The Influence of Non-State Shareholders Board Power on State-Owned Enterprises Internationalization Degree
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the influence of non-state shareholders’ board power on the internationalization of state-owned enterprises and demonstrates the moderating effect of the business expectation gap and industry competition. Taking SOEs listed in Shenzhen and Shanghai A-share markets as the research sample, the study examines the influence of non-state shareholders’ board power on SOEs’ internationalization behavior and explores the regulating effects of two situational factors: business expectations gap and industry competition. Results show that (1) non-state shareholders’ board power positively impacts SOEs’ degree of internationalization. (2) The historical business expectations gap strengthens the positive impact of non-state shareholders’ board power on SOEs’ degree of internationalization, whereas the social business expectations gap weakens the positive impact. (3) The positive impact of non-state shareholder board power on internationalization degree is stronger in SOEs with high industry competition than with low industry competition.The study analyzes how non-state shareholders’ board power promotes the internationalization of SOEs in the mixed ownership reform and provides governance efficiency evidence of the mixed-ownership reform from the perspective of SOEs’ international practices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".