IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jouinf/v5y2013i2p121-135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Privatisation Model, Contractual and Institutional Factors Play Any Role in Infrastructure Post-privatisation Efficiency? Exploring Port Concessions in Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Bongo Adi

    (Centre for Infrastructure, Policy, Regulation and Advancement, Lagos Business School, Pan-Atlantic University, Lagos, Nigeria badi@lbs.edu.ng)

  • Ernest Ndukwe

    (Centre for Infrastructure, Policy, Regulation and Advancement, Lagos Business School, Pan-Atlantic University, Lagos, Nigeria)

  • Nkemdilim Iheanachor

    (Centre for Infrastructure, Policy, Regulation and Advancement, Lagos Business School, Pan-Atlantic University, Lagos, Nigeria)

  • Chukwuma Dim

    (Centre for Infrastructure, Policy, Regulation and Advancement, Lagos Business School, Pan-Atlantic University, Lagos, Nigeria)

Abstract

Privatisation is often seen as the key to achieving efficiency in infrastructure service delivery. In most cases, however, the model of privatisation and the right institutional environment under which they perform best are ignored in addressing the privatisation-to-efficiency debate. Recognising this, we seek to underscore the contractual and institutional factors influencing infrastructure post-privatisation efficiency in Landlord port models as applied in Nigeria’s port reform. In so doing, the study explores the Landlord port privatisation model in Nigeria. The paired t -test and Wilcoxon signed rank sum test are employed to determine if there are significant improvements in port output (general cargo throughput, liquid bulk throughput, number of vessels, gross registered tonnage and container traffic) and efficiency (average waiting time, turnaround time, berth occupancy rate) proxies between the pre-concession, transition and post-concession periods in Nigeria. The result of these tests indicates that although there are significant improvements in the port output proxies, efficiency in the port did not improve significantly. The study identified lack of appropriate legal framework, weak regulatory capacity, absence of efficiency targets in concession contract and non-adherence to investment targets as the major constraints to efficiency gain in the Landlord port model.

