Mostrar el registro sencillo del documento

dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional
dc.contributor.advisorGómez Villegas, Mauricio
dc.contributor.authorArias Bello, Martha Liliana
dc.coverage.spatialAmérica Latina
dc.coverage.temporal1999-2018
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-13T19:32:00Z
dc.date.available2023-06-13T19:32:00Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/84008
dc.descriptionilustraciones
dc.description.abstractLa investigación estudió los efectos de la corporatización en las Empresas de Propiedad del Estado (EPE) no financieras de varios países de Latinoamérica, durante los años 1999-2018, a partir de tres escenarios: EPE con privatización parcial a través de la emisión de acciones; EPE sin privatización parcial, con emisión de deuda, y EPE con gobierno corporativo sin participación en el mercado de valores. La metodología aplicada fue mixta, descriptiva y explicativa. Este diseño metodológico permitió: 1) mediante modelos de regresión de datos de panel, aportar evidencia empírica sobre los efectos de la corporatización en 41 EPE, y 2) mediante el estudio de caso múltiple de ocho EPE, aportar a la literatura sobre el gobierno corporativo de estas empresas. Los hallazgos permitieron concluir que la privatización parcial con emisión de acciones en el mercado de valores tiene un efecto positivo en la eficiencia financiera de las EPE. En el caso de la emisión de deuda no se encontró evidencia concluyente que sugiera que se mejore la eficiencia de las EPE. En las EPE sin participación en el mercado de valores, pero con la implementación de gobierno corporativo, los factores de eficiencia son el tamaño de los activos y la gestión en los costos. El estudio de caso múltiple evidenció que, pese a los resultados cuantitativos, en todos los escenarios aún se presentan situaciones que afectan la eficiencia de las EPE. Es necesario que las teorías de la agencia, del stewardship y de los stakeholders incorporen a la EPE como una forma organizativa particular en la que primen los intereses sociales. (Texto tomado de la fuente).
dc.description.abstractThe research studied the effects of corporatization in non-financial state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in Latin American countries, during the years 1999-2018, based on three scenarios: SOEs with partial privatization through the issuance of shares; SOEs without partial privatization, with debt issuance, and SOEs with corporate governance without participation in the stock market. The methodology applied was mixed, descriptive and explanatory. This methodological design allowed: 1) through panel data regression models, to provide empirical evidence on the effects of corporatization in 41 SOEs, and 2) through a multiple case study of eight SOEs, to contribute to the literature on corporate governance of these companies. The findings led to the conclusion that partial privatization with the issuance of shares in the stock market has a positive effect on the financial efficiency of SOEs. In the case of debt issuance, no conclusive evidence was found to suggest that SOE efficiency is improved. In SOEs without stock market participation with the implementation of corporate governance the determinants of efficiency are asset size and cost management. The multiple case study showed that, despite the quantitative results, in all scenarios there are still situations that affect SOE efficiency. It is necessary that the theories of agency, stewardship and stakeholders incorporate the SOE as a main organizational form in which social interests prevail.
dc.format.extentxix, 36 páginas
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.subject.ddc330 - Economía::336 - Finanzas públicas
dc.subject.ddc350 - Administración pública y ciencia militar::354 - Administración pública de la economía y el medio ambiente
dc.titleEfectos de la corporatización en el desempeño de las empresas estatales no financieras en Latinoamérica durante los años 1999 a 2018
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Doctorado
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.publisher.programBogotá - Ciencias Económicas - Doctorado en Ciencias Económicas
dc.description.notesIncluye anexos
dc.coverage.tgnhttp://vocab.getty.edu/page/tgn/4006155
dc.description.degreelevelDoctorado
dc.description.degreenameDoctor en Ciencias Económicas
dc.description.methodsLa metodología aplicada fue mixta, descriptiva y explicativa. Este diseño metodológico permitió: 1) mediante modelos de regresión de datos de panel, aportar evidencia empírica sobre los efectos de la corporatización en 41 EPE, y 2) mediante el estudio de caso múltiple de ocho EPE, aportar a la literatura sobre el gobierno corporativo de estas empresas.
dc.description.researchareaGestión y organizaciones
dc.identifier.instnameUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.reponameRepositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.repourlhttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/
dc.publisher.facultyFacultad de Ciencias Económicas
dc.publisher.placeBogotá, Colombia
dc.publisher.branchUniversidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá
dc.relation.referencesModell, S. (2005). Triangulation between case study and survey methods in management accounting research: An assessment of validity implications. Management Accounting Research, 16(2), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2005.03.001
dc.relation.referencesMoore, M. H. (1995). Creating Public Value. Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press.
