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

Market power, EU integration and privatization: The case of Romania

  • Asaftei, Gabriel
  • Parmeter, Christopher F.

This paper investigates the effects on pricing behavior of firms in a transition economy resulting from integration into the European Union's Common Market and changes in ownership. We use a semiparametric model with a rich panel of manufacturing firms in Romania from 1995 to 2003 to estimate firm-level markups. We find that markups are higher in more concentrated industries and less exposed to foreign competition. Trade integration appears to generally increase competitive pressure on markups. Industries exposed to more international competition experience a larger change in markups following integration into the European Union's Common Market. However, as the initial impact of tariff reduction fades away, higher markups become an important element in firms' pricing strategies. We also find that foreign firms and private domestic firms charge significantly higher markups on average than state-owned enterprizes.

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: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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 Elsevier in its journal Journal of Comparative Economics.

Volume (Year): 38 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
Pages: 340-356

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:jcecon:v:38:y:2010:i:3:p:340-356
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. Rosen Marinov, 2010. "Competitive Pressure in Transition: A Role for Trade and Competition Policies?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, March.
  2. 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.
  3. Baldwin, Richard E. & Venables, Anthony J., 1995. "Regional economic integration," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1597-1644 Elsevier.
  4. Werner Antweiler & Daniel Trefler, 2000. "Increasing Returns and All That: A View From Trade," NBER Working Papers 7941, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jenson & Samuel Kortum, 2000. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," NBER Working Papers 7688, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. John S. Earle & Almos Telegdy, 2002. "Privatization Methods and Productivity Effects in Romanian Industrial Enterprises," Upjohn Working Papers and Journal Articles 02-81, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
  7. Jan De Loecker, 2004. "Do Exports Generate Higher Productivity? Evidence from Slovenia," LICOS Discussion Papers 15104, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
  8. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
  9. Schmidt, Klaus M., 1996. "Managerial Incentives and Product Market Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 1382, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  10. Qi Li & Jeffrey Scott Racine, 2006. "Nonparametric Econometrics: Theory and Practice," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 8355.
  11. 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 403-52, June.
  12. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-46, August.
  13. Brown, J David & Earle, John S, 2001. "Privatization, Competition and Reform Strategies: Theory and Evidence from Russian Enterprise Panel Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 2758, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  14. Paul Krugman, 1990. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," NBER Working Papers 3275, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Jean Tirole, 1991. "Privatization in Eastern Europe: Incentives and the Economics of Transition," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1991, Volume 6, pages 221-268 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. 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, MIT Press, vol. 114(4), pages 1153-1191, November.
  17. Venables, Anthony J., 1987. "Customs union and tariff reform under imperfect competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-2), pages 103-110.
  18. Vousden, Neil & Campbell, Neil, 1994. "The organizational cost of protection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 219-238, November.
  19. Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Enterprise performance and management turnover in the Czech Republic," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1115-1124, April.
  20. Harrison, Ann E., 1994. "Productivity, imperfect competition and trade reform : Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 53-73, February.
  21. Robert E. Hall, 1986. "The Relation Between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry," NBER Working Papers 1785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Bernard, Andrew B. & Bradford Jensen, J., 1999. "Exceptional exporter performance: cause, effect, or both?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-25, February.
  23. Nellis, J., 1999. "Time to Rethink Privatization in Transition Economies?," Papers 38, World Bank - International Finance Corporation.
  24. Sofronis Clerides & Saul Lach & James Tybout, 1996. "Is "learning-by-exporting" important? Micro-dynamic evidence from Colombia, Mexico and Morocco," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 96-30, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  25. Oliver D. Hart, 1983. "The Market Mechanism as an Incentive Scheme," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 366-382, Autumn.
  26. Melitz, Marc J, 2002. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," CEPR Discussion Papers 3381, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  27. Levinsohn, James, 1993. "Testing the imports-as-market-discipline hypothesis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 1-22, August.
  28. Jeffrey S. Racine & Christopher F. Parmeter, 2012. "Data-Driven Model Evaluation: A Test for Revealed Performance," Department of Economics Working Papers 2012-13, McMaster University.
  29. Roeger, Werner, 1995. "Can Imperfect Competition Explain the Difference between Primal and Dual Productivity Measures? Estimates for U.S. Manufacturing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 316-30, April.
  30. Sanford Berg & Chen Lin & Valeriy Tsaplin, 2005. "Regulation of State-Owned and Privatized Utilities: Ukraine Electricity Distribution Company Performance," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 259-287, November.
  31. Pravin Krishna & Devashish Mitra, . "Trade Liberalization, Market Discipline and Productivity Growth: New Evidence From India," Working Papers 96-8, Brown University, Department of Economics.
  32. Erkan Erdem & James Tybout, 2003. "Trade Policy and Industrial Sector Responses: Using Evolutionary Models to Interpret the Evidence," NBER Working Papers 9947, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. 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 1006-38, October.
  34. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1975. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 1-37, March.
  35. Konings, Jozef & Van Cayseele, Patrick & Warzynski, Frederic, 2001. "The dynamics of industrial mark-ups in two small open economies: does national competition policy matter?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 841-859, April.
  36. Alla Lileeva & Daniel Trefler, 2007. "Improved Access to Foreign Markets Raises Plant-Level Productivity ... for Some Plants," NBER Working Papers 13297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  37. Andrei Shleifer, 1998. "State Versus Private Ownership," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1841, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  38. J. David Brown & John S. Earle & Almos Telegdy, 2005. "The Productivity Effects of Privatization: Longitudinal Estimates from Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine," Upjohn Working Papers and Journal Articles 05-121, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
  39. James R. Tybout, 2001. "Plant- and Firm-Level Evidence on "New" Trade Theories," NBER Working Papers 8418, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  40. David M. Newbery & Paul Kattuman, 1992. "Market Concentration and Competition in Eastern Europe," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 315-334, 05.
  41. Anderson, James H & Lee, Young & Murrell, Peter, 2000. "Competition and Privatization Amidst Weak Institutions: Evidence from Mongolia," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(4), pages 527-49, October.
  42. Paul Joskow & Richard Schmalensee, 1995. "Privatization in Russia: What Should be a Firm?," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 297-327.
  43. Djankov, Simeon & Murrell, Peter, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," CEPR Discussion Papers 3319, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  44. John Earle & Saul Estrin, 2003. "Privatization, Competition, and Budget Constraints: Disciplining Enterprises in Russia," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-22, March.
  45. Li, Qi, et al, 2002. "Semiparametric Smooth Coefficient Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(3), pages 412-22, July.
  46. Helpman, Elhanan, 1981. "International trade in the presence of product differentiation, economies of scale and monopolistic competition : A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 305-340, August.
  47. Li, Qi & Racine, Jeffrey S., 2010. "Smooth Varying-Coefficient Estimation And Inference For Qualitative And Quantitative Data," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(06), pages 1607-1637, December.
  48. Dobrinsky, Rumen & Korosi, Gabor & Markov, Nikolay & Halpern, Laszlo, 2006. "Price markups and returns to scale in imperfect markets: Bulgaria and Hungary," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 92-110, March.
  49. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, June.
  50. Racine, Jeff & Li, Qi, 2004. "Nonparametric estimation of regression functions with both categorical and continuous data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 99-130, March.
  51. Saul Estrin, 2002. "Competition and Corporate Governance in Transition," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 101-124, Winter.
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:eee:jcecon:v:38:y:2010:i:3:p:340-356. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.