An analysis of entry-then-privatization model: welfare and policy implications

This study formulates a new model of mixed oligopolies in free entry markets. A state-owned public enterprise is established before the game, private enterprises enter the market, and then the government chooses the degree of privatization of the public enterprise (termed the entry-then-privatization model herein). We find that under general demand and cost functions, the timing of privatization does not affect consumer surplus or the output of each private firm, while it does affect the equilibrium degree of privatization, number of entering firms, and output of the public firm. The equilibrium degree of privatization is too high (low) for both domestic and world welfare if private firms are domestic (foreign).     

The nexus of market concentration and privatization policy in mixed oligopoly

We analyze the nexus of privatization policy and market concentration ratio in a mixed oligopoly where one public enterprise competes against n private firms with asymmetric costs. It is shown that the nexus of privatization policy and market concentration ratio is highly sensitive to the curvature of the market demand. When the market demand is concave (convex) to the origin, a higher concentration ratio leads to a higher (smaller) degree of privatization; whereas in the case of linear demand, the privatization ratio is independent of market concentration ratio.     

Privatization,Underpricing, and Welfare in the Presence of Foreign Competition

We analyze privatization in a differentiated oligopoly setting with a domestic public firm and foreign profit‐maximizing firms. In particular, we examine pricing below marginal cost by the public firm, the optimal degree of privatization, and the relationship between privatization and foreign ownership restrictions. When market structure is exogenous, partial privatization of the public firm improves welfare by reducing public sector losses. Surprisingly, even at the optimal level of privatization, the public firm's price lies strictly below marginal cost, resulting in losses. Our analysis also reveals a potential conflict between privatization and investment liberalization (i.e., relaxing restrictions on foreign ownership) in the short run. With endogenous market structure (i.e., free entry of foreign firms), partial privatization improves welfare through an additional channel: more foreign varieties. Furthermore, at the optimal level of privatization, the public firm's price lies strictly above marginal cost and earns positive profits.     

TO LIST OR TO MERGE? ENDOGENOUS CHOICE OF PRIVATIZATION METHODS IN A MIXED MARKET

When and how to privatize a public firm? This paper suggests that a welfare‐enhancing privatization may be triggered by a negative demand shock. When the shock is relatively mild, it is optimal to privatize a public firm by means of stock market listings; when the shock is sufficiently large, a public–private‐firm merger becomes optimal. This paper also considers a government that cares about privatization revenues and about social welfare. It characterizes how the weight attached to privatization revenues and the improvement in production efficiency of the privatized public firm through a stock market listing may affect the government's choices concerning privatization.     

Price control and privatization in a mixed duopoly with a public social enterprise

We explore the issue of the optimal degree of privatization for a public firm that does not need to care about its rival’s profit completely. We find that the optimal privatization of a public social enterprise under exogenous price control depends on the level of the regulated price. Namely, when the regulated price is low (medium, high), the optimal privatization is partial privatization (complete privatization, completely public owned). If the price control is optimized by maximizing social welfare, then the optimal privatization is complete privatization. For the case of the traditionally defined public firm, its optimal privatization is completely public owned when the price control is exogenously given. If the price control is endogenously determined, then privatization policy is redundant.     

Lack of commitment to future privatization policies may lead to worst welfare outcome

We investigate the welfare consequences of a lack of commitment to future privatization policies. The government implements a privatization policy after the competition structure is determined by the entry of private firms. We find that in an equilibrium, the government fully privatizes (nationalizes) a public firm if private firms expect that the government fully privatizes (nationalizes) the public firm. This is because an increase in the number of firms entering a market increases the government's incentive to privatize the public firm, which mitigates future competition and stimulates entries. The full-privatization equilibrium is the worst privatization policy among all possible (either equilibrium or non-equilibrium) privatization policies for welfare because it causes excessive market entry of private firms. Partial commitment of a minimal public ownership share may mitigate this problem.     

Determinants of privatization of public corporations: evidence from the Japanese experience

The main purpose of this study is to find factors affecting privatization decisions. This study investigates the determinants of privatization by applying the probit model for a data set of special public corporations in Japan. In December 2001, the Japanese government made a resolution to consider the privatization of special public corporations, evaluating 74 special public corporations for possible privatization. In the empirical analysis on the determinants of privatization, we find that among several factors affecting privatization decisions, two are important—the market condition factor and the policy/regulation factor. As for market conditions, a public corporation which exists in a commercialized industry is about 20% more likely to be privatized than others. As for the policy and regulation factor, the public corporation’s privatization under a single regulator is about 25% more likely, compared with the public corporation’s privatization under multiple regulators.     

