IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331071.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Company Performance in Ukraine: What Governs Its Success

Author

Listed:
  • Andreyeva, Tatiana

Abstract

The observable outcomes of post-Soviet economic reforms have generated large interest and controversy in the transition debate. Privatization and market competition are the two primary forces to induce changes in the behavior of firms. This study investigates how firm performance responds to these forces by modeling firm performance in Ukraine. Drawing from panel data on Ukrainian firms for the period 1996-2000, the study estimates a production function using random-effects and instrumental variable estimators. The analysis finds evidence that firm performance improves significantly with privatization. This effect is particularly strong when several private owners concentrate ownership. There is some indication that privatized companies with dominant outside shareholders are most efficient. Another finding is that market competition has little role in determining firm performance in Ukraine.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreyeva, Tatiana, 2003. "Company Performance in Ukraine: What Governs Its Success," Conference papers 331071, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331071/files/1050.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bela Balassa, 1965. "Tariff Protection in Industrial Countries: An Evaluation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(6), pages 573-573.
    2. Lionel Fontagné & Friedrich von Kirchbach & Mondher Mimouni, 2001. "A First Assessment of Environment-Related Trade Barriers," Working Papers 2001-10, CEPII research center.
    3. Antoine Bouët & Lionel Fontagné & Mondher Mimouni & Xavier Pichot, 2001. "Market Access Maps: A Bilateral and Disaggregated Measure of Market Access," Working Papers 2001-18, CEPII research center.
    4. Laird, S., 1996. "Quantifying Commercial Policies," Papers 96-001, Stanford - Institute for Thoretical Economics.
    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. Antoine Bouët & Lionel Fontagné & Mondher Mimouni & Xavier Pichot, 2001. "Market Access Maps: A Bilateral and Disaggregated Measure of Market Access," Working Papers 2001-18, CEPII research center.
    2. Anindya Banerjee & Paolo Zanghieri, 2003. "A New Look at the Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle using an Integrated Panel," Working Papers 2003-22, CEPII research center.
    3. Helming, John & Tabeau, Andrzej & Kuhlman, Tom & van Tongeren, Frank, 2006. "Linkage of GTAP and DRAM for scenario assessment: methodology, application and some selected results," Conference papers 331500, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    5. Guillaume Gaulier & Soledad Zignago, 2002. "La discrimination commerciale revelee comme mesure desagregee de l'acces aux marches," Economie Internationale, CEPII research center, issue 89-90, pages 262-280.
    6. Loïc Cadiou & Julien Genet & Jean-Louis Guérin, 2002. "Evolutions démographiques et marché du travail : des liens complexes parfois contradictoires," Working Papers 2002-16, CEPII research center.
    7. Schiff, Maurice*Valdes, Alberto, 1998. "Agriculture and the macroeconomy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1967, The World Bank.
    8. Alain Jousten & Florence Legros, 2005. "Pensions and Savings in a Monetary Union: An Analysis of Capital Flows," Chapters, in: Patrick Artus & André Cartapanis & Florence Legros (ed.), Regional Currency Areas in Financial Globalization, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Matthew A. Cole & Robert J. R. Elliott, 2005. "FDI and the Capital Intensity of “Dirty” Sectors: A Missing Piece of the Pollution Haven Puzzle," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 530-548, November.
    10. João Alberto De Negri & Celso Garrido & Vinicius Rodrigues Peçanha & Leonardo E. Stanley, 2010. "La inserción de América Latina en las cadenas globales de valor," Serie Red MERCOSUR, Red Mercosur, edition 1, volume 1, number 19 edited by Victor Prochnik (Coordinador), Spring.
    11. Barend A. De Vries, 1972. "International Price Comparisons of Selected Capital Goods Industries," NBER Chapters, in: International Comparisons of Prices and Output, pages 335-367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Lionel Fontagné & Thierry Mayer & Soledad Zignago, 2005. "Trade in the Triad: how easy is the access to large markets?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(4), pages 1401-1430, November.
    13. T. Paul Schultz, 2006. "Does the Liberalization of Trade Advance Gender Equality in Schooling and Health?," Working Papers 935, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    14. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné & Mondher Mimouni, 2015. "Tariff Liberalization and Trade Integration of Emerging Countries," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(5), pages 946-971, November.
    15. Françoise Lemoine & Deniz Ünal-Kesenci, 2003. "Trade and Technology Transfers: a Comparative Study of Turkey, India and China," Working Papers 2003-16, CEPII research center.
    16. Kym Anderson, 2003. "Measuring Effects of Trade Policy Distortions: How Far Have We Come?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 413-440, April.
    17. Achterbosch, Thom J. & Ben Hammouda, H. & Osakwe, Patrick N. & van Tongeren, Frank W., 2004. "Trade Liberalisation Under The Doha Development Agenda; Options And Consequences For Africa," Report Series 29104, Wageningen University and Research Center, Agricultural Economics Research Institute.
    18. Nuno Limão & Patricia Tovar, 2018. "Policy choice: Theory and evidence from commitment via international trade agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 6, pages 179-198, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Zhaohui Niu & Chang Liu & Saileshsingh Gunessee & Chris Milner, 2018. "Non-tariff and overall protection: evidence across countries and over time," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(4), pages 675-703, November.
    20. Balazs Egert & Amina Lahrèche-Révil & Kirsten Lommatzsch, 2004. "The Stock-Flow Approach to the Real Exchange Rate of CEE Transition Economies," Working Papers 2004-15, CEPII research center.

    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:ags:pugtwp:331071. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.