Defence Industry Transformation in Russia: Evidence from a Longitudinal Survey

The article is devoted to the new phenomena in the market transformation of the Russian defence-industrial complex. Based on the data generated by the repeated survey of the CEOs (general directors) of defence enterprises in 1995‐99, it examines economic performance of enterprises, their conflicts with the government and efforts at internal restructuring brought about by reductions of Russia's defence spending, mass privatisation and opening up of the domestic market. We found that despite the dramatic reduction in defence orders, inconsistent government policies and extremely unfavourable macroeconomic environment, the Russian defence industry has made significant progress in its adjustment to the market. Even before the devaluation of the ruble in the autumn of 1998 economic performance of defence enterprises had been gradually improving; it entered a virtual boom since then. Contrary to widely held views, the painful experience of the 1990s has not made the top managers of the defence industry more hostile to reforms: at the end of the decade they were generally more supportive of the market than in 1995.     

Determinants of Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: Description of a Survey in Russian Industry

The survey described in this article collects data on enterprise restructuring, ownership, competition, budget constraints and, particularly, institutions in Russian industry, covering the period between the start of 1992 and September 1999. On their own, the survey answers show a devastating restructuring crisis, massive privatisation, rather weak competition, unexpectedly hard budget constraints, an overwhelmingly negative and relatively positive assessment of formal and informal institutions respectively, and largely the same ruling networks as before the start of market reforms. Ironically, tentative results based on this survey indicate that important determinants of enterprise restructuring in Russian industry are exactly those on which least reform has been accomplished: stronger competition and better institutions go with more restructuring, while privatisation and harder budget constraints do not. The substitution, to some extent, of informal for formal institutions may have prevented even worse restructuring figures, but better formal institutions in general would have led to further improvements.     

A review of bank performance during transition in central Europe

This study, based on panel data from 189 industrial enterprises in 1992‐96, shows that privatisation 'on average' produces little improvement in performance of Russian enterprises. However, disaggregating the process, we reveal that methods of privatisation do influence performance but the impact is not always positive. The state seems to be a passive shareholder. At the same time, our results suggest that majority state ownership is preferable to a state minority stockholding, possibly because the absence of a monitoring shareholder in the latter case does not permit managers to achieve their own objectives at the expense of other shareholders.     

Privatisation and Transition in Albania

This article considers the privatisation policy and its role in the transition to a market economy in Albania. The disintegration of the old regime took place over a much longer time than in other Central and East European countries, resulting in chaos and a political vacuum in which no systematic or effective policy could be formulated. The new government, committed to fundamental reforms necessary for a market economy, did not take power until after the second general election in March 1992. One outcome of this long pre-transition period was that the privatisation programme had to evolve gradually in the course of transformation, without ever having been planned in a comprehensive and integrated manner. Privatisation proceeded on five different fronts: small privatisation, privatisation of agriculture, housing, small and medium-sized enterprises and mass privatisation. The article discusses the progress of each aspect and provides up-to-date information and data on their progress. The privatisation of agriculture and housing were the most crucial aspects of the overall policy, with significant impacts on economic growth and the progress of the transformation programme. The privatised agricultural sector grew very rapidly and made a major contribution to pulling the whole economy out of the 'transformational recession'. Privatised housing created a significant wealth effect amongst the urban population, providing many of them with collateral or start-up capital. The privatisation of state-owned enterprises, however, was carried out with much more difficulty and controversy. Although auctions were to be the main method of transfer, ensuring a significant income for the treasury, in practice many enterprises were privatised through other methods, bringing in less income and giving rise to allegations of political favouritism. Another aspect of privatisation was the weak corporate governance mechanism which replaced state ownership. Many small and medium-sized enterprises (probably about half) were sold or transferred to their employees, without any outsider interest. The performance of this sector has to be monitored closely in order to assess the impact of massive insider privatisation, reminiscent of Russia's privatisation programme. Mass privatisation too, by distributing enterprise shares amongst the general public, resulted in the increased power of insiders. The shares of nearly 100 enterprises were transferred to the private sector over the first year of the implementation of this programme. Although the privatisation programme progressed very rapidly, no serious attention was paid to problems of corporate governance. Without concentrated ownership or the involvement of financial intermediaries to oversee and monitor the managers, it is unlikely that the expected efficiency gains will be realised. The political crisis resulting from the collapse of informal financial schemes brought the whole reform process, including the privatisation programme, to a halt in early 1997. It is expected that, with a new government in power, there will be a new push for reforms and an increased pace of privatisation. It is hoped that the renewed efforts will also deal with the shortcomings of the previous schemes-particularly the corporate governance issues.     

