IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Privatization in a Small Open Economy with Imperfect Competition


We look at privatization in a general equilibrium model of a small, tariff-distorted, open economy. There is a differentiated good produced by both private and public sector enterprises. A reduction in government production in order to cut losses from such production raises the returns to capital and increases the tariff revenue, which are welfare improving. However, privatization also leads to lower wages and possibly fewer private brands. This lowers workers’ welfare, which may make privatization politically infeasible. Privatization can improve workers’ welfare with complementary reforms, e.g., attracting foreign investment or trade liberalization.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Association for Public Economic Theory in its journal Journal of Public Economic Theory.

Volume (Year): 14 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 (06)
Pages: 441-471

in new window

Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:14:y:2012:i:3:p:441-471
Contact details of provider: Web page:

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Web:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. repec:tpr:qjecon:v:118:y:2003:i:4:p:1375-1418 is not listed on IDEAS
  2. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
  3. ANDERSON, Simon & de PALMA, André & THISSE, Jacques-François, 1996. "Privatization and Efficiency in a Differentiated Industry," CORE Discussion Papers 1996045, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  4. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2004. "Endogenous Cost Differentials between Public and Private Enterprises: A Mixed Duopoly Approach," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 71(284), pages 671-688, November.
  5. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1989. "Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 302-11, April.
  6. Brecher, Richard A. & Diaz Alejandro, Carlos F., 1977. "Tariffs, foreign capital and immiserizing growth," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 317-322, November.
  7. Schmidt, Klaus M, 1996. "The Costs and Benefits of Privatization: An Incomplete Contracts Approach," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, April.
  8. Oliver Hart & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1996. "The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and an Application to Prisons," NBER Working Papers 5744, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Majumdar, Sumit K, 1998. " Assessing Comparative Efficiency of the State-Owned Mixed and Private Sectors in Indian Industry," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 96(1-2), pages 1-24, July.
  10. CREMER, Helmuth & MARCHAND, Maurice & THISSE, Jacques-François, . "Mixed oligopoly with differentiated products," CORE Discussion Papers RP 930, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  11. Kenji Fujiwara, 2007. "Partial Privatization in a Differentiated Mixed Oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 51-65, September.
  12. Baland, Jean-Marie & Francois, Patrick, 2005. "Commons as insurance and the welfare impact of privatization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 211-231, February.
  13. Sen, Partha & Ghosh, Arghya & Barman, Abheek, 1997. "The Possibility of Welfare Gains with Capital Inflows in a Small Tariff-Ridden Economy," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 345-52, May.
  14. Barros, Fatima & Modesto, Leonor, 1999. "Portuguese banking sector: a mixed oligopoly?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 869-886, August.
  15. Gérard Roland, 2000. "Transition and Economics: Politics, Markets, and Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262182033, June.
  16. Chakraborty, Brati Sankar, 2001. "Welfare consequence of capital inflow for a small tariff-protected economy," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 305-316, October.
  17. Clarke, George R. G. & Cull, Robert, 2001. "Bank privatization in Argentina : a model of political constraints and differential outcomes," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2633, The World Bank.
  18. Suzumura, Kotaro & Kiyono, Kazuharu, 1987. "Entry Barriers and Economic Welfare," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 157-67, January.
  19. Antras, Pol, 2003. "Firms, Contracts, and Trade Structure," Scholarly Articles 3196328, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  20. Toshihiro Matsumura & Osamu Kanda, 2005. "Mixed Oligopoly at Free Entry Markets," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 84(1), pages 27-48, 02.
  21. Venables, Anthony J., 1982. "Optimal tariffs for trade in monopolistically competitive commodities," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3-4), pages 225-241, May.
  22. Dutt, Pushan & Mitra, Devashish, 2002. "Endogenous trade policy through majority voting: an empirical investigation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 107-133, October.
  23. Jeffrey D. Sachs & Andrew Warner, 1995. "Economic Reform and the Process of Global Integration," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 26(1, 25th A), pages 1-118.
  24. Jeffry M. Netter & William L. Megginson, 2001. "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 321-389, June.
  25. De Fraja, Giovanni, 1993. "Productive efficiency in public and private firms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 15-30, January.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:14:y:2012:i:3:p:441-471. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.