The co-evolution of institutions and stakeholders in creating new industries
- PDF / 1,016,885 Bytes
- 34 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 112 Downloads / 167 Views
The co-evolution of institutions and stakeholders in creating new industries Jipeng Qi 1 & Xiangfei Fu 1 & Jie Li 2 & Jigang Xie 1 # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract We examine different government levels in China as institutional entrepreneurs that coevolve with other stakeholders in the emerging ride-sharing and bike-sharing industries there. We find that various requirements and demands of the central government and other stakeholders help to mold institutions. Meanwhile, different types of governance models on a meso-level are identified by differentiating local governments’ attitudes and stakeholders’ feedback with respect to institutional formation and implementation. Overall, our study contributes to the literature on co-evolution and institutional entrepreneurship by presenting the local governments’ governance modes in helping to seed new industries. Keywords Institutional theory . Institutional formation . Feedback . Sharing economy .
Meso-level governance modes What is the role of the different levels of governments in terms of institutional formation and implementation, and how do governments and other stakeholders coevolve institutions in creating new industries? Prior research has broadly discussed that institutional formation involves an institutional entrepreneurship process (Battilana, Leca, & Boxenbaum, 2009; Zhang & White, 2016) as well as a co-evolutionary one (Ahlstrom & Bruton, 2010). In these processes, both top-down and bottom-up mechanisms have attracted much attention (e.g., Child, Rodrigues, & Tse, 2012; Dieleman & Boddewyn, 2012; Dieleman & Sachs, 2008; Rodrigues & Child, 2008). Most of these studies have analyzed different actors (such as local businesses and local government agencies) that acquire formal legislation from aspects of co-evolution. The government as the main actor that engages in entrepreneurial behavior has also been analyzed in the institutional formation and implementation process. Shane and Venkataraman (2000) * Jie Li [email protected]
1
School of Economics and Management, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China
2
School of Management, Shanghai University, 99 Shangda Road, Shanghai 200444, China
J. Qi et al.
pointed out that government could be an institutional entrepreneur when official perceives the opportunities. A number of scholars have explored the role of government as a change agent or an institutional entrepreneur to shape and bureaucratize employment practices such as due process in the workplace (Edelman, 1990), the interpretation and application of civil rights laws (Edelman, 1992), or specifying production standards (Ahlstrom, 2014). Still other studies have focused on government influence in the creation of new organizational forms (Fligstein, 1990; Strang & Bradburn, 2001). Prior research has expended much on effort on examining the implementation of institutions and the effects of institutions, but have spent much less time on the government as an institutional entrepreneur in co-evolving with
Data Loading...
