Political objectives and privatization decisions

In early Romanian privatization a group of firms was explicitly banned from privatization. We use this institutional feature to test which factors contributed to the selection of firms for long‐term state ownership, and find that politicians sheltered from privatization large and inefficient firms which paid low wages and had high overdue payments. These results are consistent with minimization of employment losses, even if efficiency enhancement of privatization had to be sacrificed. We conjecture that the unfavourable economic conditions bringing large employment losses motivated Romanian politicians to fear the possible negative employment effects of privatization.     

The results of ‘mass privatization’in Romania: A first empirical study1

This paper provides an assessment of the contribution to privatization in Romania of the 1995-96 Mass Privatization Programme (MPP), which offered shares in nearly 5,000 companies to citizens in exchange for coupons. Analysing a comprehensive database of MPP companies, we find that an average of only 18.7 per cent of these companies' shares were actually transferred to Romanian citizens, and only 7.8 per cent of the companies were majority privatized (on a size-weighted basis). We estimate that the MPP accounted for only about 5.5 per cent of the value of state-owned enterprise assets inherited from the socialist period. The design of the programme created highly dispersed ownership structures, which is likely to generate particularly difficult problems in the many small companies in the programme. We place our findings in the context of the history of Romanian privatization policies since 1990, and provide some comparisons with mass privatization programmes in other countries. We also analyse the implications of the MPP for the corporate governance and the restructuring of enterprises.     

Employment adjustment in the global crisis

This paper analyzes the employment adjustment of domestic, foreign and state‐owned companies before and during the global crisis. Using Hungarian firm‐level data for the period between 2006 and 2012 and matching foreign and state‐owned firms to domestic enterprises by industry and employment, it finds that the net job creation rate is similar in domestic and state‐owned firms while it is larger by 3.5 percent in foreign‐owned enterprises before the crisis. Domestic and foreign‐owned firms react to the crisis in very similar fashion by dropping net job creation by about 4 percentage points. Contrary to this behaviour, state‐owned enterprises do not decrease net job creation in some, and increase it by 3.5‐6 percent in other regressions.     

Privatization Methods and Productivity Effects in Romanian Industrial Enterprises

Comprehensive panel data on privatization transactions and labor productivity in Romanian industrial corporations are used to describe the postprivatization ownership structure and to estimate the effect of Romania's diverse privatization policies on firm performance. The econometric results show consistently positive, highly significant effects of private ownership on labor productivity growth; the point estimates imply an increased 1.0 to 1.7% growth for a 10% rise in private shareholding. The strongest estimated impacts are associated with sales to outside blockholders; insider transfers and mass privatization are estimated to have significantly smaller, although still positive, effects on firm performance. J. Comp. Econ., December 2002, 30(4), pp. 657–682. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Central European University; and Budapest University of Economic Sciences, Central European University. © 2002 Association for Comparative Economic Studies. Published by Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: G32, G34, L32, L33, P20, P31.