Privatization and Public Enterprise Reform: A Suggestive Action Plan

  • Simrit Kaur

Abstract

Governments have long used State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) as instruments to achieve their social and economic developmental goals. Until about the 1970s, in most countries it appeared as though SOEs were having some success in this task. In the 1980s, however, there were increasing signs of weaknesses in the SOE sector. Protection from competition, bankruptcy and takeover allowed them to become inefficient. With the world recession of the mid 1980s, they became net drawers on government budgets, rather than net providers. It appeared that the SOEs were undertaking many activities which the private sector could probably do better, since property rights would ensure greater productivity and bankruptcy laws would weed out the unproductive enterprises. The theory of market failure was overtaken by the theory of non-market or bureaucratic failure (Stiglitz, 1989). The international community agreed and urged, particularly after the success of early privatization in the United Kingdom that governments shed their public enterprise burden, deregulate sectors formerly monopolized by the public sectors, and provide an enabling environment for the private sector to develop. Privatization thereafter has been widely promoted in the sphere of industries, services and agencies (Kay and Thompson, 1986; Kikery, Nellis and Shirley, 1992; Ramamurti, 1999; Yarrow, 1999; Vickers and Yarrow, 1988).

Keywords

Petroleum HOCL Concession Monopoly 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akerlof, G. (1979). ‘The Market for Lemons: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism,’ Quarterly Journal of Economics, Aug. 89, 488–500.Google Scholar
  2. Alchian, A, and H. Demsetz (1972). ‘Production, Information Costs and Economic Organization’, American Economic Review, 62: 777–95.Google Scholar
  3. Alchian, A. and R. Kessel (1962). ‘Competition, Monopoly and the Pursuit of Money’, in Aspects of Labour Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  4. Datt, R. (1997). ‘Employment Policy for the Ninth Plan’, paper presented at the seminar on Employment Policy for the Ninth Plan, 27 March, organized by Institute of Applied Manpower Research, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  5. Furubotn, E. and S. Pejuvich (1972). ‘Property Rights and Economic Theory: A survey of recent literature’, Journal of Economic Literature, 10 (4): 1137–62.Google Scholar
  6. Ghosh, J. (1995): ‘Employment and Labour under Structural Adjustment: India since 1991’, The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 38 (4).Google Scholar
  7. ILO (International Labor Organization) (1997). ‘Labor and Social Dimensions of Privatization and Restructuring’, by L. de Luca.Google Scholar
  8. Joshi, V. and I. Little (1996). India’s Economic Reforms: 1991–2001, Oxford University Press, Delhi.Google Scholar
  9. Kaur, S. (1998). The Indian Experience with the Memorandum of Understanding, Abighyan, 3(16): July–August.Google Scholar
  10. Kaur, S. (1999). ‘Financing Indian Infrastructure — A Greenfield Privatization Approach’, in Contemporary Issues in Finance, V. Bhalla (ed.), Anmol Publications, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  11. Kaur, S. (2002). ‘The Employment Implications of Divestiture: The Indian Experience’, VISION: The Journal of Business Perspective, 6(1): January–June.Google Scholar
  12. Kaur, S. (2003). Privatization and Public Regulation: the Indian Experience, Macmillan India. Kaur, S. (2003b). Fiscal Governance and Privatization: Centre versus State, MARGIN, NCAER, Oct–Dec.Google Scholar
  13. Kay, J. and D. Thompson (1986). ‘Privatization: A Policy in Search of a Rationale’, Economic Journal, 96: 18–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kikeri, S. (1998). Privatization and Labor: What Happens to Workers when Governments Divest? World Bank Technical Papers.Google Scholar
  15. Kikeri, S., Nellis, J. and M. Shirley (1992). Privatization: The Lesson of Experience, World Bank, Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kundu, A. (1993). Employment Growth, Changing Workforce Structure and Poverty Employment Linkages in Urban Areas, International Labour Organization, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  17. Moore, J. (1992). British Privatization-Taking Capitalism to the People. Harvard Business Review (Jan/Feb): 115–24.Google Scholar
  18. Oestmann, C. (1994). ‘Privatization of Public Services and Public Utilities, Sectoral Activities’, Oil & Gas Journal (17/10/91): ‘The ASEAN pipe dream’ (pp. 111–12). Public Enterprise Survey, Government of India, various issuesGoogle Scholar
  19. Ramamurti, R. (1999). Why Haven’t Developing Countries Privatized Deeper and Faster. World Development Report,. 27 (1): 137–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stiglitz, J., et al. (1989). The Economic Role of the State, J. Arnold (ed.), Basil Blackwell Ltd., Heertje.Google Scholar
  21. Vickers, J. and G. Yarrow (1988). Privatization; An Economic Analysis. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  22. Williamson, O. (1970). Corporate Control and Business Behavior: An Inquiry into the Effects of Organizational Form on Enterprise Behavior. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.Google Scholar
  23. Yarrow, G. (1999). A Theory of Privatization, or Why Bureaucrats are Still in Business. World Development Report, 27 (2): 157–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. World Bank (1995). Bureaucrats in Business: The Economics and Politics of Government Ownership. Oxford University Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  25. World Bank (2000). Global Development Finance Washington DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Simrit Kaur 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simrit Kaur

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations