«Russia and the World Community’s Respond to a Challenge of Instability of Economic and Legal Systems Materials of the International Scientific-practical Conference ...»
Operation studies – through the evaluation of the target-task-tool procedure consistency and efficiency – may give information for the determination of optimal tightness of control, for the transformation of interest and motivation system, for the elimination of temporary failures and limits, while it is possible to analyze whether the system designer intentions failed due to occasional or structural barrier factors. The determination of goals and directions of organization and capability analysis is followed by the selection of method of organization/capability analysis;
one of its possible criterion systems is presented in Table 2.
When composing Table 2, the author waived from individual organization of methodologies such as factor and cluster analysis, correlation and regression calculation, combination of multivariable mathematical-statistical methods, KIPA, CHECKLAND, simulation model, etc; interpretation examples are specified according to standpoints. Generally, the following can be stated about the methodologies:
the methods meet differently the respective requirements;
the user is offered a number of approaches, which makes it easier to fit the decision-making situation, makes the decision-making process more efficient, fit to interest and influence relationships originating from user roles, adapt to users' way of thinking and communication patterns;
the effectiveness of each method for a given problem is to be determined.
Table 2: Method-choice criterion system for analysis of organization and its capabilities (own edition)
STANDPOINTS INTERPRETATION DOMAIN / EXAMPLEStest of quantitative factors between organizational structure and organization efficiency, Basic goal, determination of directions of organizational analysis Task size Demarcation of test state and/or operation Formal presentation of qualifyquantitative and/or qualitative parameters ing system Mode of formation of evaluasum, ratio, preference and disqualification indicators, average, fretion parameter Mode of evaluation Application condition NCM, BS, graphical method, advantage-disadvantage analysis, questionUsable auxiliary method naires, PARETO analysis, Guilford type pair-wise comparison, RADAR, Number of analysis participerson and/or group pants Structural elements of qualifycentralization – decentralization, ing system In order to choose the analytical methodology for the improvement of organizational capability and to perform the analysis, the author composed a line of standpoints, which is applicable to the evaluation of both existing structures and new ones. There is a separate study performed or a methodology applied behind all the points; their strength is not in their innovative nature but in their accuracy and completeness. In this approach, each functional element should show the same values and put the company closer to the implementation of its strategic objectives. Finally, as a second critical phase of organizational development and capability improvement the method-choice criterion system for variation ranking is devised for the effective implementation (Table 3).
Table 3: Method-choice criterion system for variation ranking (own edition)
STANDPOINTS INTERPRETATION DOMAIN / EXAMPLESTask size Random/limited from above/below depending upon the number of variations Principle of sorting reference Referred to one another, referred to ideal, referred to the best, Recording of standpoints of determination of contribution extent to the goal to be Determination of comparison qualitative dimensions/effects, dimensions quantitative dimensions/actual quantifiable values, Determination of property with the help of an auxiliary method (BS, Delphy,...), expression criteria collection of factors helping goal implementation and logically linked to the goals, Number of opinion-makers person and/or group Table 3 continued (own edition)
STANDPOINTS INTERPRETATION DOMAIN / EXAMPLESMode of criterion weighing direct estimation, (presuming interpretation pair comparison, according to the criterion determination of importance grades by criteria, system) determination of expected values of weight and scatter by criteria, Sort-serving measurement uses the measured values of sequence scale classification of variations into five categories (K-S one-sample significance test), Basis of measurement weighted, complex formal evaluation, Suitability conditions record of presupposition of effects, Bibliography 1. Klein S. (2001): Vezets- s szervezetpszicholgia. SHL Hungary Kft.
2. Morgan, G. (1986): Images of Organization. Sage Publications. Inc. Ismerteti: Jvor (1993): A szervezetszociolgia gondolati rendszere. ELTE Szociolgiai, Szocilpolitikai Intzet s Tovbbkpz Kzpont. Nemzeti Tanknyvkiad.
3. Morgan, G. (1998): Images of Organization. Berrett – Kochler Publ. inc.
– Sage Publications.
4. Veresn Somosi M. (2005.b): Organisational Self – Evaluation as a Possible Tool of Organisational Analysis. „Sixteenth Annual Conference of POMS, Chicago, Il, April 29 – May 2, 2005.” 14 p. [CD] 5. Veresn Somosi M. (2009.b): Az rtkalap szervezetfejleszts egy j megkzeltse. In: „Vezetsi ismeretek II.” Tanulmnyok a Vezetstudomnyi Intzet munkatrsaitl. Jubileumi kiadvny a Miskolci Egyetem Gazdasgtudomnyi Kar Vezetstudomnyi Intzet alaptsnak 50. vforduljra. II. kt.
