Privatization in India

Topics: Public sector, Privatization, Public ownership Pages: 19 (6614 words) Published: October 1, 2009
PRIVATIZATION IN INDIA : ISSUES AND EVIDENCE (A doctoral dissertation proposal) T.T.Ram Mohan Visiting Faculty, Finance and Accounting Area Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India

Abstract The proposed research is intended to survey the process of privatization in India and assess its impact on the Indian economy. The central issue we will address is the impact of privatization that has taken place so far on profitability and performance of PSUs. Going beyond this, we will attempt to understand what explains the impact of privatization on performance. Is it the use of market power by oligopolistic firms whose pricing power had been constrained under government ownership ? Is performance bought at the expense of labour through extensive layoffs so that what we see is essentially a transfer from workers to shareholders ? Or are we confusing the impact of privatization with the more generalised impact of deregulation in the economy, which in itself could spur efficiency ? The research output will comprise the following: 1. A survey of the literature on privatization, particularly with respect to less developed countries. 2. A review of the role of the public sector in the Indian economy, and the process of economic liberalization and privatization in India upto this point. 3. Impact of privatization on firm performance. 4. Explanation for the impact of privatization 5. Assessment of mechanisms of corporate governance in India.

-2-

I.

Background: privatization in theory and practice A great wave of privatization has swept the world in the past two decades, embracing the industrial economies, the transition economies of East Europe and large parts of the less developed world, and it continues to roll on. It is interesting, however, that its basis in theory was somewhat shaky to start with. Moreover, a sizable enough body of empirical evidence, on which hypotheses about its impact could be tested, became available only several years down the road. So much of the initial impetus to privatization entailed a leap in faith, and, as happens all too often in the development of knowledge, attempts to explain its impact have followed on the heels of widespread existing practice. Although ideological considerations - exemplified by such statements as, “ governments have no businesss to be in business” - have often been paramount in driving privatization in various parts of the world, it is also true that governments have sought to justify privatization in relation to certain objectives. These objectives include one or more of the following: 1. to promote increased efficiency. 2. to raise revenues for the state (and thereby to bridge fiscal deficits). 3. to reduce government interference in the economy and promote greater private initiative. 4. to promote wider share ownership and the development of the capital market. Of these, the first objective, the need to promote efficiency in running commercial organizations, has arugably been the dominant motivation. There is a sense that public ownership somehow leads to lower levels of efficiency than are possible under private ownership; and inefficient enterprises, in turn, are seen as creating other problems such as pre-emption of government revenues (badly needed for investment in social sectors in the less developed countries ) through subsidies or recapitalization and uncompetitive industries in the economy. All this is now virtually taken as axiomatic and is part of the conventional wisdom, but it is noteworthy that neoclassical theory dwelt does not have much to say about firm ownership, dwelling instead on the importance of market structure in generating efficient outcomes . If anything under certain conditions of market failure that cannot not be entirely rectified through Pigouvian taxes or subsidies, there is a case for public, rather than private, ownership to meet overriding social objectives.

T.T. Ram Mohan, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad

-3-...