dc.relation.referencesMusacchio, A., Pineda, E., & García, G. (2015). State-Owned Enterprise Reform in Latin America. Inter-American Development Bank. https://publications.iadb.org/en/state-owned-enterprise-reform-latin-america-issues-and-possible-solutions
dc.relation.referencesNeto, R. de G. (1994). Privatization Strategies: Is Brazil Moving in the Wrong Gear? International Executive, 36(4), 465–489. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.5060360406
dc.relation.referencesNordhaus, W.D. (1975). The Political Business Cycle. The Review of Economic Studies, 42(2), 169-190. https://doi.org/10.2307/2296528
dc.relation.referencesObermann, J., Velte, P., Gerwanski, J. & Kordsachia, O. (2020), Mutualistic symbiosis? Combining theories of agency and stewardship through behavioral characteristics. Management Research Review, Vol. 43 No. 8, pp. 989-1011. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-07-2019-0317
dc.relation.referencesOcampo, J., & Bértola, L. (2013). El Desarrollo Económico de América Latina desde la Independencia. Fondo de Cultura Económica, México.
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2011). Directrices de la OCDE sobre el Gobierno Corporativo de las Empresas Públicas. Paris: OCDE. https://www.oecd.org/daf/ca/corporategovernanceofstate-ownedenterprises/48632643.pdf
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2012). OECD Integrity Review of Brazil - Managing Risks for a Cleaner Public Service. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264119321-en
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2013). Colombia: Implementing Good Governance. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264202177-en
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2014). Chile's Supreme Audit Institution. Enhancing Strategic Agility and Public Trust. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264207561-en
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2015). Directrices de la OCDE sobre el Gobierno Corporativo de las Empresas Públicas. https://www.oecd.org/daf/directrices-de-la-ocde-sobre-el-gobierno-corporativo-de-las-empresas-publicas-edicion-2015-9789264258167-es.htm
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2016). State-Owned Enterprises as Global Competitors: A Challenge or an Opportunity?, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://doi.org/10.1787/9789264262096-en
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2017). The Size and Sectoral Distribution of State-Owned Enterprises. http://www.oecd.org/daf/ca/soemarket.htm
dc.relation.referencesOrganización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE). (2017a). OECD Integrity Review of Mexico Taking a Stronger Stance Against Corruption. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273207-en
dc.relation.referencesPeng, M., Bruton, G., Stan, C., & Huang, Y. (2016). Theories of the (state-owned) firm. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 33(2), 293–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-016-9462-3
dc.relation.referencesPham, H.S.T. & Nguyen, D.T. (2019). The effects of corporate governance mechanisms on the financial leverage–profitability relation: Evidence from Vietnam. Management Research Review, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 387-409. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-03-2019-0136
dc.relation.referencesPombo, C., & Ramírez, M. (2005). Privatization in Colombia: A plant performance analysis. En A. Chong, & F. López-de-Silanes, Privatization in Latin America Myths and Reality, 275-348. Washington: Stanford University Press
dc.relation.referencesPrahalad, CK., & Hamel, G. (1994). Strategy as a Field of Study: Why Search for a New Paradigm?. Strategic Management Journal,15,5-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250151002
dc.relation.referencesQi, D., Wu, W., & Zhang, H. (2000). Shareholding structure and corporate performance of partially privatized firms: Evidence from listed Chinese companies. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 8(5), 587–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-538X(00)00013-5
dc.relation.referencesRadosław, M. (2021). Corporate governance in state-owned enterprises. A systematic literature review: an international perspective. International Journal of Contemporary Management. Vol. 57 Issue 4, p1-13. 13p. https://doi.org/10.2478/ijcm-2021-0011
dc.relation.referencesRakhman, F. (2018). Can partially privatized SOEs outperform fully private firms? Evidence from Indonesia. Research in International Business and Finance, 45, 285–292. https://doi.org/Doi: 10.1016/j.ribaf.2017.07.160
