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

Privatization, Government's Preference and Unionization Structure: A Mixed Oligopoly Approach

  • Kangsik, Choi

By introducing the government's preference for tax revenues into the theoretical framework of unionized mixed oligopolies, this study investigates the efficiency of privatization. The results show that (i) regardless of the government's preference for tax revenues, its incentive to privatize a public firm depends on the number of the private firms and (ii) social welfare can decrease with an increase in the number of firms depending on the level of government's preference for tax revenue. Moreover, if the number of private firms and the government's preference for tax revenue are sufficiently small, then social welfare under a unionized privatized oligopoly is greater than under a unionized mixed oligopoly while the government has an incentive not to privatize the public firm, and vice versa if only the number of firms is sufficiently large.

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:
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 13028.

in new window

Date of creation: 27 Jan 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:13028
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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. Haucap, Justus & Wey, Christian, 2003. "Unionisation Structures and Innovation Incentives," Working Paper 21/2003, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
  2. Michael Rauscher, 2000. "Interjurisdictional Competition and Public-Sector Prodigality: The Triumph of the Market over the State?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 57(1), pages 89-, September.
  3. Fjell, Kenneth & Heywood, John S., 2004. "Mixed oligopoly, subsidization and the order of firm's moves: the relevance of privatization," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 411-416, June.
  4. Kjell Erik Lommerud & Frode Meland & Lars Sørgard, 2002. "Unionized Oligopoly, Trade Liberalization and Location Choice," CESifo Working Paper Series 777, CESifo Group Munich.
  5. Jan Rose Skaksen, 2004. "International outsourcing when labour markets are unionized," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 78-94, February.
  6. White, Mark D., 1996. "Mixed oligopoly, privatization and subsidization," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 189-195, November.
  7. Edwards, Jeremy & Keen, Michael, 1996. "Tax competition and Leviathan," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 113-134, January.
  8. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2004. "Endogenous Cost Differentials between Public and Private Enterprises: A Mixed Duopoly Approach," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 71(284), pages 671-688, November.
  9. Oates, Wallace E, 1985. "Searching for Leviathan: An Empirical Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 748-57, September.
  10. De Fraja, Giovanni, 1993. "Unions and Wages in Public and Private Firms: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 457-69, July.
  11. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1990. " Game Theoretic Models of Mixed Oligopoly," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17.
  12. Marius BRÜLHART & Mario JAMETTI, 2007. "Does Tax Competition Tame the Leviathan?," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 07.09, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
  13. Ishida, Junichiro & Matsushima, Noriaki, 2009. "Should civil servants be restricted in wage bargaining? A mixed-duopoly approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 634-646, April.
  14. Leahy, Dermot & Montagna, Catia, 2000. "Unionisation and Foreign Direct Investment: Challenging Conventional Wisdom?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(462), pages C80-92, March.
  15. Naylor, Robin, 1998. "International trade and economic integration when labour markets are generally unionised," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(7), pages 1251-1267, July.
  16. Michael J. Keen & Christos Kotsogiannis, 2002. "Does Federalism Lead to Excessively High Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 363-370, March.
  17. Zax, Jeffrey S, 1989. "Is There a Leviathan in Your Neighborhood?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 560-67, June.
  18. Juan Bárcena-Ruiz, 2007. "Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Duopoly: Price Competition," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 263-272, July.
  19. Oswald, Andrew J & Turnbull, Peter J, 1985. "Pay and Employment Determination in Britain: What Are Labour," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 80-97, Summer.
  20. Rudra Sensarma & Bibhas Saha, 2008. "The Distributive Role of Managerial Incentives in a Mixed Duopoly," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(28), pages 1-10.
  21. Tirole, Jean, 1994. "The Internal Organization of Government," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-29, January.
  22. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:28:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
  23. Matsumura, Toshihiro, 1998. "Partial privatization in mixed duopoly," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 473-483, December.
  24. Mujumdar, Sudesh & Pal, Debashis, 1998. "Effects of indirect taxation in a mixed oligopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 199-204, February.
  25. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1989. "Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 302-11, April.
  26. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2002:i:1:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
  27. Forbes, Kevin F & Zampelli, Ernest M, 1989. "Is Leviathan a Mythical Beast?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 568-77, June.
  28. Naylor, Robin A., 2002. "Industry profits and competition under bilateral oligopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 169-175, October.
  29. Junichiro Ishida & Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2008. "When Market Competition Benefits Firms," OSIPP Discussion Paper 08E011, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
  30. Lorenz NETT, 1993. "Mixed Oligopoly With Homogeneous Goods," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 367-393, 07.
  31. Joanna Poyago-Theotoky, 2001. "Mixed oligopoly, subsidization and the order of firms' moves: an irrelevance result," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(3), pages 1-5.
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:pra:mprapa:13028. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.