Employing data for 2001–2012, the article analyzes the factors impacting the wealth of Indian billionaires and the performance and innovative activity of firms which these billionaires represent. The analysis indicates that billionaires in rent-thick sectors have higher wealth levels, on average. As well, the evidence also supports lower wealth for self-made and entrepreneurial billionaires. The findings also reveal that self-interested actions by billionaires tend to raise agency costs, which, in turn, dampens profitability and firm value. Finally, there is evidence which suggests a tendency on the part of billionaires to block innovative activity.
AdamsR. B., & MehranH. (2008). Corporate performance, board structure and their determinants in the banking industry (Staff Report 300). New York, NY: Federal Reserve Bank of New York, FRB.
2.
AggarwalR., KyawN., & ZhaoX. (2011). Financial environment and the value-leverage relation.Journal of International Business and Economy, 12(1), 1–26.
3.
AghionP., BurgessR., ReddingS., & ZilibottiF. (2008). The unequal effects of liberalization: Evidence from dismantling the license raj in India.American Economic Review, 98(6), 1397–1412.
4.
AgrawalA., & KnoeberC. R. (1996). Firm performance and the mechanism to control agency problems between managers and shareholders.Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3), 377–397.
5.
AiyagariS. R. (1994). Uninsured idiosyncratic risk and aggregate saving.Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(5), 659–684.
6.
AlmeidaH., & CampelloM. (2007). Financial constraints, asset tangibility and corporate investment.Review of Financial Studies, 20(4), 1429–1460.
7.
AnglinP. (2005). Econophysics of wealth concentration: A comment. In ChatterjeeA., YarlagaddaS. & ChakrabartiB. K. (Eds), Econophysics of wealth distributions (pp. 223–238). New York, NY: Springer.
8.
BagchiS., & SvejnarJ. (2013). Does wealth inequality matter for growth? The effect of billionaire wealth, income distribution and poverty (IZA Discussion Paper 7733). Bonn: IZA.
9.
BasM., & BerthouA. (2011). The decision to import capital goods in India: Firms’ financial factors matter (Working Paper No. 6). Paris: CEPII Research Center.
10.
BaumolW. J. (1990). Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive and destructive.Journal of Political Economy, 98(4), 893–921.
11.
BertrandM., MehtaP., & MullainathanS. (2002). Ferreting out tunneling: An application to Indian business groups.Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 121–148.
12.
BewleyT. (1986). Stationary monetary equilibrium with a continuum of independently fluctuating consumers.Contributions to Mathematical Economics (pp. 79–102.). North Holland
13.
CaballeroR. (1990). Consumption puzzles and precautionary savings.Journal of Monetary Economics, 25(1), 113–136.
14.
CagettiM., & de NardiM. (2005). Wealth inequality: Data and models (Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Working Paper 1250). Chicago, IL: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
15.
CameronC., GelbachJ., & MillerD. (2011). Robust inference with multi-way clustering.Journal of Business and Economics Statistics, 29(1), 238–249.
16.
Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (2013). Prowess Database (Release 4.1). Mumbai: CMIE.
17.
CornettM. M., McNuttJ. J., StrahanP. E., & TehranianH. (2011). Liquidity risk management and credit supply in the financial crisis.Journal of Financial Economics, 101(2), 297–312.
18.
di VitoJ., LaurinC., & BozecY. (2010). R&D activity in Canada: Does corporate ownership structure matter?Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 27(1), 107–121.
19.
EichengreenB., & GuptaP. (2013). The financial crisis and Indian banks: Survival of the fittest?Journal of International Money and Finance, 39(1), 138–152.
20.
FurceriD., & MourouganeA. (2012). The effect of financial crisis on potential output: New empirical evidence from OECD countries.Journal of Macroeconomics, 34(6), 822–832.
21.
GandhiA., & WaltonM. (2012). Where do India’s billionaires get their wealth?Economic and Political Weekly, 47(40), 10–14.
22.
GhoshS. (2006). Did financial liberalization ease financing constraints? Evidence from Indian firm-level data.Emerging Markets Review, 7(2), 176–190.
23.
GhoshS. (2008). Affiliation and firm performance: Evidence from Indian business groups.Manchester School, 78(2), 183–200.
24.
GhoshS. (2009). R&D in Indian manufacturing enterprises: What shapes it?Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18(2), 337–352.
25.
GoldbergP. K., KhandelwalA. K., PavcnikN., & TopalovaP. (2010). Imported intermediate inputs and domestic product growth: Evidence from India.Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(3), 1727–1767.
26.
GoldmanM. L. (1998). Russian billionaire’s club.International Economy, 12(1), 10–15.
27.
Government of India. (2009). Right to Education. New Delhi: Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India. Retrieved 165February2014, from www.mhrd.gov.in/rte
28.
GradsteinM., MilanovicD., & YingY. (2001). Democracy and income inequality: An empirical analysis (Policy Research Working Paper 2561). Washington, DC: The World Bank.
29.