Mixed markets in bilateral monopoly

Should we expect to see patterns in the privatization of a public bilateral monopoly? To address this question, the paper analyzes the welfare implications of privatization and examines the interplay of firm location in the vertical stream, differential priorities on private and public profit in welfare and cost asymmetries in a mixed bilateral monopoly. We conclude that merely comparing cost savings from privatization upstream/downstream, is inadequate. If public profit is relatively insignificant in welfare, then only relative cost savings matter. However, if public profit is sufficiently important, then privatization downstream will maximize welfare if it is as (or more) cost effective compared to privatization upstream. We find that downstream privatization can be better than upstream privatization even when the latter is more cost effective than the former.     

R&D活动、市场势力与社会福利效应*——基于中国企业的实证分析

R&D活动提高企业市场势力的途径是什么？R&D活动改善社会福利的途径与机制是否存在行业差异？本文利用2004-2007年中国工业企业的面板数据,在市场势力的度量模型--新产业组织生产法模型的基础上加入企业的R&D活动因素,直接测算我国工业企业的市场势力,并基于企业所在行业、企业所有制和企业行为特征的不同视角,考察R&D活动对企业市场势力的影响,以及降低成本和提高产品价格两条路径对不同行业的社会福利效应的影响。       

Mixed oligopoly, optimal privatization, and foreign penetration

This paper examines the impact of foreign penetration on privatization in a mixed oligopolistic market. In contrast to the simple framework of single domestic market with foreign entry by entry mode of foreign direct investment (FDI) or exports, our result shows that government should increase the degree of privatization along with increasing proportion of domestic ownership of multinational firms. Furthermore, we show that an increase in domestic ownership of multinational firms raises all domestic private firms' profit and social welfare, while it may either increase or decrease public firm's profit. With the aid of numerical example, intensive competition from private firms in general will enhance the degree of privatization gradually; in particular, the degree of privatization is lower in the presence of multinational firms.     

Privatization Neutrality Theorem: When a Public Firm Pursues General Objectives

This paper examines the privatization neutrality theorem when a public firm pursues general objectives other than welfare maximization. This theorem states that when the government gives firms optimal subsidies, welfare is exactly the same before and after privatization. However, we present a seemingly paradoxical result. When a public firm incorrectly assumes that subsidies change the welfare size, privatization is necessarily welfare neutral, whereas when the public firm correctly recognizes that subsidies only bring about income redistribution, without affecting welfare, the situations in which neutrality holds are limited.     

ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES OF A PUBLIC ENTERPRISE IN OLIGOPOLY REVISITED: AN EXTENSION TO STACKELBERG COMPETITION

This paper revisits De Fraja and Delbono (1989), which is the seminal paper on mixed oligopoly, in order to pay more attention to Stackelberg competition. First, we show that, even in Cournot competition, if the number of private firms is sufficiently small, privatization necessarily reduces social welfare. Second, we demonstrate that when a public firm is a Stackelberg leader before and after privatization, privatization necessarily reduces welfare irrespective of the number of private firms. Moreover, we show that even when a public firm remains a follower, privatization reduces welfare if the number of private firms is relatively small.     

R&D competition between public and private sectors

We investigate a mixed market where a welfare-maximizing public research institute competes against profit-maximizing private firms. We investigate R&D competition by using a standard model of patent races where each firm chooses both its innovation size and R&D expenditure. We find that the innovation size (R&D expenditure) chosen by the public institute is too small (too large) from the viewpoint of social welfare, respectively, and so the government should control the public institute appropriately. We also discuss the welfare implications of privatization of public research institutes.     

Elimination of Social Security in a Dynastic Framework

Much of the existing literature on social security has taken the extreme assumption that individuals have little or no altruism; this paper takes an opposite assumption that there is full two-sided altruism. When households insure members that belong to the same family line, privatizing social security can gain public support. In our benchmark model calibrated to the U.S. economy, privatization without compensation is favoured by 52% of the population. If social security participants are fully compensated for their contributions, and the transition to privatization is financed by a combination of debt and a consumption tax, 58% experience a welfare gain. These gains and the resulting public support for social security reform depend critically on a flexible labour market. If the labour supply elasticity is low, then support for privatization disappears.     