The Role of Foreign Direct Investment in the Privatisation and Restructuring of the Czech Motor Industry

Foreign direct investment (FDI) has been considered one of the crucial factors of a successful economic transformation in Central and Eastern Europe. This article investigates the role of FDI in the privatisation and restructuring of the Czech motor industry in the 1990s. In particular, it examines how governmental policies towards FDI affected FDI inflows, the immediate effects of FDI at the enterprise level, and the contested nature of this change. Advantages of foreign ownership for Czech enterprises, such as access to investment capital, access to sale and distribution networks of parent companies and technology transfer are discussed, as well as examples of failures of FDI to result in a successful enterprise restructuring. The information presented is based upon in-depth interviews with top managers of twenty component suppliers, governmental officials and vehicle makers in the Czech Republic as well as on the secondary data.     

Privatisation in Poland: Ten Years After

The purpose of this article is to compare economic discussion on privatisation, expected privatisation outcomes and actual results in Poland. First it discusses the privatisation of state enterprises in the broader context of the economic transformation programme designed and introduced at the end of 1989 and the beginning of 1990. It examines the choice of privatisation methods, the political economy of privatisation and the three major policy issues: pace of privatisation, sequence of privatisation and the authority to initiate and carry out privatisation. The final section compares privatisation blueprints and actual results. The appendix presents a detailed technical guide to the privatisation methods in Poland and a basic set of figures illustrating the outcome.     

Post-privatisation ownership concentration: Determinants and influence on firm efficiency

With this study we aim to contribute to the empirical literature on privatisation processes by analysing the determinants of post-divestment private ownership concentration and its possible link to corporate efficiency. For Spanish firms, we find that the method of privatisation, the type of industry, the company’s size and its level of risk may help explain differences in private ownership concentration. We also find, after controlling for endogeneity, that ownership concentrated in the hands of private investors has a positive and significant effect on post-privatisation efficiency.     

Formal and real ownership structure of the Polish economy: state-owned versus state-controlled enterprises

This article analyses the difference between the state’s formal and real shares in the Polish economy. We identify two basic types of corporate control exercised by the state over enterprises through ownership (in the case of majority ownership) and non-ownership tools (in the case of minority ownership). Consequently, we distinguish between two types of state enterprises: state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and state-controlled enterprises (SCEs). In post-communist economies, SCEs mainly originate from so-called reluctant privatisation, in which the transfer of ownership rights takes place without the appropriate transfer of control rights. We discuss the tools of non-ownership control used by the state. Our estimates of the real share of state enterprises in the Polish economy (which include both SOEs and SCEs) show that it is almost two times higher than the formal share (only SOEs). The share of state enterprises is also highest in the group of Poland’s largest and most important firms. We conclude that the real importance of state enterprises in the Polish economy is much higher than might be expected if only the formal share of state ownership is taken into account.     

Privatisation and Crime

Abstract
While criminalisation of the Russian economy can partly be explained by privatisation in conditions of underdevelopment of free market institutions, the emphasis on privatisation as the prime cause of crime may lead to gross oversimplification. The present article claims that faster and more radical, rather than slower and partial, privatisation could create less room for criminal behaviour in Russia. Half-measures applied to privatise the Russian economy have contributed to prolonged uncertainty and to a blurred demarcation between the private and government sectors as well as between management and ownership in business enterprises. Prolonged coexistence of the two sectors creates too much opportunity for criminal behaviour. Moreover, an explanation of the growth in crime in Russia is impossible without analysing the legacies of the former communist system, the developments in politics (including demoralisation of the ex-communist state apparatus), cultural factors and the specific features of the privatisation as actually conducted .     

Is It a Few Days of Good Times and then Darkness Ensues? Long-Term Performance of an Industry after Broad Reforms and Privatisation

ABSTRACT

The long-run financial performances of privatised firms have rarely been investigated. This study examines the financial and operational performance within the Pakistani cement industry utilising two decades of post-privatisation data. Broadly speaking, regression analyses confirm that long-term positive impacts of reforms and privatisation on profitability, output and investment are uncertain. After controlling for firm, industry and economic factors, our estimates show that privatised firms initially improved their profitability but recorded a statistically significant decline over a longer period. The sale efficiency, capacity utilisation, and leverage indicators, however, improved over a considerably long post-ownership change period.     

The economic performance of state-owned enterprises in Central and Eastern Europe

This article explores the economic performance of state ownership in the largest non-financial enterprises operating in 13 post-socialist Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries over the period 2007–2013. The largest state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are selected based on the ‘Coface – 500 Top Companies in CEE’ list in 2013. Of these 500 enterprises, 69 were identified as state-owned. All originated in the socialist period. The majority of them are from Poland and Ukraine. SOEs hold a dominant position in energy supply, the oil and gas sector, and transport. We find that the persistence of state ownership in post-socialist countries is caused by incomplete privatisation and the presence of SOEs within strategic sectors. The economic performance of the largest state-owned companies is, on average, comparable to their private counterparts.     

