This paper provides a modern overview of corporate governance in China and in doing so highlights many corporate governance features and issues that are, for the most part, unique to China. We also describe how papers in this special issue advance our understanding of corporate governance in China and in general.

This paper provides a modern overview of capital markets, financial institutions, and corporate finance in China. In our discussions, we highlight and describe what is unique to China. We also describe how papers in the Special Issue advance our understanding of financial markets, institutions, and corporate finance in China and in general.

We first extend Baker and Wurgler's (2004a) catering theory of dividends to share repurchases. Consistent with the notion that firms cater to investor demand for share repurchases, we report evidence that the market's time-varying repurchase premium positively affects firms' choice to repurchase shares. Next, we use the catering behavior as a novel framework for testing the dividend substitution hypothesis. Consistent with the notion that managers consider dividends and share repurchases to be substitute payout mechanisms, we find that the dividend premium negatively affects the repurchase choice, whereas the repurchase premium negatively affects the choice to pay dividends.

We examine the operating performance of Thai firms after they go public. Overall, we find that their performance declines. We then explore the relationship between managerial ownership and the change in firm performance. We find that firms with ‘low’ and ‘high’ levels of managerial ownership experience positive relationships between managerial ownership and the change in performance (alignment-of-interest hypothesis), while firms with ‘intermediate’ levels of managerial ownership exhibit a negative relationship between managerial ownership and the change in performance (entrenchment hypothesis). Examining the operating performance of IPO firms from an emerging market and finding a curvilinear relationship between managerial ownership and the post-IPO change in performance represents two significant contributions to the IPO literature.

We propose that family firms with religious founders have less risk than other family firms. Using a sample of 4159 family firms in China, we find that firms founded by religious entrepreneurs have lower leverage and less investment in fixed and intangible assets compared to firms founded by nonreligious entrepreneurs. These findings are consistent with our proposition. However, these findings primarily hold for entrepreneurs who adhere to Western religions but not to Eastern religions. As such, our paper makes important contributions to the literature on family-firms and their risk-taking and the literature on the relation between religion and risk aversion.

We examine the relation between minority shareholder protection laws, ownership concentration, and board independence. Minority shareholder rights is a country-level governance variable. Ownership structure and board composition represent firm-level governance variables. Prior research hypothesizes and documents a negative relation between countries' minority shareholder rights quality and firms' ownership concentration. We introduce the hypothesis that shareholder protection rights and firms' board independence are positively related. When a country's minority shareholder rights are strong, then minority shareholders should have the legal power to affect board composition. Using a sample of large firms from 14 European countries, we test both hypotheses and find that countries with stronger shareholder protection rights have firms with lower ownership concentrations and with more independent directors, consistent with both hypotheses. We also find evidence that ownership concentration and board independence are negatively related.

Not all corporate bailouts are the same. We study corporate bailouts from around the world during 1987–2005. Among these bailed-out firms, some firms are economically distressed while others are financially distressed. Some firms are bailed out with cash (either as equity or as loans) while others are bailed out with debt relief. Some firms are bailed out by the government while others are bailed out by other stakeholders. We examine these firms’ operating performance before and after their bailouts, but specifically across different bailout types, and we also measure their stock returns surrounding their bailout announcements.

We find a positive relation between product market competition and corporate investment using a sample of Chinese manufacturing firms during 1999–2010. A quasi-natural experiment and change regressions yield consistent evidence. We postulate that China's high and predictable growth rate, as it transitions from a developing economy to a developed economy, is what drives the positive relation between competition and investment. We directly test and provide support for this growth-oriented explanation. We also find that high investment under high competition is a value-enhancing proposition for firms. Finally, we test whether some firm types are more likely to invest under high competition in a growing economy, and we find that firms with high predation risk and firms that are industry leaders invest more.

We develop and test an ownership structure pecking order. Our ownership pecking order sorts out which structures are likely to have relatively fewer agency costs versus higher agency costs. At the top of the pecking order are firms with a single controlling shareholder, they have the lowest agency costs when that shareholder is not the government. Next is the presence of multiple large shareholders. They are even more effective when the large shareholders are of the same type. The structure with the highest agency costs consists of a single large non-controlling shareholder. Our empirical tests confirm this pecking order.

We examine Korean chaebols to determine the costs and benefits associated with the operation of a diversified business group. We find that chaebol-affiliated firms suffer a value loss relative to non-affiliated firms. We observe that this value loss holds even after controlling for the relatedness of the diversification present within the chaebol. To identify the causes of this value loss, we obtain evidence suggesting that chaebol firms: (1) pursue profit stability rather than profit maximization, (2) over-invest in low performing industries, and (3) cross-subsidize the weaker members of their group. We do find however that chaebol firms possess greater debt capacity and consequently enjoy lower tax burdens. Nevertheless, because chaebols suffer an overall loss in value, we conclude that the costs associated with chaebol membership exceed its benefits.