MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2233895131

Financial Liberalization, Foreign Ownership and Corporate Operational Efficiency: The Case of Taiwan Market

2013· article· en· W2233895131 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
李桐豪, Tung-Hao Lee, Jiun-Kai Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperational efficiencyBusinessLiberalizationForeign ownershipSpeculationForeign direct investmentData envelopment analysisInvestment (military)Monetary economicsFinancial systemFinanceIndustrial organizationEconomicsMarket economyMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a non-parametric data envelopment analysis (DEA) method, this paper investigates the investment allocation choices of foreign investors and how the foreign ownership and corporate operational efficiency play roles in Taiwan market with more financial liberalization. Empirical results suggest a possible channel. Through this channel, a high level of foreign ownership significantly positively affects corporate operational efficiency, and then higher operational efficiency triggers better performance. With more liberalization, some foreign investors are not only speculators, but also they play the role of monitoring or disciplinary. They improve corporate operational efficiency and performance, and thus in turn their investment profits, especially high-tech and exporting companies. These two roles are not mutually exclusive. The case of Taiwan market may have established a paradigm for developing countries to follow.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207