IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecmode/v28y2011i6p2502-2508.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unions, government's preference, and privatization

Author

Listed:
  • Choi, Kangsik

Abstract

By introducing the government's preference for tax revenues into the theoretical framework of unionized mixed oligopolies, this study investigates the efficiency of privatization. The results are twofold. First, regardless of the government's preference for tax revenues and the number of private firms, the government and the public firm do not always have an incentive to privatize the public firm even if the government places lesser emphasis on the tax revenues than on social welfare. Second, social welfare increases with an increased number of private firms regardless of the government's preference for tax revenues and decreases with the government's preference for tax revenues regardless of the number of private firms. Hence, the government can use tax more efficiently as a commitment device to control the union's wage demand so as to maintain lower wage level under unionized mixed oligopoly.

Suggested Citation

  • Choi, Kangsik, 2011. "Unions, government's preference, and privatization," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2502-2508.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:28:y:2011:i:6:p:2502-2508
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2011.06.025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026499931100157X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econmod.2011.06.025?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haskel, Jonathan & Sanchis, Amparo, 1995. "Privatisation and X-Inefficiency: A Bargaining Approach," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 301-321, September.
    2. Edwards, Jeremy & Keen, Michael, 1996. "Tax competition and Leviathan," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 113-134, January.
    3. Ishida, Junichiro & Matsushima, Noriaki, 2009. "Should civil servants be restricted in wage bargaining? A mixed-duopoly approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 634-646, April.
    4. Oates, Wallace E, 1985. "Searching for Leviathan: An Empirical Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 748-757, September.
    5. Joanna Poyago-Theotoky, 2001. "Mixed oligopoly, subsidization and the order of firms' moves: an irrelevance result," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(3), pages 1-5.
    6. Brulhart, Marius & Jametti, Mario, 2006. "Vertical versus horizontal tax externalities: An empirical test," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 2027-2062, November.
    7. Mujumdar, Sudesh & Pal, Debashis, 1998. "Effects of indirect taxation in a mixed oligopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 199-204, February.
    8. Zax, Jeffrey S, 1989. "Is There a Leviathan in Your Neighborhood?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 560-567, June.
    9. White, Mark D., 2002. "Political manipulation of a public firm's objective function," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 487-499, December.
    10. De Fraja, Giovanni, 1991. "Efficiency and Privatisation in Imperfectly Competitive Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 311-321, March.
    11. repec:bla:econom:v:60:y:1993:i:238:p:161-81 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2002:i:1:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Michael Rauscher, 2000. "Interjurisdictional Competition and Public-Sector Prodigality: The Triumph of the Market over the State?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 57(1), pages 89-105, September.
    14. Johan Willner, 2006. "A Mixed Oligopoly Where Private Firms Survive Welfare Maximisation," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 235-251, December.
    15. Bibhas Saha, 2009. "Mixed ownership in a mixed duopoly with differentiated products," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 25-43, September.
    16. Oswald, Andrew J & Turnbull, Peter J, 1985. "Pay and Employment Determination in Britain: What Are Labour," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 1(2), pages 80-97, Summer.
    17. De Fraja, Giovanni, 1993. "Unions and Wages in Public and Private Firms: A Game-Theoretic Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 457-469, July.
    18. Schmidt, Klaus M, 1996. "The Costs and Benefits of Privatization: An Incomplete Contracts Approach," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, April.
    19. Hideya Kato, 2008. "Privatization and government preference," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(40), pages 1-7.
    20. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:40:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. White, Mark D., 1996. "Mixed oligopoly, privatization and subsidization," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 189-195, November.
    22. Schmidt, Klaus M., 1996. "Incomplete contracts and privatization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 569-579, April.
    23. Gareth Myles, 2002. "Mixed oligopoly, subsidization and the order of firms' moves: an irrelevance result for the general case," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(1), pages 1-6.
    24. Forbes, Kevin F & Zampelli, Ernest M, 1989. "Is Leviathan a Mythical Beast?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 568-577, June.
    25. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, April.
    26. Michael J. Keen & Christos Kotsogiannis, 2002. "Does Federalism Lead to Excessively High Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 363-370, March.
