详情
Cross-listing, Corporate Governance, and Firm Performance An Empirical Test on Bonding Hypothesis
Applying the principle of the bonding theory, this study examined the relationship
between corporate governance practice and performance of Chinese firms that are listed
in the major international stock exchanges, including NASDAQ, New York, Hong Kong,
Singapore and London AIM markets, and further investigated whether the Chinese firms
that adopted the corporate governance mechanisms of the stock exchanges where they are
listed would outperform those of firms listed locally in the Chinese stock exchange that
operates in a weak enforcement mechanism environment. Hypotheses are tested using
cross sectional data. The empirical tests show a mixed result. The cross-listings in New
York and NASDAQ (dual-listing is excluded) exhibit bonding premium, while those noncross-
listed Chinese firms demonstrated better firm performance that those listed in
London, Singapore, and Hong Kong. Further, the study shed some lights on the relative
importance of various corporate governance mechanisms in enhancing the firm
performance in the context of the dominance of state-owned-enterprises in the market.
The results reveal that different market has different corporate governance mechanisms
under its different macro-environments. For the overall Chinese listings, the second
largest shareholder of a firm could play a role as an effective corporate governance
mechanism in increasing the firm’s performance. A negative relationship between the
size of the board and the corporate governance was found. For those cross-listed Chinese
firms, by adopting the stringent financial disclosure and the famous auditing firms could
increase the firm performance, but not good enough comparing to these non-cross-listed
Chinese firms. Meanwhile, controlling shareholder has negative effect on firm
performance for the cross-listed Chinese firms. The study suggests that merely borrowing
corporate governance mechanism does not guarantee the improvement of corporate
governance (further to its firm performance), rather, firm’s own background and country
effects also matter.