IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joaaec/15204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rural Development, Privatization And Public Choice: Substance Depends Upon Process

Author

Listed:
  • Hite, James C.

Abstract

Whether or not privatization facilitates rural development depends upon what rural development means. In practice, rural development often is the result of a struggle between rent defenders and rent seekers. A positivist concept of rural development is proposed, and the institutions of public choice are examined to determine how they might influence privatization decisions. The conclusion is that whether or not privatization improves efficiency of adjustment in rural economies depends upon the specifics of political deals required to achieve a particular act of privatization.

Suggested Citation

  • Hite, James C., 1993. "Rural Development, Privatization And Public Choice: Substance Depends Upon Process," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(01), pages 1-10, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:15204
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.15204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/15204/files/25010089.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.15204?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buchanan, James M, 1987. "The Constitution of Economic Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 243-250, June.
    2. Wenders, John T, 1987. "On Perfect Rent Dissipation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 456-459, June.
    3. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, December.
    4. David E. M. Sappington & Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1987. "Privatization, information and incentives," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(4), pages 567-585.
    5. Boardman, Anthony E & Vining, Aidan R, 1989. "Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 1-33, April.
    6. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1991. "Economic Perspectives on Privatization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 111-132, Spring.
    7. Shapiro, C. & Willing, D.R., 1990. "Economic Rationales For The Scope Of Privatization," Papers 41, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elena G. Irwin & Andrew M. Isserman & Maureen Kilkenny & Mark D. Partridge, 2010. "A Century of Research on Rural Development and Regional Issues," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(2), pages 522-553.
    2. James Hite, 1995. "We are not Rats: Seeking a Regional Version of Austrian Economics," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 18(2), pages 177-183, April.
    3. Horna, J. Daniela & von Oppen, Matthias, 2006. "Supporting Agricultural Extension: Could Farmers Contribute?," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25324, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gong, Stephen X.H. & Cullinane, Kevin & Firth, Michael, 2012. "The impact of airport and seaport privatization on efficiency and performance: A review of the international evidence and implications for developing countries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 37-47.
    2. Villalonga, Belen, 2000. "Privatization and efficiency: differentiating ownership effects from political, organizational, and dynamic effects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 43-74, May.
    3. Adler, Nicole & Liebert, Vanessa, 2014. "Joint impact of competition, ownership form and economic regulation on airport performance and pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 92-109.
    4. Wolf, C. & Pollitt, M.G., 2008. "Privatising national oil companies: Assessing the impact on firm performance," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0811, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Willner, Johan & Parker, David, 2002. "The Relative Performance of Public and Private Enterprise Under Conditions of Active and Passive Ownership," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30591, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    6. Germà Bel, 2010. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany1," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 63(1), pages 34-55, February.
    7. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1991. "Economic Perspectives on Privatization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 111-132, Spring.
    8. A. Asquer, 2014. "Explaining Partial Privatization Of Public Service Provision: The Emergence Of Mixed Ownership Water Firms In Italy (1994–2009)," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(1), pages 11-30, March.
    9. Saul Estrin, 2020. "Towards A Framework To Understand The Relative Performance Of State-Owned Firms," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 65(225), pages 11-32, April – J.
    10. Nepal, Rabindra & Foster, John, 2015. "Electricity networks privatization in Australia: An overview of the debate," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 12-24.
    11. Estrin, Saul, 2020. "Towards a framework to understand the relative performance of state-owned firms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 109830, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Hyvärinen, Jari, 2004. "EU Outsourcing to the East, Governance and Innovation Systems in the Baltic Countries - A Three-Stage Approach," Discussion Papers 934, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    13. Germa Bel & Anton Costas, 2006. "Do Public Sector Reforms Get Rusty? Local Privatization in Spain," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24.
    14. Alessandro MARRA, 2007. "Internal Regulation By Mixed Enterprises: The Case Of The Italian Water Sector," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 78(2), pages 245-275, June.
    15. Filippo Belloc, 2014. "Innovation in State-Owned Enterprises: Reconsidering the Conventional Wisdom," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(3), pages 821-848.
    16. Roland Zullo, 2019. "Explaining Privatization Failure: The Vice of Sweet Carrots and Hard Sticks," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 51(1), pages 111-128, March.
    17. Alberto Cavaliere & Simona Scabrosetti, 2008. "Privatization And Efficiency: From Principals And Agents To Political Economy," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 685-710, September.
    18. Barbara Blaszczyk & Iraj Hashi & Alexander Radygin & Richard Woodward, 2003. "Corporate Governance and Ownership Structure in the Transition: The Current State of Knowledge and Where to Go from Here," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0264, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Stefan Buehler & Simon Wey, 2014. "When Do State-Owned Firms Crowd Out Private Investment?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 319-330, September.
    20. Máximo Torero, 2002. "Peruvian Privatization: Impacts On Firm Performance," Research Department Publications 3169, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Community/Rural/Urban Development;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:15204. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/saeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.