The Dialectics of Rent-Seeking and Value Creation: An Economic Analysis of Constitutional Constraints in Indonesia’s Danantara
Main Article Content
Abstract
The establishment of Badan Pengelola Investasi Daya Anagata Nusantara (Danantara) represents a paradigmatic shift in Indonesia’s state capitalism, consolidating state-owned enterprise assets exceeding USD 57 billion within an unprecedented super-holding governance structure. This article employs constitutional political economy and economic analysis of law to interrogate the hypothesis that institutional designs permitting high executive discretion without adequate constitutional constraints generate exponential agency costs. Through comparative institutional analysis contrasting Danantara with Temasek Holding, Khazanah Nasional, and 1MDB as a counterfactual failure, this study applies Jensen and Meckling’s (1976) agency theory, Williamson’s (1985) transaction cost economics, and North and Weingast’s (1989) credible commitment framework to evaluate the efficiency implications of presidential appointment authority. The analysis demonstrates that Danantara currently occupies a suboptimal position on the institutional possibility frontier, positioned within a rent-seeking zone characterized by high political interference risk and moderate transparency. The article argues that legal legitimacy depends upon implementing credible commitment mechanisms, specifically constitutionalized investment mandates, arm’s length director selection procedures, and minority shareholder protections, that constrain ultra vires risks while preserving operational efficiency. These findings demonstrate that without adequate institutional engineering, asset consolidation amplifies agency costs multiplicatively through cascading principal-agent relationships, potentially resulting in welfare losses exceeding 8–12 percent of assets under management.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2001). The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American Economic Review, 91(5), 1369–1401. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.5.1369
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2005). Institutions as a fundamental cause of long-run growth. In P. Aghion & S. N. Durlauf (Eds.), Handbook of economic growth (Vol. 1, pp. 385–472). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0684(05)01006-3
Alchian, A. A., & Demsetz, H. (1972). Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62(5), 777–795.
Banalieva, E. R., Eddleston, K. A., & Zellweger, T. M. (2014). When do family firms have an advantage in transitioning economies? Toward a dynamic institution-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9), 1358–1377. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2308
Bagnall, A. E., & Truman, E. M. (2011). The Linaburg-Maduell Transparency Index: A review and assessment of sovereign wealth fund transparency. Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Bernstein, S., Lerner, J., & Schoar, A. (2013). The investment strategies of sovereign wealth funds. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27(2), 219–238. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.27.2.219
Bingham, T. (2010). The rule of law. Allen Lane.
Bortolotti, B., Fotak, V., & Megginson, W. L. (2015). Sovereign wealth fund investment patterns and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(4), 434–453. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.44
Brennan, G., & Hamlin, A. P. (2001). Constitutional choice. In W. F. Shughart & L. Razzolini (Eds.), The Elgar companion to public choice (pp. 117–139). Edward Elgar.
Buchanan, J. M. (1975). The limits of liberty: Between anarchy and leviathan. University of Chicago Press.
Buchanan, J. M. (1987). The constitution of economic policy. American Economic Review, 77(3), 243–250.
Buchanan, J. M. (1990). The domain of constitutional economics. Constitutional Political Economy, 1(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393031
Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. University of Michigan Press.
Butler, H. N., & Ribstein, L. E. (1990). Opting out of fiduciary duties: A response to the anti-contractarians. Washington and Lee Law Review, 47(3), 703–722.
Calabresi, G., & Melamed, A. D. (1972). Property rules, liability rules, and inalienability: One view of the cathedral. Harvard Law Review, 85(6), 1089–1128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340052
Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E., & Strike, V. M. (2011). Deadlock on the board: Structural and behavioral correlates. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2011(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2011.65869137
Chen, C. C. H. (2016). Solving the puzzle of corporate governance of state-owned enterprises: The path of the Temasek model in Singapore and lessons for China. Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, 36(2), 303–370.
Congleton, R. D. (2018). The political economy of rent seeking. In R. D. Congleton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of public choice (Vol. 1, pp. 473–486). Oxford University Press.
Crain, W. M., & Tollison, R. D. (1979). Constitutional change in an interest-group perspective. Journal of Legal Studies, 8(1), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1086/467599
Cullinan, C., Mahoney, D. M., & Roush, C. N. (2019). The effects of political connections on corporate governance and audit quality: Evidence from audit fees and the revolving door. Journal of Business Ethics, 154(3), 729–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3456-9
Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Luo, Y., Ramamurti, R., & Ang, S. H. (2023). Agency issues in managing sovereign wealth funds. In S. Globerman (Ed.), Sovereign wealth funds and international investment (pp. 1–25). Palgrave Macmillan.
Dewenter, K. L., & Malatesta, P. H. (2001). State-owned and privately owned firms: An empirical analysis of profitability, leverage, and labor intensity. American Economic Review, 91(1), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.1.320
Doucouliagos, H., & Ulubasoglu, M. A. (2008). Democracy and economic growth: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 52(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00303.x
Faccio, M., Masulis, R. W., & McConnell, J. J. (2006). Political connections and corporate bailouts. Journal of Finance, 61(6), 2597–2635. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.01000.x
George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press.