Suggested Citation

  • Bongo Adi & Ernest Ndukwe & Nkemdilim Iheanachor & Chukwuma Dim, 2013. "Do Privatisation Model, Contractual and Institutional Factors Play Any Role in Infrastructure Post-privatisation Efficiency? Exploring Port Concessions in Nigeria," Journal of Infrastructure Development, India Development Foundation, vol. 5(2), pages 121-135, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jouinf:v:5:y:2013:i:2:p:121-135
    DOI: 10.1177/0974930614521274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0974930614521274
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0974930614521274?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrei Shleifer, 1998. "State versus Private Ownership," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 133-150, Fall.
    2. J. David Brown & John S. Earle & Almos Telegdy, 2006. "The Productivity Effects of Privatization: Longitudinal Estimates from Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(1), pages 61-99, February.
    3. Antonio Estache & MartÌn A. Rossi, 2002. "How Different Is the Efficiency of Public and Private Water Companies in Asia?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 16(1), pages 139-148, June.
    4. Katharina Gassner & Alexander Popov & Nataliya Pushak, 2009. "Does Private Sector Participation Improve Performance in Electricity and Water Distribution?," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6605, December.
    5. Boardman, Anthony E & Vining, Aidan R, 1989. "Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 1-33, April.
    6. Estache, Antonio & Gonzalez, Marianela & Trujillo, Lourdes, 2002. "Efficiency Gains from Port Reform and the Potential for Yardstick Competition: Lessons from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 545-560, April.
    7. Cullinane, Kevin & Song, Dong-Wook & Gray, Richard, 2002. "A stochastic frontier model of the efficiency of major container terminals in Asia: assessing the influence of administrative and ownership structures," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 743-762, October.
    8. Ehrlich, Isaac & Georges Gallais-Hamonno & Zhiqiang Liu & Randall Lutter, 1994. "Productivity Growth and Firm Ownership: An Analytical and Empirical Investigation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 1006-1038, October.
    9. I. Ehrlich & Georges Gallais-Hamonno & Zh Liu & R. Lutter, 1994. "Productivy Growth & Firm Ownership : an Analytical & Empirical Investigation," Post-Print halshs-00276861, HAL.
    10. Megginson, William L & Nash, Robert C & van Randenborgh, Matthias, 1994. "The Financial and Operating Performance of Newly Privatized Firms: An International Empirical Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(2), pages 403-452, June.
    11. Rafael La Porta & Florencio López-de-Silanes, 1999. "The Benefits of Privatization: Evidence from Mexico," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(4), pages 1193-1242.
    12. Tongzon, Jose & Heng, Wu, 2005. "Port privatization, efficiency and competitiveness: Some empirical evidence from container ports (terminals)," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 405-424, June.
    13. van den Broeck, Julien & Koop, Gary & Osiewalski, Jacek & Steel, Mark F. J., 1994. "Stochastic frontier models : A Bayesian perspective," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 273-303, April.
    14. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, December.
    15. Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1994. "The New Economics of Regulation Ten Years After," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(3), pages 507-537, May.
    16. Pablo Coto-Millan & Jose Banos-Pino & Ana Rodriguez-Alvarez, 2000. "Economic efficiency in Spanish ports: some empirical evidence," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 169-174, April.
    17. Roman Frydman & Cheryl Gray & Marek Hessel & Andrzej Rapaczynski, 1999. "When Does Privatization Work? The Impact of Private Ownership on Corporate Performance in the Transition Economies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(4), pages 1153-1191.
    18. Theo Notteboom & Chris Coeck & Julien Van Den Broeck, 2000. "Measuring and Explaining the Relative Efficiency of Container Terminals by Means of Bayesian Stochastic Frontier Models," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 2(2), pages 83-106, June.
    19. Andres, Luis & Foster, Vivien & Guasch, Jose Luis, 2006. "The impact of privatization on the performance of the infrastructure sector : the case of electricity distribution in Latin American countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3936, The World Bank.
    20. J. David Brown & John S. Earle & Almos Telegdy, "undated". "The Productivity Effects of Privatization: Longitudnal Estimates for Hungary, romania, Russia, and Ukraine," Upjohn Working Papers jse20063, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    21. Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1994. "Politicians and Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 995-1025.
    22. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    23. Eytan Sheshinski & Luis F. López-Calva, 2003. "Privatization and Its Benefits: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 49(3), pages 429-459.
    24. Shapiro, C. & Willing, D.R., 1990. "Economic Rationales For The Scope Of Privatization," Papers 41, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. O'Toole, Conor M. & Morgenroth, Edgar L.W. & Ha, Thuy T., 2016. "Investment efficiency, state-owned enterprises and privatisation: Evidence from Viet Nam in Transition," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 93-108.
    2. Gong, Stephen X.H. & Cullinane, Kevin & Firth, Michael, 2012. "The impact of airport and seaport privatization on efficiency and performance: A review of the international evidence and implications for developing countries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 37-47.
    3. A. Abramov & A. Radygin & M. Chernova & R. Entov., 2017. "State ownership and efficiency characteristics," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 4.
    4. Filippo Belloc, 2014. "Innovation in State-Owned Enterprises: Reconsidering the Conventional Wisdom," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(3), pages 821-848.
    5. Alberto Chong & Florencio de, 2003. "The Truth about Privatization in Latin America," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm436, Yale School of Management.
    6. Pradeep Kautish, 2010. "Study On Impact Of Environmental Change On Selected Public Sector Enterprises In India," Romanian Economic Business Review, Romanian-American University, vol. 5(2), pages 68-88, June.
    7. Asaftei, Gabriel & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2010. "Market power, EU integration and privatization: The case of Romania," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 340-356, September.
    8. Estrin, Saul & Pelletier, Adeline, 2016. "Privatisation in Developing Countries: What Are the Lessons of Recent Experience?," IZA Discussion Papers 10297, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Estrin, Saul & Pelletier, Adeline, 2018. "Privatization in developing countries: what are the lessons of recent experience?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87348, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Boardman, Anthony E. & Vining, Aidan R. & Weimer, David L., 2016. "The long-run effects of privatization on productivity: Evidence from Canada," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1001-1017.
    11. Ann P. Bartel & Ann E. Harrison, 1999. "Ownership versus Environment: Why are Public Sector Firms Inefficient?," NBER Working Papers 7043, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Rossi, Martin, 2021. "The Performance of Privatized Utilities: Evidence from Latin America," MPRA Paper 110534, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Máximo Torero, 2002. "Peruvian Privatization: Impacts On Firm Performance," Research Department Publications 3169, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    14. Ádám Szentpéteri & Álmos Telegdy, 2010. "Political Selection Of Firms Into Privatization Programs. Evidence From Romanian Comprehensive Data," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 298-328, November.
    15. Laura Cabeza García & Silvia Gómez Ansón, 2012. "What Drives the Operating Performance of Privatised Firms?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-27, February.
    16. Pan, Xia & Cheng, Wenyin & Gao, Yuning, 2022. "The impact of privatization of state-owned enterprises on innovation in China: A tale of privatization degree," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    17. Rodriguez-Alvarez, Ana & Tovar, Beatriz & Trujillo, Lourdes, 2007. "Firm and time varying technical and allocative efficiency: An application to port cargo handling firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(1-2), pages 149-161, September.
    18. Bogart, Dan & Chaudhary, Latika, 2015. "Off the rails: Is state ownership bad for productivity?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 997-1013.
    19. David Parker & Colin Kirkpatrick, 2005. "Privatisation in Developing Countries: A Review of the Evidence and the Policy Lessons," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 513-541.
    20. Deepankar Sinha & Shuvo Roy Chowdhury, 2017. "Optimizing Private and Public Mode of Operation in Major Ports of India for Better Customer Service," Working Papers LD-17-32, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Privatisation; port; infrastructure concession; PPP; Nigeria;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R4 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics
    • L9 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jouinf:v:5:y:2013:i:2:p:121-135. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.idfresearch.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.