References: 1. Adams, Christopher, Cavendish, William, and Mistry, Percy, Adjusting Privatization: Case Studies From Developing Countries, James Curry, London, 1992. 2. Bhaskar, V. (1992), “Privatization and the developing countries: the issues and the evidence Discussion Paper No.47, Geneva: UNCTAD. 3. Bishop, Mathew R., and John A. Kay, 1989, Privatization in the United Kingdom: Lessons from experience, World Development, 643-657. 4. Boardman, A and A. Vining (1989), “Ownership and performance in competitive environments: a comparison of the performance of private mixed and state-owned enterprises”, Journal of Law and Economics, 32, April. 5. Bourbakri, Narjess and Jean-Claude Cosset (1997), “The Financial and Operating Performance of Newly Privatized Firms: Evidence from Developing Countries,” mimeo 6. Caves, D., and Christensen, L., “The Relative Efficiency of Public and Private Firms in a Competitive Environment: the Case of Canadian Railroads,” Journal of Political Economy, 1980.
T.T. Ram Mohan, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad
- 16 -
7. Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., and Logan, J., “The Relative Performance of Publicly Owned and Privately Owned Utilities,” Journal of Public Economics, 1985, pp. 89-106. 8. Finisinger, Jorg, “The Performance of Public Enterprises in Insurance Markets,” in Marchand, Pestieau, and Tulkens, The Performance of Public Enterprises, 1984, pp. 223-241. 9. Foreman-Peck J., and D.Manning (1988), How Well is BT Performing ? An International Comparison of Telecommunications Total Factor Productivity, University of Newcastle, Department of Economics, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England 10. Frydman Roman, Gray Cheryl, Hessel Marek and Rapaczynski Andrzej (1997), Private Ownership and Corporate Performance, Some lessons from Transition Economies, the World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 1830 11. Galal, A., L. Jones, P. Tandon and I. Vogelsang (1994), `Welfare Consequences of selling public enterprises’, New York: Oxford University Press 12. Hemming Richard and Ali M. Mansoor, Privatization and Public Enterprises, IMF, Washington D.C. 13. Kornai J. (1980), The Economics of Shortage, North-Holland, Amsterdam 14. LaPorta, Rafael and F.Lopez-De-Silanes (1998); “The Benefits of Privatization: Evidence from Mexico,” NBER Working Paper 6215 15. Megginson, W.L., R.Nash, and Matthias Van Randenborgh (1994), “The Financial and Operating Performance of Newly Privatized Firms: An International Empirical Analysis”, The Journal of Finance, Vol. XLIX, No. 2, June 16. Meyer, R.A., “Public Owned versus Privately Owned Utilities: A Policy Choice, ” Review of Economics and Statistics, 57, 1975, pp 391-399 17. Millward, Robert, “Measured Sources of Inefficiency in the Performance of Private and Public Enterprises in LDCs,” in Cook and Kirkpatrick, eds., Privatization in Less Developed Countries, 1988, pp. 143-161. 18. Sapington, David, and Stiglitz, Joseph (1987), “Privatization, Information, and Incentives,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1987, 6, 567-582. 19. Sheshinksi Eytan and Lopez-Calva Luis Felipe (1998), Privatization and its benefits: theory and evidence, Harvard Institute of International Development
T.T. Ram Mohan, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad
- 17 -
20. Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny (1996), A Theory of Privatization, Economic Journal 106; 309-319 21. Stiglitz, Joseph (1994), Whither Socialism, Cambridge: MIT Press 22. Tyler, William, “Technical Efficiency in Production in a Developing Country: An Empirical Examination of the Brzilian Plastics and Steel Industry,” Oxford Economic Papers, 1979, pp. 477-495. 23. Weiss John (1995), Mexico: Comparative performance of state and private industrial corporations in Paul Cook and Colin Kirkpatrick (ed), Privatization policy and performance- international perspectives, Prentice- Hall, pp 213-224 24. World Bank (1992), Privatization- the lessons of experience, Washington D.C. 25. Wortzel, Heidi V., and Lawrence H. Wortzel, 1989, Privatization: Not the only answer, World Development, 633-641. 26. Yunker, J.A., “Economic Performance of Public and Private Enterprise: The Case of U.S. Electric Utilities,” Journal of Economics and Business, 1975, pp 60-67 27. Vickers . and G.Yarrow (1988), Privatization: an Economic Analysis, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press
T.T. Ram Mohan, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad
- 18 -
T.T. Ram Mohan, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Privatization in India Essay
  • Privatization Essay
  • privatization Essay
  • Privatization In india Essay
  • privatization Essay
  • Privatization Essay
  • Lpg in India Liberlization Privatization Globalization Essay
  • Privatization in Nepal Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free