IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Competition and Enterprise Performance in Transition Economies: Evidence from a Cross-country Survey

  • Carlin, Wendy
  • Fries, Steven
  • Schaffer, Mark E
  • Seabright, Paul

This Paper uses a survey of 3,300 firms in 25 transition countries to shed light on the factors that influence restructuring by firms and their subsequent performance as measured by growth in sales and in sales per employee over a three-year period. We begin by surveying what a decade of transition has taught us about the factors that determine how firms respond to the new market environment. We go on to analyse the impact on performance of ownership, soft budget constraints, the general business environment and a range of measures of the intensity of competition as perceived by a firm. We find that competition has an important and non-monotonic effect on the growth of sales and of labour productivity: some degree of perceived market power is associated with higher sales growth, but competitive pressure is also important. Similar competition effects are found upon firms’ decisions to develop and improve their products, but market power has an unambiguously negative impact on purely defensive (cost-reducing) restructuring activity. New firms have grown relatively fast, but among old firms ownership per se has no significant relationship to performance (though state-owned firms have engaged in significantly less development of new products). Soft budget constraints have a broadly negative and the business environment a broadly positive impact on restructuring and performance.

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: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at

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.

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 2840.

in new window

Date of creation: Jun 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:2840
Contact details of provider: Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information: Email:

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. Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Restructuring of insider-dominated firms," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2046, The World Bank.
  2. Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Ownership structure and enterprise restructuring in six newly independent states," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2047, The World Bank.
  3. Damien NEVEN & Paul SEABRIGHT, 1995. "Trade Liberalisation and the Co-ordination of Competition Policy," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 9503, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
  4. Joel Hellman & Mark Schankerman, 2000. "Intervention, Corruption and Capture: The Nexus between Enterprises and the State," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(3), pages 545-576, November.
  5. Grosfeld, Irena & Nivet, Jean-François, 1997. "Wage and Investment Behaviour in Transition: Evidence from a Polish Panel Data Set," CEPR Discussion Papers 1726, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  6. Olivier Blanchard & Michael Kremer, 1997. "Disorganization," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 38, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
  7. Smith, Stephen C. & Cin, Beom-Cheol & Vodopivec, Milan, 1997. "Privatization Incidence, Ownership Forms, and Firm Performance: Evidence from Slovenia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 158-179, October.
  8. Kattuman, Paul A & Newbery, David M G, 1992. "Market Concentration and Competition in Eastern Europe," CEPR Discussion Papers 664, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  9. Jones, Derek C & Mygind, Niels, 2002. "Ownership and Productive Efficiency: Evidence from Estonia," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(2), pages 284-301, June.
  10. Bilsen, Valentijn & Konings, Jozef, 1998. "Job Creation, Job Destruction, and Growth of Newly Established, Privatized, and State-Owned Enterprises in Transition Economies: Survey Evidence from Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 429-445, September.
  11. Hausman, Jerry A & Taylor, William E, 1981. "Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1377-98, November.
  12. Jones, Derek & Klinedinst, Mark & Rock, Charles, 1998. "Productive Efficiency during Transition: Evidence from Bulgarian Panel Data," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 446-464, September.
  13. 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.
  14. John S. Earle & Saul Estrin, . "Privatization, Competition, and Budget Constraints: Disciplining Enterprises in Russia," Upjohn Working Papers and Journal Articles jse20032, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
  15. Earle, John S & Estrin, Saul, 1997. "After Voucher Privatization: The Structure of Corporate Ownership in Russian Manufacturing Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 1736, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  16. Brown, J David & Earle, John S, 2000. "Competition And Firm Performance: Lessons From Russia," CEPR Discussion Papers 2444, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  17. Frydman, R. & Gray, C. & Hessel, M. & Rapaczynski, A., 2000. "The Limits of Discipline: Ownership and Hard Budget Constraints in the Transition Economies," Working Papers 00-02, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  18. Roman Frydman & Cheryl Gray & Marek Hessel & Andrzej Rapaczynski, 2000. "The Limits of Discipline: Ownership and Hard Budget Constraints in the Transition Economies," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(3), pages 577-601, November.
  19. Schaffer, Mark E., 1998. "Do Firms in Transition Economies Have Soft Budget Constraints? A Reconsideration of Concepts and Evidence," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 80-103, March.
  20. Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Ownership Concentration and Corporate Performance in the Czech Republic," CEPR Discussion Papers 2145, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  21. Hare, Paul G & Hughes, Gordon, 1991. "Competitiveness and Industrial Restructuring in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland," CEPR Discussion Papers 543, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  22. Simeon Djankov & Peter Murrell, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 739-792, September.
  23. Baltagi, Badi H., 1981. "Simultaneous equations with error components," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 189-200, November.
  24. repec:ebd:wpaper:51 is not listed on IDEAS
  25. 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.
  26. Wendy Carlin & Jonathan Haskel & Paul Seabright, 2001. "Understanding ‘The Essential Fact about Capitalism’: Markets, Competition and Creative Destruction," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 175(1), pages 67-84, January.
  27. repec:ebd:wpaper:58 is not listed on IDEAS
  28. Amemiya, Takeshi & MaCurdy, Thomas E, 1986. "Instrumental-Variable Estimation of an Error-Components Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 869-80, July.
  29. Boozer, Michael A., 1997. "Econometric Analysis of Panel Data Badi H. Baltagi Wiley, 1995," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(05), pages 747-754, October.
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:cpr:ceprdp:2840. 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: ()

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.