kesiapan kelima skema pembiayaan IKN dalam rangka pembiayaan IKN. Kajian ini mengembangkan tiga indikator untuk menilai tingkat kesiapan lima skema anggaran pembangunan IKN, yaitu indikator nilai anggaran, pertumbuhan anggaran, dan concern anggaran terhadap infrastruktur. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah kualitatif dengan pendekatan studi kepustakaan. Sumber data berasal dari laporan realisasi APBN 2012-2021, laporan perkiraan biaya proyek KPBU 2017-2021, realisasi nilai penanaman modal dalam negeri (PMDN) dan asing (PMA) 2012-2021, laporan laba bersih dan belanja modal (infrastruktur dan non infrastruktur) BUMN 2015-2021, dan laporan nilai kapitalisasi pasar perusahaan yang terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) 2012-2021. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dari kelima skema pembiayaan IKN, 3 skema dinyatakan cukup siap yaitu skema PPP, swasta, dan penanaman modal asing, sedangkan skema APBN dan BUMN dinyatakan kurang siap. Oleh karena itu, pemerintah perlu menyusun strategi dan regulasi yang dapat memfasilitasi dan mempercepat skema PPP, penanaman modal asing, dan swasta dalam pendanaan IKN.
... The ownership structure in Brazil is highly concentrated and consists of family-owned business groups, state-owned entities, and affiliates (Rabelo and Vasconcelos 2002). In Russia, state-owned entities control pyramid corporate ownership structures by controlling golden shares, 4 issuing non-voting shares, and maintaining the single ownership of multiple companies (Abramov et al. 2017). The majority of Indian companies owned by business groups are controlled through pyramidal and cross-holding ownership structures (Sarkar 2010). ...
... oligarchic business groups). 9 The state enhanced its control by developing pyramid corporate ownership structures through the control of golden shares 10 and the single-agency ownership of multiple companies (Abramov et al. 2017). Because of such high capital concentration, controlling shareholders, including managers, expropriated resources for private benefits (Berezinets et al. 2014). ...
Abusive transactions with related parties are more common in a concentrated ownership structure. Previous studies have debated that the fallout of concentrated corporate ownership (i.e. sizable corporate conglomerates and corporate enterprises owned by business families or the government of the state) is high in a relatively close market. Despite the adoption of the Anglo–US model in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) for improving transparency, accountability, and fairness, the rate of corporate failure involving abusive related party transactions has been high. This study examines differences in related party transactions (RPT) regulatory strategies among BRICS with respect to international standards (Anglo–US model) and local conditions. The study analyses to what extent BRICS nations have adopted the Anglo–US model by comparing the RPT regulatory framework with the convergence towards the Anglo–US model, divergence from the Anglo–US model, and unfolding of a new construct in BRICS. Overall, the study finds Brazilian and Russian RPT legislation the least convergent towards the Anglo–US model and RPT legislation in India, China, and South Africa fully convergent towards the Anglo–US model. BRICS have shown persistence or resistance towards the Anglo–US RPT legal transplantation. In certain aspects, BRICS have made a concerted effort to regulate abusive RPTs suitable to their local conditions. However, RPT legislation in BRICS nations has failed to address some major governance problems caused by concentrated ownership structures (monitoring of RPTs in pyramidal companies, same RPT thresholds for group and non-group companies, dominance of controlling shareholders on independent directors’ appraisal of RPTs, and the lack of adequate disclosure requirements for RPTs).
... Feng et al. (2020) investigated the impact of capital on the ownership structure of SMEs in China, discovering that capital has a significant impact on the ownership outlook of listed real estate enterprises in the country. Abramov et al. (2017) found that private-equity firms were more productive than state-owned structures in a sample of 114 top companies in Russian cities. The study concluded that the variations in the effects of government control on ownership were relatively small, using private ownership to represent rural SMEs and public ownership to represent urban SMEs. ...