Guha-KhasnobisB., & KarS. (2008). The corporate debt market in India: An analytical study of macroeconomic and institutional issues. In Guha-KhasnobisB. & MavrotasG. (Eds), Financial development, institutions, growth and poverty reduction. London: Palgrave-McMillan.
30.
GuptaN. (2005). Partial privatization and firm performance.Journal of Finance, 60(1), 987–1015.
31.
HenreksonM., & SanandajiT. (2013). Small business activity does not measure entrepreneurship (IFN Working Paper 959). Sweden: Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
32.
HuggettM. (1996). Wealth distribution in life-cycle economies.Journal of Monetary Economics, 38, 469–494.
33.
International Monetary Fund (IMF). (2013). Report for selected countries and subjects. Retrieved 16February2014, from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/02/weodata
34.
IvashinaV., & ScharfsteinD. (2010). Bank lending during the financial crisis of 2008.Journal of Financial Economics, 97(2), 319–338.
35.
KaplanS., & RauhJ. (2013). Family, education and sources of wealth among the richest Americans, 1982–2012.American Economic Review, 103(1), 158–162.
36.
KennickellA. B. (2003). A rolling tide: Changes in the distribution of wealth in the US, 1989–2001 (Federal Reserve Board Working Paper 24). Washington, DC: FRB.
37.
KhandelwalA., & TopalovaP. (2011). Trade liberalisation and firm productivity: The case of India.The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(13), 995–1009.
38.
KhannaT., & PalepuK. (2000). Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups.Journal of Finance, 55(2), 867–891.
39.
KimB-H., KimH., & LeeB.-S. (2012). Spillover effects of the US financial crisis on financial markets in emerging Asian countries (Working Paper 6). Auburn: Auburn University.
40.
KruegerA. O. (1974). The political economy of the rent seeking society.American Economic Review, 64(1), 291–303.
41.
LevinM., & SatarovG. A. (2000). Corruption and institutions in Russia.European Journal of Political Economy, 16(1), 113–132.
42.
MehranH. (1995) Executive compensation structure, ownership and firm performance.Journal of Financial Economics, 38, 163–184.
43.
MorckR., ShleiferA., & VishnyR. (1988). Management ownership and market valuation: An empirical analysis.Journal of Financial Economics, 31(2), 239–315.
44.
MorckR., StangelandD., & YeungB. (2000). Inherited wealth, corporate control and economic growth: The Canadian disease. In MorckR. (Ed.), Concentrated corporate ownership (pp. 319–369). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
45.
MurphyK., ShleiferA., & VishnyR. W. (1993). Why is rent seeking costly to growth?American Economic Review, 83(1), 409–414.
46.
NeumayerE. (2004). The super-rich in global perspective: A quantitative analysis of the Forbes list of billionaires.Applied Economics Letters, 11(8), 793–796.
47.
NikoloskiZ. (2010). Impact of financial crisis on poverty in the developing world. Paper presented at the World Bank International Conference on Poverty and Social Inclusion in the Western Balkans, Brussels, Belgium.
48.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2011). Divided we stand: Why inequality keeps rising. Paris: OECD.
49.
PerssonT., & TabelliniG. (1994). Is income inequality harmful for growth?American Economic Review, 84, 600–621.
50.
PikettyT., & SaezE. (2012). Top incomes and the great recession: Recent evolutions and policy implications. Paper presented at the 13th Jacques Polak Annual Research Conference, IMF, Washington, DC.
51.
SaezE., & VeallM. (2005). The evolution of high income earners in Northern America: Lessons from Canadian evidence.American Economic Review, 95(2), 831–849.
52.
SanandajiT., & LeesonP. T. (2013). Billionaires.Industrial and Corporate Change, 22(2), 313–337.
53.
SiegfriedJ., & RobertsA. (1991). How did the wealthy Britons get so rich?Review of Industrial Organisation, 6(1), 19–32.
54.
SiegfriedJ., & RoundD. (1994). How did the wealthiest Australians get so rich?Review of Income and Wealth, 40(2), 191–204.
55.
SiegfriedJ. J., & RoundD. K. (1995). The limited role of market power in generating great fortunes in UK, US and Australia.Journal of Industrial Economics, 3(1), 43–76.
56.
SinhaJ., & VarshneyA. (2012, August6). India must harness the profit motive in the spirit of Nehru. Financial Times: UK.
57.
TorglerB., & PiattiM. (2013). Extraordinary wealth, globalisation and corruption.Review of Income and Wealth, 59(3), 341–359.
58.
WaltonM., NathA., & ModyA. (2011). Sources of corporate profits in India—Business dynamism or advantages of entrenchment? (IMF Working Paper 8). Washington, DC: IMF.
59.
WeisbachM. (1988). Outside directors and CEO turnover.Journal of Financial Economics, 20(4), 431–460.
60.
World Bank (2013). World Development Report (Risk and opportunity: Managing Risk for Development).Washington DC: The World Bank.