Choice of Ownership Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from Estonia

This article uses panel data for a representative sample of Estonian enterprises to analyse diverse issues related to the determinants of ownership structures and ownership changes after privatisation. A key focus is to determine whether ownership changes are related to economic efficiency. While employee-owned firms are found to be much more prone than other firms to switch ownership categories, often ‘employee-owned’ firms remain ‘insider-owned’ as ownership passes from current employees to managers and former employees. Logit analysis of the determinants of ownership structures and ownership changes provides mixed support for several hypotheses. As predicted: (i) wealth and resource constraints play a crucial role in the determination of ownership, with foreigners buying firms with the highest equity levels and insiders buying firms with the lowest equity valuations; (ii) risk aversion explains subsequent ownership changes, especially away from employee ownership; (iii) allocation of ownership depends on the pre-privatisation origin and location of the firm, and these factors also influence subsequent ownership changes. Our findings provide mixed support for the hypothesis that ownership changes are related to economic efficiency.     

金融发展、企业特征与研发融资约束

基于2008-2014年沪深A股主板和中小企业板上市公司数据,实证研究金融发展能否缓解企业R&D融资约束、促进企业R&D投入,并进一步考察这种作用在规模、区域、所有权、行业等4种因素影响下的差异性。研究发现：金融发展能够显著缓解企业面临的R&D融资约束,并且这种缓解作用对小规模企业和民营企业更加明显;金融发展水平较高的东部地区能够在更大程度上促进企业研发投入,而中西部地区则未能有效刺激企业R&D支出;与高科技行业相比,非高科技行业能够从金融发展中获利更多,其R&D投入水平得到显著提高。     

产业集聚、所有制结构与外商投资企业的区位选择

产业集聚理论认为,同一产业内的企业由于正的外部性具有聚集在同一地理范围内的倾向。在本文中,我们运用条件Logit概率模型,结合国家统计局对外商投资企业的调查数据,估计产业集聚程度、所有制结构以及其他传统的地区特征因素对外商投资企业地理区位选择的影响。我们发现存在非常显著的集聚效应,这意味着偶然的政策和历史因素将长久地影响企业生产活动的地理分布,这对理解中国的地区差异具有重要意义。     

The Ambiguity of Joint Asset Ownership: Cautionary Tales From Uganda and South Africa

ABSTRACT

This study uses individual-level survey data from women and men in Uganda and South Africa to examine coupled women's joint ownership of land and housing. It compares women's control over and benefits from jointly held land and housing with those of coupled women not owning land or housing at all and coupled women owning them solely. The lack of a clear and consistent advantage of joint ownership potentially arises from frequent disagreement within couples about whether the land or house is jointly owned. The study serves as a reminder of the complexities of joint ownership in practice, particularly within families, that need to be considered in order for coupled women to benefit from joint asset ownership. Efforts promoting joint ownership, for example, joint titling and marital property laws supporting joint ownership, should not only consider these complexities but also establish and communicate clear and enforceable rules for joint ownership.     

WHAT DO CITIZENS THINK ABOUT PUBLIC ENTERPRISES? SUBJECTIVE SURVEY DATA ON THE LEGITIMACY OF THE ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES OF THE GERMAN PUBLIC SECTOR

We analyse the legitimacy of public enterprises that perform economic activities by focusing on the citizens’ subjective preferences, i.e. determining their political legitimacy. Using data from a representative survey conducted among 318 citizens of the German state of Rhineland‐Palatine, we explore determinants for the support of either privatisation efforts or the instrumental thesis, a widespread principle in German‐speaking countries, which considers public enterprises solely as instruments to fulfil economic policy objectives. Our results indicate that the respondents’ perception of the efficiency of public enterprises as well as their personal economic situation are important factors for the support of privatisation. The influential factors for the use of public enterprises as policy instruments are political ideology, the perception of a higher security of supplying goods and services as well as opinions regarding corporate social responsibility. The subjective preferences of a (democratic) country's citizens are thus an important reason why the public sector should or should not play an active part in providing goods and services. This can play an important role when decision makers from the public sector are keen to take into account the citizens’ approval or disapproval of privatisation measures.     

What Drives the Operating Performance of Privatised Firms?

Using a panel data analysis of Spanish privatised firms, we study how different factors influence the operating performance of divested companies. The results show that it is not privatisation per se but other factors that matter. After controlling for possible sample selection bias related to government timing of divestments, we find that the greater the relinquishment of State control and the smaller the percentage of ownership held by managers and/or employees, the better the firms’ post‐privatisation performance. Moreover, privatisations that are accompanied by liberalisation programmes and occur during buoyant economic cycles turn out to be more successful.     

Enterprise performance and ownership: The case of Ukraine

In this paper, we use a unique enterprise level random survey of 150 firms in Ukraine to test hypotheses on the relationship between enterprise performance and ownership in transitional economies. In particular, we explore whether privatisation has yielded improved company performance and whether specific ownership forms (insider, manager, worker, and outsider) have led to differentiated behaviour at the enterprise level. Our analysis also explores the determinants and ramifications of barter, a widespread phenomenon across the former Soviet Union. We refute the hypothesis that private ownership per se is associated with improved performance, and try to isolate any positive performance effects from outsider ownership. However, we do isolate some clear ownership effects, associated with insider ownership. We find barter to be associated with lower profitability, and to be less common in privatised firms.