Mass privatization, management control and efficiency
We present a model where a government chooses the number of individuals to which ownership in a former state-owned firm shall be allocated. When making this decision the government maximizes the political support it gets from the firm's incumbent manager and from potential shareholders, anticipating that a greater dispersion of shares reduces the control of the manager by the firm's new owners. It turns out that shares will be allocated to the maximum number of individuals - and thus a policy of mass privatization will be implemented - if the manager's utility enters the political support function with a higher weight than the welfare of the potential shareholders. The result of the political process, however, need not conflict with the objective of achieving a Pareto-optimal allocation. Thus we contradict a widely shared presumption that mass privatization schemes sacrifice efficiency to satisfy political constraints and show that they can be very attractive from an efficiency point of view.
(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.
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.
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.:
- Boycko, Maxim & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1997.
MIT Press Books,
The MIT Press,
edition 1, volume 1, number 0262522284, June.
- Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shlelfer & Robert Vishny, 1993.
University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State
85, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- David Lipton & Jeffrey Sachs, 1990. "Privitization in Eastern Europe: The Case of Poland," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(2), pages 293-342.
- Patrick Bolton, 1995. "Privatization and the separation of ownership and control: lessons from Chinese enterprise reform," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 3(1), pages 1-11, 03.
- Roland, G. & Verdier, T., 1991.
"Privatization in Eastern Europe: Irreversibility and Critical Mass Effects,"
DELTA Working Papers
91-21, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
- Roland, Gerard & Verdier, Thierry, 1994. "Privatization in Eastern Europe : Irreversibility and critical mass effects," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 161-183, June.
- Roland, G. & Verdier, T., 1991. "Privatisation in Eastern Europe: Irreversibility and Critical Mass Effects," Papers 9105, Universite Libre de Bruxelles - C.E.M.E..
- Roland, Gérard & Verdier, Thierry, 1992. "Privatization in Eastern Europe: Irreversibility and Critical Mass Effects," CEPR Discussion Papers 612, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Mookherjee, Dilip & Png, Ivan, 1989. "Optimal Auditing, Insurance, and Redistribution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 104(2), pages 399-415, May.
- Schmidt,Klaus & Schnitzer,Monika, 1992.
"Privatization and management incentives in the transition period in Eastern Europe,"
Discussion Paper Serie A
374, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Schmidt Klaus M. & Schnitzer Monika, 1993. "Privatization and Management Incentives in the Transition Period in Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 264-287, June.
- Schmidt, Klaus M. & Schnitzer, Monika, 1993. "Privatization and Management Incentives in the Transition Period in Eastern Europe," Munich Reprints in Economics 3400, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Schmidt, Klaus M. & Schnitzer, Monika, 1993. "Privatization and Management Incentives in the Transition Period in Eastern Europe," Munich Reprints in Economics 3109, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Schmidt, K.M. & Schnitzer, M., 1992. "Privatization and Management Incentives in the Transition Period in Eastern Europe," Working papers 92-17, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Border, Kim C & Sobel, Joel, 1987. "Samurai Accountant: A Theory of Auditing and Plunder," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 525-40, October.
- John S. Earle & Saul Estrin, 1995. "Alternative ownership forms: the impact on restructuring," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 3(1), pages 111-115, 03.
- David P. Baron & David Besanko, 1984. "Regulation, Asymmetric Information, and Auditing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 447-470, Winter.
- Coughlin, Peter J. & Mueller, Dennis C. & Murrell, Peter, 1990. "A model of electroral competition with interest groups," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 307-311, April.
- Aghion, Philippe & Blanchard, Olivier & Burgess, Robin, 1994. "The behaviour of state firms in eastern Europe, pre-privatisation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1327-1349, June.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:64:y:1997:i:3:p:343-357. 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.