dc.relation.referencesRamamurti, R. (1998). The Logic of Privatization: The Case of Telecommunications in the Southern Cone of Latin America Walter Molano. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 40(3), 133. https://doi.org/10.2307/166205
dc.relation.referencesRamírez, C. E. (2007). El proceso de privatización: Antecedentes, implicaciones y resultados. Contaduría y administración, (222), 97-114. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0186-10422007000200007&lng=es&tlng=es
dc.relation.referencesResolución 275 de 2001. Por la cual se establecen los requisitos que deben acreditar las personas jurídicas públicas y privadas que pretendan ser destinatarias de la inversión de recursos de los fondos de pensiones. Superintendencia de Valores. Revista Legislación Económica N°:1169 De Junio 30 De 2001, Pg.1160
dc.relation.referencesResolución S.B.S. N° 272 -2017. La Superintendenta de Banca y Seguros y Administradoras Privadas de Fondos de Pensiones. República del Perú. Lima. https://www.sbs.gob.pe/Portals/0/jer/Auto_Nuevas_Empresas/Normas_Comunes/5.%20Reg.%20de%20Gobierno%20Corporativo_Res.%20SBS%20N%C2%B0%20272-2017.pdf
dc.relation.referencesRichter, P., Edeling , T., & Reichard, C. (2006). Kommunale Betriebe in größeren Städten. En W. Kilian, P. Richter , & J. Trapp , Ausgliederung und Privatisierung in Kommunen, 56-84. Berlin: Empirische Befunde zur Struktur kommunaler Aufgabenwahrnehmung
dc.relation.referencesRogoff, K., & Sibert, A. (1988). Elections and Macroeconomic Policy Cycles. The Review of Economic Studies, 55(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297526
dc.relation.referencesRuiz, A. (2002). El proceso de privatizaciones en el Perú durante el período 1991-2002. Instituto Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Planificación Económica y Social – ILPES. Serie 22, Gestión pública. https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/7273/1/S027489_es.pdf
dc.relation.referencesSacristán Roy, E. (2006). Las privatizaciones en México. Economía Unam, 54-64. https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S1665-952X2006000300004&script=sci_abstract
dc.relation.referencesSam, C. Y. (2010). Globalizing partially privatized firms in Singapore: The role of government as a regulator and a shareholder. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 45(3), 258–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021909610364778
dc.relation.referencesSánchez, J. (2010). La privatización en México como retracción estatal. Instituto de Administración Pública del Estado de México, A.C.
dc.relation.referencesSappideen, R. (2016). Corporate Governance with Chinese Characteristics: The Case of State Owned Enterprises. (May 7, 2016). Frontiers of Law in China, Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2017. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2964606
dc.relation.referencesShan, Y. G., & McIver, R. P. (2011). Corporate governance mechanisms and financial performance in China: Panel data evidence on listed non-financial companies. Asia Pacific Business Review, 17(3), 301-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602380903522325
dc.relation.referencesShawtari, F. A., Har Sani Mohamad, M., Abdul Rashid, H. M., & Ayedh, A. M. (2017). Board characteristics and real performance in malaysian state-owned enterprises (SOEs). International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66(8), 1064-1086. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-12-2015-0188
dc.relation.referencesShi, X. (2010). Restructuring in China’s State-Owned Enterprises: Evidence from the Coal Industry. China and World Economy, 18(3), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-124X.2010.01198.x
dc.relation.referencesShleifer, A. & Vishny R. W. (1994). Politicians and Firms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4), 995-1025. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118354
dc.relation.referencesSikka, P. & Stittle, J. (2019) Debunking the myth of shareholder ownership of companies: Some implications for corporate governance and financial reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting (63), p. 101992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2017.03.011
dc.relation.referencesSistema de Empresas (SEP) Chile. (Octubre de 2020). Quiénes somos. https://www.sepchile.cl/quienes-somos/#quienes-somos
dc.relation.referencesSong, Z., Nahm, A. Y., & Zhang, Z. (2017). Partial State Ownership, Political Connection, and Financing: Evidence from Chinese Publicly Listed Private Sector Enterprises. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 53(3), 611–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2015.1097920
dc.relation.referencesStiglitz, J., (2000). La economía del sector público. Antoni Bosch, Editor.