    27. Oates, Wallace E, 1989. "Searching for Leviathan: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 578-583, June.
    28. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1989. "Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 302-311, April.
    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. Choi, Kangsik, 2012. "Indirect Taxation and Privatization in a Model of Government's Preference," MPRA Paper 42968, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Toshihiro Matsumura & Yasunori Okumura, 2014. "Comparison between specific taxation and volume quotas in a free entry Cournot oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 125-132, October.
    3. Lee, Ki-Dong & Lee, Woohyung, 2016. "Exports versus export-platform FDI with endogenous wage determination," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 479-489.
    4. Nakamura, Tamotsu & Takami, Hiroyuki, 2015. "Nash bargaining and partial privatization in mixed oligopoly," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 315-321.
    5. Choi, Kangsik, 2013. "Unionized Mixed Oligopoly and Privatization with Excess Burden of Taxation," MPRA Paper 51156, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Choi, Kangsik, 2009. "Government's Preference and Timing of Endogenous Wage Setting: Perspectives on Privatization and Mixed Duopoly," MPRA Paper 17221, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kangsik, Choi, 2009. "Privatization, Government's Preference and Unionization Structure: A Mixed Oligopoly Approach," MPRA Paper 13028, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kangsik Choi & Yuanzhu Lu, 2009. "A Model Of Endogenous Payoff Motives And Endogenous Timing In A Mixed Duopoly," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 203-223, September.
    4. Kangsik, Choi, 2009. "Endogenous Timing with Government's Preference and Privatization," MPRA Paper 13844, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Choi, Kangsik, 2012. "Indirect Taxation and Privatization in a Model of Government's Preference," MPRA Paper 42968, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Kangsik, Choi, 2008. "Cournot-Bertrand competition in a unionized mixed duopoly," MPRA Paper 12787, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Dec 2008.
    7. Choi, Kangsik, 2013. "Unionized Mixed Oligopoly and Privatization with Excess Burden of Taxation," MPRA Paper 51156, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Choi, Kangsik, 2008. "Comparing Cournot and Bertrand Competition in a Unionized Mixed Duopoly," MPRA Paper 15468, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 27 May 2009.
    9. Choi, Kangsik, 2010. "Strategic Budget Constraints of Public Firm under Bertrand Competition of Unionized Mixed Duopoly," MPRA Paper 19969, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Natália Monteiro & Miguel Portela & Odd Straume, 2011. "Firm Ownership and Rent Sharing," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 210-236, September.
    11. Arup Bose & Barnali Gupta, 2013. "Mixed markets in bilateral monopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 110(2), pages 141-164, October.
    12. Kangsik Choi, 2009. "Privatization and Government's Preference under Mixed Oligopoly: A Generalization," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(2), pages 861-866.
    13. Kojun Hamada, 2018. "Privatization Neutrality Theorem: When a Public Firm Pursues General Objectives," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 59-68, March.
    14. J Hindriks & D Claude, 2006. "Strategic Privatization and Regulation Policy in Mixed Markets," The IUP Journal of Managerial Economics, IUP Publications, vol. 0(1), pages 7-26, February.
    15. Amarjyoti Mahanta, 2019. "Endogenous strategic variable in a mixed duopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 128(1), pages 47-65, September.
    16. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2013. "A Two-production-period Model with State-owned and Labour-managed Firms," Institutions and Economies (formerly known as International Journal of Institutions and Economies), Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya, vol. 5(1), pages 41-56, April.
    17. Kazuhiro Ohnishi, 2014. "Sequential Mixed Competition with a Foreign Joint-stock Firm," International Journal of Social Sciences and Management Studies (IJSSMS), The Economics and Social Development Organization (TESDO), vol. 1(2), pages 38-52, June.
    18. Paolo Liberati & Agnese Sacchi, 2013. "Tax decentralization and local government size," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 183-205, October.
    19. Wang F.S., Leonard & Chen, Tai-Liang, 2011. "Privatization, Efficiency Gap, and Subsidization with Excess Taxation Burden," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 52(1), pages 55-68, June.
    20. Russo, Massimo, 1998. "Policy coordination in the European Union (from the EMS to EMU)," Sede de la CEPAL en Santiago (Estudios e Investigaciones) 34386, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Union; Government's preference; Social welfare; Tax; Privatization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C79 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Other
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • H44 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets
    • J51 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Trade Unions: Objectives, Structure, and Effects
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out

    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:eee:ecmode:v:28:y:2011:i:6:p:2502-2508. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30411 .

    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.