Graham, J., Maire, D., O’Connor, F., & Sacchetto, R. (2023). Sovereign wealth fund governance: A trade-off between internal and external legitimacy. Global Finance Journal, 51, 100671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2021.100671
Grossman, S. J., & Hart, O. D. (1986). The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy, 94(4), 691–719. https://doi.org/10.1086/261404
Grøgaard, B., Rygh, A., & Benito, G. R. G. (2019). Bringing the owner back in: Governance drivers for MNEs in emerging economies. Global Strategy Journal, 9(3), 341–363. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1335
Hasen, R. L. (1993). An enriched economic model of political patronage and campaign contributions: Revising Supreme Court jurisprudence. Cardozo Law Review, 14, 1311–1352.
Hasen, R. L. (1996). Voting without law?. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 144(5), 2135–2179. https://doi.org/10.2307/2974396
Hart, O., & Moore, J. (1990). Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1119–1158. https://doi.org/10.1086/261729
Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., Van Essen, M., & Van Oosterhout, J. H. (2009). Meta-analyzing ownership concentration and firm performance in Asia: Towards a more fine-grained understanding. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26(3), 481–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-009-9140-0
Holcombe, R. G. (1991). Constitutions as constraints: A case study of three American constitutions. Constitutional Political Economy, 2(2), 303–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02387892
Jiang, Y., & Peng, M. W. (2011). Are family ownership and control in large firms good, bad, or irrelevant?. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(1), 15–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-010-9227-0
Jiang, W., Wan, H., & Zhao, S. (2013). Reputation concerns of independent directors: Evidence from individual director voting. Review of Financial Studies, 29(11), 3038–3066. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhw050
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
Kiser, L. L. (1994). A constitutional theory of public enterprise. Constitutional Political Economy, 5(3), 287–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02387892
Klein, D. B. (1990). The microfoundations of rules vs. discretion. Constitutional Political Economy, 1(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02386831
Kornai, J. (1979). Resource-constrained versus demand-constrained systems. Econometrica, 47(4), 801–819. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914130
Krueger, A. O. (1974). The political economy of the rent-seeking society. American Economic Review, 64(3), 291–303.
Laffont, J. J., & Tirole, J. (1993). A theory of incentives in procurement and regulation. MIT Press.
Leutert, W. (2024). Singapore’s Temasek model and state asset management in China: Influence and limits. Asian Survey, 64(4), 700–726. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2024.1845962
Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007113830879
Maire, D., O’Connor, F., & Sacchetto, R. (2021). Sovereign wealth fund governance: A trade-off between internal and external legitimacy. Global Finance Journal, 51, 100671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2021.100671
Megginson, W. L., & Wei, Z. (2023). Sovereign wealth fund investments and financial performance of target firms: The disciplinary role of debt in political agenda theory. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 85, 100884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2023.100884
Milhaupt, C. J., & Pargendler, M. (2017). Institutional particularities and path dependence: Why China’s state capitalism is not Singapore’s. Cornell International Law Journal, 50(3), 521–561.
Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1992). Economics, organization and management. Prentice Hall.
Moe, T. M. (1984). The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28(4), 739–777. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110997
Ng, W. J. N. (2018). Comparative corporate governance: Why Singapore's Temasek model is not replicable in China. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 51, 211–249.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
North, D. C., & Weingast, B. R. (1989). Constitutions and commitment: The evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. The Journal of Economic History, 49(4), 803–832. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700009451
Posner, R. A. (1986). Economic analysis of law (3rd ed.). Little, Brown and Company.
Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. Wiley-Interscience.
Raz, J. (1979). The authority of law: Essays on law and morality. Oxford University Press.
Rowley, C. K. (2018). The political economy of rent seeking. In R. D. Congleton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of public choice (Vol. 1, pp. 473–486). Oxford University Press.
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1994). Politicians and firms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4), 995–1025. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118354
Thabane, T. (2024). Rebooting state-owned companies in South Africa: Exploring the viability of Singapore's state holding company (Temasek) model. Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa, 57(1), 68–95.
Totleben, B., Szarzec, K., & Kardziejonek, A. (2019). Rent-seeking by politicians in state-owned enterprises. Ekonomia i Prawo. Economics and Law, 18(4), 515–529. https://doi.org/10.12775/EiP.2019.035
Truman, E. M. (2008). A blueprint for sovereign wealth fund best practices. Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Tullock, G. (1967). The welfare costs of tariffs, monopolies, and theft. Western Economic Journal, 5(3), 224–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1967.tb01923.x
U.S. Department of Justice. (2016). Malaysian sovereign wealth fund embezzlement scheme. Office of Public Affairs.
Van Essen, M., Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., & Otten, J. (2012). Competitive advantage and the rule of law: Evidence from multinational enterprises in emerging markets. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(3), 763–794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-012-9316-1
Van Essen, M., Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., & Heugens, P. P. M. A. R. (2015). How does agency theory dominate in China? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3), 729–766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9420-9
Vasudeva, G., Alexander, E. A., & Jones, S. L. (2018). Sovereign wealth funds and internationalization: Insights from institutional theory. Journal of World Business, 53(5), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2018.05.001
Wade, W., & Forsyth, C. F. (2014). Administrative law (11th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Weingast, B. R. (1995). The economic role of political institutions: Market-preserving federalism and economic development. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 11(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/11.1.1
Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261. https://doi.org/10.1086/466942
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.
Wright, M., & Amess, K. (2017). Private equity and sovereign wealth funds. In The Oxford handbook of private equity (pp. 321–341). Oxford University Press.