dc.relation.referencesSu, D. & He, X. (2012). Ownership structure, corporate governance and productive efficiency in China. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 38(3), 303-318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-011-0257-8
dc.relation.referencesTeo, S. (2000). Evidence of Strategic HRM Linkages in Eleven Australian Corporatized Public Sector Organizations. Public Personnel Management, 29(4), 557. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102600002900412
dc.relation.referencesThynne, I. (1994). The incorporated company as an instrument of government: a quest for a comparative understanding. Governance: An International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 59-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.1994.tb00169.x
dc.relation.referencesTian, L. & Estrin, S. (2007). Debt financing, soft budget constraints, and government. Economics of Transition, 15(3), 461-481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0351.2007.00292.x
dc.relation.referencesTihanyi, L., Aguilera, R. V., Heugens, P., Essen, M., Sauerwald, S., Duran, P., & Turturea, R. (2019). State Ownership and Political Connections. Journal of Management. 45(6), 2293–2321. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1177/0149206318822113
dc.relation.referencesTirole, J. (2001). Corporate governance. Econometrica, 69, issue 1, p. 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00177
dc.relation.referencesToninelli, P. (2000). The rise and fall of state-owned enterprise in the western world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
dc.relation.referencesTranfield, D, Denyer, D, & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
dc.relation.referencesTriebs, T., & Pollitt, M. G. (2019). Objectives and incentives: Evidence from the privatization of Great Britain’s power plants. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 65, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2018.12.003
dc.relation.referencesTullock, G., & Wagner, R. E. (1976). Rational Models, Politics, and Policy Analysis. Policy Studies Journal, 4 (4), 408-416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1976.tb01668.x
dc.relation.referencesVargas, J. (2006). La nueva economía política en la transformación institucional del Estado-nación. Problemas del desarrollo, 37(145), 31-51. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=11820086003
dc.relation.referencesVeldman, J. (2019). Inequality, Inc. SI: Emancipatory accounting and corporate governance: Critical and interdisciplinary perspectives. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 63, 102039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2018.04.001
dc.relation.referencesVithessonthi, C. (2016). Capital investment, internationalization, and firm performance: Evidence from Southeast Asian countries. Research in International Business and Finance, 38, 393–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2016.04.019
dc.relation.referencesVoorn, B., van Genugten, M. L., & van Thiel, S. (2017). The efficiency and effectiveness of municipally owned corporations: a systematic review. Local Government Studies, 43(5), 820–841. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2017.1319360
dc.relation.referencesWang, L. F. S., & Han, T.D. (2015). Better Governance Matters Optimal Privatization Policy. Eurasian Economic Review, 5(2), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40822-015-0025-6
dc.relation.referencesWernerfelt B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2486175
dc.relation.referencesWicaksono, A. (2009). Corporate governance of state-owned enterprises: investment holding structure of government-linked companies in Singapore and Malaysia and applicability for Indonesian state-owned enterprises. Dissertation at the University of St. Gallen, p. 230. http://www.biblio.unisg.ch/www/edis.nsf/wwwDisplayIdentifier/3488/$FILE/dis3488.pdf
dc.relation.referencesWilliamson, O. (1985). The Economics Institutions of Capitalism. Firms, Markets and Relational Contracts. The Free Press, A division of McMillan, Nueva York.
dc.relation.referencesWong, S. C. Y. (2018). The state of governance at state-owned enterprises. Private sector opinion; no.40. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/564891520946563480/pdf/NWP-State-of-Governance-PSO-40-PUBLIC.pdf
dc.relation.referencesXu, L. C., Zhu, T., & Lin, Y. (2005). Politician control, agency problems and ownership reform: Evidence from China. Economics of Transition, 13(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0351.2005.00205.x
dc.relation.referencesYin, R. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
dc.relation.referencesZhang, L. (2004). The roles of corporatization and stock market listing in reforming china's state industry. World Development, 32(12), 2031-2047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.08.003
dc.relation.referencesZimmerman, J. L. (1977). The Municipal Accounting Maze: An Analysis of Political Incentives. Journal of Accounting Research (Wiley-Blackwell), 15, 107–144. https://doi.org/10.2307/2490636
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject.jelH82 Governmental Property
dc.subject.proposalCorporatización
dc.subject.proposalEficiencia
dc.subject.proposalEmpresas de Propiedad del Estado
dc.subject.proposalGobierno Corporativo
dc.subject.proposalLatinoamérica
dc.subject.proposalPrivatización
dc.subject.proposalCorporate governance
dc.subject.proposalCorporatization
dc.subject.proposalEfficiency
dc.subject.proposalLatin America
dc.subject.proposalPrivatization
dc.subject.proposalState-owned enterprises
dc.subject.unescoEmpresa pública
dc.subject.unescoPublic enterprises
dc.subject.unescoPolítica económica
dc.subject.unescoEconomic policy
dc.subject.unescoProductividad industrial
dc.subject.unescoIndustrial productivity
dc.title.translatedEffects of corporatization on the performance of non-financial state-owned enterprises in Latin America during the years 1999 to 2018
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa
dc.type.contentText
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TD
oaire.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentEstudiantes
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentInvestigadores
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentMaestros
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentPúblico general
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentReceptores de fondos federales y solicitantes
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentResponsables políticos
dc.contributor.orcidArias Bello, Martha Liliana [0000000155403980]
dc.contributor.cvlacArias Bello, Martha Liliana [https://scienti.minciencias.gov.co/cvlac/visualizador/generarCurriculoCv.do?cod_rh=0000501689]
dc.contributor.googlescholarArias Bello, Martha Liliana [https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=pddv56MAAAAJ&hl=es]


Archivos en el documento

Thumbnail

Este documento aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del documento

Atribución-NoComercial 4.0 InternacionalEsta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0.Este documento ha sido depositado por parte de el(los) autor(es) bajo la siguiente constancia de depósito