Institutional Quality, Regulatory Environment and Microeconomic Performance: Evidence from Transition and Non-transition Developing Countries

Haggai Kennedy Ochieng, Bokyeong Park
{"title":"Institutional Quality, Regulatory Environment and Microeconomic Performance: Evidence from Transition and Non-transition Developing Countries","authors":"Haggai Kennedy Ochieng, Bokyeong Park","doi":"10.11644/kiep.eaer.2021.25.3.398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The development of regulatory systems varies between transition and non-transition economies. This suggests that they provide different incentives for entrepreneurial development and could have varied effects on the economy because they have different methods to deal with market failure. However, limited empirical evidence exists to prove the assumption of dichotomy. Using comprehensive data for institutional quality, labor market and financial market development, this research sought to analyze their effect on employment growth at micro level. The results show that the quality of institutions in transition economies are poorer relative to those in non-transition economies, but their financial and labor markets are more developed than the latter. Further analysis for the transition sample shows that the three variables are individually positively related with employment growth. For the non-transition sample, institutional quality and labor market flexibility bear a positive and significant effect on employment. Financial market development enters the model with a negative coefficient when regressed alone, but a joint test of significance finds that all the variables have a positive effect on employment growth. This result could imply that there is interdependence between institutional quality, labor flexibility and financial market development in firm-employment-growth relationship, or complementarity between regulations and the quality of institutions. Alternatively, this finding suggests that a stringently regulated credit market in non-transition economies have a selection effect-allocating credit only to entrepreneurs who already demonstrate strong growth potential. In sum, despite differences in the evolution of regulatory environment between the two samples, both of them complement employment growth at firm level. The overall implication of these findings is that less rigid regulations and coherent policies that are enforced with impartiality provide incentives for firms to expand.","PeriodicalId":341686,"journal":{"name":"Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) Research Paper Series","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11644/kiep.eaer.2021.25.3.398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The development of regulatory systems varies between transition and non-transition economies. This suggests that they provide different incentives for entrepreneurial development and could have varied effects on the economy because they have different methods to deal with market failure. However, limited empirical evidence exists to prove the assumption of dichotomy. Using comprehensive data for institutional quality, labor market and financial market development, this research sought to analyze their effect on employment growth at micro level. The results show that the quality of institutions in transition economies are poorer relative to those in non-transition economies, but their financial and labor markets are more developed than the latter. Further analysis for the transition sample shows that the three variables are individually positively related with employment growth. For the non-transition sample, institutional quality and labor market flexibility bear a positive and significant effect on employment. Financial market development enters the model with a negative coefficient when regressed alone, but a joint test of significance finds that all the variables have a positive effect on employment growth. This result could imply that there is interdependence between institutional quality, labor flexibility and financial market development in firm-employment-growth relationship, or complementarity between regulations and the quality of institutions. Alternatively, this finding suggests that a stringently regulated credit market in non-transition economies have a selection effect-allocating credit only to entrepreneurs who already demonstrate strong growth potential. In sum, despite differences in the evolution of regulatory environment between the two samples, both of them complement employment growth at firm level. The overall implication of these findings is that less rigid regulations and coherent policies that are enforced with impartiality provide incentives for firms to expand.
制度质量、监管环境和微观经济绩效:来自转型和非转型发展中国家的证据
管制制度的发展在转型经济和非转型经济之间有所不同。这表明,它们为企业发展提供了不同的激励,并可能对经济产生不同的影响,因为它们处理市场失灵的方法不同。然而,证明二分法假设的经验证据有限。本研究利用制度质量、劳动力市场和金融市场发展的综合数据,试图从微观层面分析它们对就业增长的影响。结果表明,转型经济体的制度质量相对于非转型经济体较差,但其金融和劳动力市场比后者更发达。对转型样本的进一步分析表明,这三个变量分别与就业增长呈正相关。对于非转型样本,制度质量和劳动力市场灵活性对就业有显著的正向影响。金融市场发展在单独回归时以负系数进入模型,但联合显著性检验发现,所有变量对就业增长都有正向影响。这一结果可能暗示在企业-就业-增长关系中,制度质量、劳动力灵活性和金融市场发展之间存在相互依存关系,或者法规与制度质量之间存在互补性。另外,这一发现表明,在非转型经济体中,严格监管的信贷市场具有选择效应——只将信贷分配给已经显示出强劲增长潜力的企业家。总之,尽管两个样本之间监管环境的演变存在差异,但它们都在企业层面上补充了就业增长。这些发现的总体含义是,不那么严格的法规和公正执行的连贯政策为企业扩张提供了激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信