메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
임형록 (한양대학교)
저널정보
아태인문사회융합기술교류학회 아시아태평양융합연구교류논문지 아시아태평양융합연구교류논문지 제9권 제5호
발행연도
2023.5
수록면
173 - 183 (11page)
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.47116/apjcri.2023.05.15

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Ever since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, transition countries have adopted the market economy system. However, some of these countries are currently more tied in reciprocal economic relationships with European Union members, the pro-EU group, while[ others continue to maintain pre-existing ties, the pro-Russia group. The purpose of this paper is set to tackle how firms perform differently across two groups both theoretically and empirically. In particular, a game model is first developed to evaluate if an ex-communist country networking effect persists. Second, if it has resulted in deterioration of the firm performance of the pro-Russia group compared to that of the pro-EU group, and third if a networking effect is able to enhance the firm performance of the pro-Russia group. The predictions of the model are tested empirically with two regression models controlling for the size effect of the firms within the transitional economies. Because long-lasting political ties with Russia in CEE countries can generate endogeneity, a 2SLS estimation using a secondary data is attempted for testing some propositions. The dataset is collected from the Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey jointly constructed by the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The empirical results have two important findings based on the secondary data. First, in terms of innovative capability and input-output efficiency, firms in the pro-EU group outperform those in the pro-Russia group. Second, the networking effect can compensate for firm performance in the pro-Russia group even though firm efficiency is lower than the pro-EU group. The findings of the paper suggest two kinds of business strategies. First, between transitional economies and pro-Russian countries, the former is a better place for making investments as the former can request to pay higher embedded costs. Second, the networking effect of pro-Russian countries cannot be discounted. Indirect exports based on a mutual long-term relationship across pro-Russian countries while pivoting on Russia are a non-negligible factor.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0