Miskolc-Lillafred, 2009. mjus 19-20. Miskolc. 2009. Miskolci Egyetem Gazdasgtudomnyi Kar. 160-170. p. ISBN 978-963-661-886-5; ISBN 978-963Veresn Somosi M. (2009.c): Szervezeti kpessg – vltoz tuds. „Innovci az egyetemi kpzsben s kutatsban.” Jubileumi Tudomnyos Konferencia. Balatonvilgos, 2009. augusztus 27-29.
7. Veresn Somosi M. (2009.d): Novj podhod k osznovannomu na cennoszti organizacionnomu razvitiju. In:VESZTNIK. Nacional’nogo Tehnicseszkogo Universziteta „HPI” 38’2009. Harkov. 84 96. p.
8. Veresn Somosi M. (2011.c): Alapvet kpessg: a szervezeti s az egyni kpessg fejlesztse. In: Magyar Minsg, XX. vf. 2011. 5. sz. 11-20. p.
HU ISSN 1789- Causality of natural resource endowment of authoritarian regimes 1. Introduction Chinese investments in resource-abundant countries of Africa have gotten into the medial, academic and political limelight in the last decade. China has been increasingly criticized in Western circles for her neo-mercantilism in Africa. She allegedly follows merely her own economic welfare and takes advantage of Africa’s natural resources while exerting corrupt regimes for meeting her opportunistic goals. The US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has several times alerted the African leaders and media about the threat that the PRC poses to Africa. Purportedly it is the easiest to sign investment contracts with authoritarian leaders of these countries, who are keen on cooperating in order to avoid eventual protests and sustain their own position.
At the first glance the situation is rather simple: China needs resources to sustain its economic growth and Africa offers those resources with a favourable price tag. On one hand, China is praised for boosting African trade; on the other hand, it is criticized for its overly pragmatic approach to cooperation completely devoid of long-term environmental considerations. Firstly, it doesn’t have to worry about sustainability of African economies; secondly, creating and supporting rentier states that fail to develop politically – where governmental institutions, independent media and civil society are weak or non-existent and coercion or corruption becomes the way of governance – can contribute to long-term stable cooperation due to overdependence of these states on exports of natural resources. Chinese government officials have refuted these allegations.
Are the Chinese ODI determined by abundance of natural resources in African countries? Do they primarily seek authoritarian regimes in order to take advantage of their poor governance and exploit the mineral resources of Africa?
The aim of this paper is to verify these controversial statements by means of statistical analysis, since the articles published on this topic are mostly determined by of the author’s origin and thus provide biased arguments.
2. Methodology and data The aim of this paper is to investigate the causality of natural resource endowment of authoritarian regimes of Africa and outward direct investments of China. For achieving this aim we will use panel data regression analysis of Chinese ODI stock ODIi,t in 50 African countries (all African countries except for Burkina Faso, Somalia and Swaziland for which there is no available data) for the period of years 2003-2010. Data for the dependent variable ODIi,t is derived from the officially approved dataset published by the Ministry of Commerce of the PRC compiled in the The Statistical Bulletin of China’s Outward Foreign English version of the 2010 publication, we draw the data from the Chinese version and omit the incomplete ODIi,t.
For monitoring the connection between the natural resource endowment in authoritarian regimes and Chinese ODI we have chosen two independent variables: NTRi,t and RLi,t. NTRi,t stands for Chinese imports of natural resources from African countries in the time period 2003-2010, based on the UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics. RLi,t represents changes in the Rule of Law index for these countries in 2003-2010 derived from the World Governance Indicators with a confidence level of 95%, published by the World bank. Due to negative figures it can reach and its small scale (-2,5 to +2,5) solely this indicator will not be converted to natural logarithm. The other two variables will be linearized because of the large scale of values they reach which might otherwise create deviations of the results.
We explore these two determinants with the basic specification as follows:
To validate the outcome of the regression analysis, we also use the categorization of African countries according to their indices of democracy for published by Economist Intelligence Unit and identify the African authoritarian regimes. Although 2011 indices have already been published, due to data consistency we adhere to the 2010 indices. Further, we will analyse the flows and stock of Chinese ODI in these regimes and their commodity structure of natural resource exports in 2010 (based on UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics) divided into the following categories:
• pearls, precious stones and non-monetary gold.
Subsequently, we will identify those authoritarian countries abundant in natural resources for which China is the main customer, analyse their importance in terms of Chinese ODI and thus answer the key question of the paper:
Does China primarily invest in resource-rich authoritarian countries of Africa?
The panel data analysis with random effects of Chinese ODI stock in African countries for years 2003 to 2010 has led to the following results (Table 1):
• RLi,t. – rule of law is not a decisive factor for Chinese ODI.
• NTRi,t – those countries from which China imports natural resources tend to attract more Chinese investments.
The regression results indicate that rule of law in African countries is not a significant factor for Chinese determinants. On the other hand, Chinese imports of natural resources are important. The model, though, does not fully explicate the motives of Chinese investments in Africa and further factors need to be examined. However, we leave these for further research and instead validate the regression results with further analysis of the Chinese ODI in resource-rich authoritarian regimes.