我国水务产业市场准入问题研究

随着公用事业改革和城市化进程的推进,国内外民营资本进入供水和污水处理产业的期望越来越大。如何根据水务产业的特点和我国水务产业的实际状况,借鉴国外引入竞争机制的经验,寻求我国水务产业引入竞争机制和民营化的途径,是当前推进水务产业改革和发展的关键。从水务产业市场准入的角度探讨我国水务产业引入竞争机制和民营化途径,对我国水务产业市场准入改革具有重要意义。     

Imported inputs and privatization in downstream mixed oligopoly with foreign ownership

This paper examines welfare implications of privatization in a mixed oligopoly with vertically related markets, where an upstream foreign monopolist sells an essential input to public and private firms located downstream in the domestic country. The impact on domestic welfare of privatizing the downstream public firm is shown to contain three effects. The first is an output distortion effect, which negatively affects welfare since privatization decreases the production of final good for consumption. The second is an input price lowering effect resulting from a decrease in derived demand for the input. When the level of privatization increases, a decrease in final good production lowers input demand, causing input price to decline and domestic welfare to increase. The third is a rent‐leaking effect associated with foreign ownership in the downstream private firm. The rival domestic firm strategically increases its final good production, causing profits accrued to foreign investors to increase and domestic welfare to decline. Without foreign ownership in the downstream private firm, the optimal policy toward the public firm is complete privatization as the output distortion effect is dominated by the input price lowering effect. With foreign ownership, however, complete privatization can never be socially optimal due to the additional negative impact on domestic welfare of the rent‐leaking effect. We further discuss implications for domestic welfare under different privatization schemes (e.g., selling the privatization shares to the upstream foreign monopolist or to the rival domestic firm).     

Partial Ownership For The Public Firm And Competition

This paper investigates the issue of partial ownership (partial privatization) of a state-owned public enterprise. We elaborate on the framework of Matsumura (1998) by allowing for managerial inefficiency, and show that under moderate conditions partial ownership is a reasonable choice of government in a monopoly market as well as in a mixed duopoly market, where a public firm competes with a profit-maximizing private firm. We also provide some economic rationale on the result that neither full privatization nor full nation-alization is optimum.     

What role should public enterprises play in free-entry markets?

We investigate a desirable role of public enterprise in mixed oligopoly in free-entry markets. We compare the following three cases: (a) a public firm produces before private firms (public leadership), (b) all firms produce simultaneously (Cournot), (c) a public firm produces after private firms (private leadership). We find that private leadership is best and public leadership is worst, in contrast to the cases without entries and exits of private firms. We also investigate the welfare implication of privatization. We find that some important results shown by existing works do not hold under private leadership.     

WELFARE ANALYSIS OF PRIVATIZATION IN A MIXED MARKET WITH BARGAINING

The author analyzes the welfare effects of privatization in a mixed duopoly model in which the wage rate for the privatized firm is determined by Nash bargaining beforehand. The evaluations are based on three-stage privatization frameworks respectively under two regimes: Cournot competition and a public firm acting as a Stackelberg leader. The author finds that the optimal degrees of privatization from the viewpoint of social welfare may be different for various types of competition. The article also shows that even optimal privatization set by a welfare-maximization government may not guarantee welfare improvement, owing to the interference of wage bargaining. (JEL D60, D78, L32, L33 )     

The Optimal Privatization Policies under an International Mixed Duopoly

This paper explores the socially optimal privatization policies under the setting of international mixed duopoly. We find that partial privatization is socially optimal under Cournot competition and private leadership competition, whereas full nationalization is socially optimal under public leadership competition. Moreover, the equilibrium social welfare under private leadership competition is higher than that observed under Cournot competition and that observed under private leadership competition, which differs from the findings of Matsumura ( 2003b ). We also show that the endogenous timing game has a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium outcome, under which the government chooses a partial privatization policy, and private leadership competition emerges as the optimal output decision sequence of firms. An important policy implication from this paper is that the government should partially privatize the public firm and facilitate the emergence of private leadership competition in an international mixed market.