Abstract:It is now well-established that different markets may develop different growth-supporting institutions that can give rise to public firms and set capital markets in motion. Yet, the paradigm view still holds local alternatives as merely stepping stones, a transitional passage toward achieving a deeper and more advanced market, at which point conventional legal and market institutions—modeled on Anglo-American corporate capitalism—are still held necessary.Four decades of economic development in China challenge these conventions. With modern firms with global prominence and a capital market that is the second largest in the world, corporate governance in China seems to have passed the point of an "adjust or perish" prognostic. The system that governs Chinese firms and the ways in which capital markets function sustain strong governance attributes that go against many fundamentals in economics and legal thought. Political involvement and state ownership, both assumed to stand in the way of capital market growth, remain prevalent while the market continues to advance.Most strikingly, harmonization with conventional corporate governance been pushed aside as the Chinese Communist Party has decided to exercise an ever-more expansive and direct role in market activity. Public firms in present-day China are increasingly being governed by a "politicized corporate governance." Political institutions with corporate governance capacities have been deployed both inside and outside firms. These institutions now buttress or even replace weaker traditional corporate governance mechanisms in the Chinese market.The implications are striking. First, despite justified reasons for alarm, a politicized corporate governance system in China can perform the main functions of corporate governance elsewhere, thereby offering some benefits for public firms and their stockholders. Second, these developments show how path-dependent corporate governance attributes, here political institutions, reject convergence predictions yet have enough plasticity to evolve and to support modern firms and markets beyond assumed thresholds and developmental milestones. In so doing, China's politicized corporate governance casts doubts on law and development conventions as well as on both sides of a long-standing governance convergence debate. Finally, the politicization of corporate governance in China offers a new direction in comparative corporate governance scholarship, providing evidence of an instituted reversal from outwardly convergent corporate governance toward a new form of a planned economy.

Globalisation and Institutional Change in the State-Led Model: The Case of Corporate Governance in South Korea

Corporate Governance and Firm Performance: A Cross-Country Analysis in South Korea

Neo-liberalism in post-crisis South Korea: Social conditions and outcomes

Convergence or Divergence: On the Evolution Tendency of Corporate Governance Models in Globalization

Change and continuity in management systems and corporate performance: Human resource management, corporate culture, risk management and corporate strategy in South Korea

Examining political connections to study institutional change: Evidence from two unexpected election outcomes in South Korea

South Korean Economy at the Crossroads: Structure Issues under External Pressure – An Essay from a Law and Development Perspective

Changes in foreign ownership and innovation investment: the case of Korean corporate governance reforms

The Politicization of Corporate Governance: A Viable Alternative?

Corporate Governance and Globalization

The developmental welfare state in South Korea under globalization

Organizational responses to the marketization of higher education institutions: a comparative case study of South Korea and Hong Kong

Communicative rationality and the evolution of business ethics: corporate social responsibility and stockowner–employee partnership–An empirical case study in Republic of Korea1

Management Features of the South-Korean Corporations in the Digital Paradigm of Development

Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Governance and Earnings Quality: Evidence from Korea

Corporate Social Responsibility, Ownership Structure, and Firm Value: Evidence from Korea

Do Institutional Investors Improve Corporate Governance Quality? Evidence From the Blockholdings of the Korean National Pension Service

Reforms of corporate governance in East Asia: December 2022

The workings of collaborative governance: Evaluating collaborative community-building initiatives in Korea

The profits of cause: a new direction for corporate social responsibility in South Korea

Does ESG Performance Enhance Firm Value? Evidence from Korea