IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfinec/v89y2008i3p513-526.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing limits to policy reversal: Evidence from Indian privatizations

Author

Listed:
  • Dastidar, Siddhartha G.
  • Fisman, Raymond
  • Khanna, Tarun

Abstract

We examine the effect of regime change on privatization. In the 2004 Indian election, the pro-reform BJP was unexpectedly defeated by a less reformist coalition. Stock prices of government-controlled companies that had been slated for privatization by the BJP dropped 3.5% relative to private firms. Government-controlled companies that were under study for possible privatization fell 7.5% relative to private firms. This is consistent with investor belief of a "point of no return," where advanced reforms are more difficult to reverse. Further analysis suggests that layoffs, combined with the privatization announcement, served as a credible commitment to privatize.

Suggested Citation

  • Dastidar, Siddhartha G. & Fisman, Raymond & Khanna, Tarun, 2008. "Testing limits to policy reversal: Evidence from Indian privatizations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 513-526, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfinec:v:89:y:2008:i:3:p:513-526
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304-405X(08)00095-0
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of 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. Chong, Alberto & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio, 2002. "Privatization and labor force restructuring around the world," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2884, The World Bank.
    3. Paul H. Malatesta & Kathryn L. DeWenter, 2001. "State-Owned and Privately Owned Firms: An Empirical Analysis of Profitability, Leverage, and Labor Intensity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 320-334, March.
    4. Perotti, Enrico C, 1995. "Credible Privatization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 847-859, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Mara Faccio, 2006. "Politically Connected Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 369-386, March.
    7. Tabellini, Guido & Alesina, Alberto, 1990. "Voting on the Budget Deficit," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 37-49, March.
    8. Jones, Steven L. & Megginson, William L. & Nash, Robert C. & Netter, Jeffry M., 1999. "Share issue privatizations as financial means to political and economic ends," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 217-253, August.
    9. Nandini Gupta, 2005. "Partial Privatization and Firm Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(2), pages 987-1015, April.
    10. Gupta, Nandini & Ham, Jhon C. & Svejnar, Jan, 2008. "Priorities and sequencing in privatization: Evidence from Czech firm panel data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 183-208, February.
    11. Raymond Fisman, 2001. "Estimating the Value of Political Connections," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1095-1102, September.
    12. Alesina, Alberto, 1988. "Credibility and Policy Convergence in a Two-Party System with Rational Voters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 796-805, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helen Wei Hu & Lin Cui & Preet S Aulakh, 2019. "State capitalism and performance persistence of business group-affiliated firms: A comparative study of China and India," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(2), pages 193-222, March.
    2. Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra & Ajai Gaur & Deeksha Singh, 2019. "Pro-market institutions and global strategy: The pendulum of pro-market reforms and reversals," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(4), pages 598-632, June.
    3. Boubakri, Narjess & Cosset, Jean-Claude & Guedhami, Omrane & Saffar, Walid, 2011. "The political economy of residual state ownership in privatized firms: Evidence from emerging markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 244-258, April.
    4. Neeru Chaudhry & Chris Veld, 2023. "Political uncertainty and investments by private and state‐owned enterprises," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 584-614, September.
    5. Huang, Zhangkai & Li, Lixing & Ma, Guangrong & Qian, Jun, 2021. "The reversal of privatization in China: A political economy perspective," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Elitsa R Banalieva & Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra & Ravi Sarathy, 2018. "Dynamics of pro-market institutions and firm performance," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 49(7), pages 858-880, September.

    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. Fan, Joseph P.H. & Wong, T.J. & Zhang, Tianyu, 2007. "Politically connected CEOs, corporate governance, and Post-IPO performance of China's newly partially privatized firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 330-357, May.
    2. Bai, Tao & Chen, Stephen & Xu, Youzong, 2021. "Formal and informal influences of the state on OFDI of hybrid state-owned enterprises in China," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5).
    3. Carvalho, Augusto & Guimaraes, Bernardo, 2018. "State-controlled companies and political risk: Evidence from the 2014 Brazilian election," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 66-78.
    4. Beuselinck, Christof & Cao, Lihong & Deloof, Marc & Xia, Xinping, 2017. "The value of government ownership during the global financial crisis," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 481-493.
    5. Qi Quan & Nancy Huyghebaert, 2005. "Share Issuing Privatizations in China: Determinants of Public Share Allocation and Underpricing," LICOS Discussion Papers 16205, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    6. Jan Hagemejer & Joanna Tyrowicz, 2020. "A New Instrument for Measuring the Local Causal Effect of Privatisation on Firm Performance," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 35-52.
    7. Henk Berkman & Rebel A. Cole & Lawrence J. Fu, 2014. "Improving corporate governance where the State is the controlling block holder: evidence from China," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7-9), pages 752-777, September.
    8. Huyghebaert, Nancy & Quan, Qi, 2009. "Share issuing privatizations in China: Sequencing and its effects on public share allocation and underpricing," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 306-320, June.
    9. Siddhartha G. Dastidar & Raymound Fisman & Tarun Khanna, 2006. "Limits to Policy Reversal: Privatization in India," Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series d05-158, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    10. Bernardo Bortolotti & Mara Faccio, 2004. "Reluctant Privatization," Working Papers 2004.130, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Alberto Chong & Florencio de, 2003. "The Truth about Privatization in Latin America," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm436, Yale School of Management.
    12. Feng, Xunan & Johansson , Anders C. & Wang, Ying, 2018. "Strengthened State Capitalism: Nationalized Firms in China," Stockholm School of Economics Asia Working Paper Series 2018-51, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm China Economic Research Institute.
    13. Li, Zhaohua & Yamada, Takeshi, 2015. "Political and economic incentives of government in partial privatization," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 169-189.
    14. 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.
    15. Mike W. Peng & Garry D. Bruton & Ciprian V. Stan & Yuanyuan Huang, 2016. "Theories of the (state-owned) firm," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 293-317, June.
    16. Bilei Zhou & Jie (Michael) Guo & Jun Hua & Angelos J. Doukas, 2015. "Does State Ownership Drive M&A Performance? Evidence from China," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 21(1), pages 79-105, January.
    17. Chen, Gongmeng & Firth, Michael & Rui, Oliver, 2006. "Have China's enterprise reforms led to improved efficiency and profitability?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 82-109, March.
    18. D'Souza, Juliet & Megginson, William & Nash, Robert, 2007. "The effects of changes in corporate governance and restructurings on operating performance: Evidence from privatizations," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 157-184.
    19. Haikun Zhu, 2018. "Social Stability and Resource Allocation within Business Groups," Working Papers Series 79, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    20. Bortolotti, Bernardo & Fantini, Marcella & Siniscalco, Domenico, 2004. "Privatisation around the world: evidence from panel data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1-2), pages 305-332, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Government commitment Layoffs Emerging markets Electoral turnover Government policy credibility;

    JEL classification:

    • G15 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - International Financial Markets
    • G38 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out

    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:eee:jfinec:v:89:y:2008:i:3:p:513-526. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505576 .

    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.