Finance, incubation, managerial support initiatives, and technological innovation have all been identified as major drivers of SMEs’ business location. Despite the importance of SMEs, little attention has been paid to business research regarding the impact of government support, business style, and entrepreneurial sustainability on SME activities in rural, semi-urban, and urban areas. Identifying the necessary support for SMEs in rural, semi-urban, and urban areas is critical for the government as well as stakeholders and SME owners in assessing their survival status and other goal-setting achievements. The article’s central question is whether government support, business style, and entrepreneurship sustainability affect SME operations differently depending on location (rural, semi-urban, or urban). The MANOVA technique was used for the analysis to determine whether there is a significant difference between groups on a composite dependent variable as well as the univariate results for each dependent variable separately. Because conducting a series of studies (ANOVA) reveals the possibility of an inflated Type 1 error, MANOVA is preferred. The test re-test reliability method (trustworthiness assessment of the questionnaire) and the Cronbach Alpha test (internal consistency of instrument sections) yielded satisfactory results of 0.70 and 0.875, respectively. Government support (GS), business style (BS), and entrepreneurial sustainability were used as dependent variables (SE). The independent variable was the business location. On the combined dependent variables, there was a statistically significant difference between SME location: F (3, 902) = 20.388, p = 0.001, Wilks’ Lambda = 0.88, partial eta squared = 0.06. When the results for the dependent variables were considered separately, they all reached statistical significance, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.017. BS: F (1, 904) = 13.29, p ≤ 001, partial eta squared = 0.03. GS: F (1, 904) = 30.28, p ≤ 0.001, partial eta squared = 0.06. SE: F (1, 904) = 8.08, p ≤ 0.001, partial eta squared = 0.02. The findings show that locational effects on government support have a knock-on effect on the business plan and long-term entrepreneurship. As a result, the government must reconsider its rural activities to ensure that support is distributed equitably across levels of location.
... Their research results show that increasing the relative shareholding ratio of other large shareholders to the largest shareholder is not good for the company's short-term performance, but it is beneficial to the company's innovation and sustainable development. However Russian economy is characterized by restricted competition due to the dominance of state-controlled enterprises with different forms of both direct and indirect state ownership (Abramov et al., 2017;Alexeev and Chernyavskiy, 2018;Belikov and Dementieva, 2019;Liljeblom et al., 2020;Krome, 2021). Therefore, the equity structure of largest listed industrial companies remains highly stable and cannot be implemented in our models. ...
Purpose
The paper examines whether, along with the financial performance, the disclosure of research and development (R&D) expenses, patent portfolios, patent citations and innovation activities affect the market capitalization of Russian companies.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper opted for a set of techniques including bag-of-words (BoW) to retrieve additional innovation-related data from companies' annual reports, self-organizing maps (SOM) to perform visual exploratory analysis and panel data regression (PDR) to conduct confirmatory analysis using data on 74 Russian publicly traded companies for the period 2013–2019.
Findings
The paper observes that the disclosure of nonfinancial data on R&D, patents and primarily product and marketing innovations positively affects the market capitalization of the largest Russian companies, which are mainly focused on energy, raw materials and utilities and are operating on international markets. The study suggests that these companies are financially well-resourced to innovate at risk and thus to provide positive signals to stakeholders and external agents.
Research limitations/implications
Our findings are important to management, investors, financial analysts, regulators and various agencies providing guidance on corporate governance and sustainability reporting. However, the authors acknowledge that the research results may lack generalizability due to the sample covering a single national context. Researchers are encouraged to test the proposed approach further on other countries' data by using the compiled lexicons.
Originality/value
The study aims to expand the domains of signaling theory and market valuation by providing new insights into the impact that companies' reporting on R&D, patents and innovation activities has on market capitalization. New nonfinancial factors that previous research does not investigate – innovation disclosure indicators (IDI) – are tested.
... Therefore, in order to understand the peculiarities of market reactions on companies' involvement in CSR activities and earnings management, it is important to take into account the role of political institutions that operate in the national environment, especially in the emerging country like Russia, where due to the communist tradition the state exerts total control over all the aspects of the society (Li et al., 2014) and where the government plays a significant role in setting rules to create norms for organizations' CSR behavior (Campbell, 2007). Russian economy is characterised by a significant presence of companies controlled by the state (Abramov et al., 2017). State owned companies represent around 40% of the market value of all publicly listed companies in Russia (Abramov et al., 2017) and contribute to 70% of the total public sector (Panibratov and Klishevich, 2018). ...
... Russian economy is characterised by a significant presence of companies controlled by the state (Abramov et al., 2017). State owned companies represent around 40% of the market value of all publicly listed companies in Russia (Abramov et al., 2017) and contribute to 70% of the total public sector (Panibratov and Klishevich, 2018). Marquis and Qian (2014) claim that in emerging markets state ownership might be associated with an increased risk of financial misreporting as state owned companies are not inclined to adopt strong governance mechanisms. ...
