IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nov/artigo/v10y2000i2p145-170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

O movimento de privatização dos anos oitenta: reais motivos [The movement of privatization in the 80's: real causes]

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Helena Dweck

    (Universidade Federal Fluminense - UFF)

Abstract

The objective of this article is to discuss the privatization question, a phenomenon which has involved the world economy during the last two decades. The debate takes place in a wide context, discussing the several aspects of the human knowledge and not only the economic one, which is usually the most explored aspect in the literature. This study, which has as reference a theoretic-empirical tool, shows that the concrete privatization movements, which happened in the capitalist world at the end of the 70`s, have a National specificity. This occurs not only because of the economic conditions, but also because of the organization level of the different societies, and mainly due to the political basis that supports them. Therefore, they have a strong politic-ideological feature. The logic of these movements shows that the privatization question leads to the discussion of the State's role in each economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Helena Dweck, 2000. "O movimento de privatização dos anos oitenta: reais motivos [The movement of privatization in the 80's: real causes]," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 10(2), pages 145-170, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:nov:artigo:v:10:y:2000:i:2:p:145-170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.face.ufmg.br/novaeconomia/sumarios/v10n2/Dweck.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. L. Wade, 1988. "Review," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 99-100, July.
    2. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, April.
    3. Bishop, Matthew & Kay, John & Mayer, Colin (ed.), 1994. "Privatization and Economic Performance," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198773443.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2007. "Regulatory reform in Turkish energy industry: An analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 984-993, February.
    2. Rim Lahmandi-Ayed & Didier Laussel, 2020. "A voting model of privatization," Working Papers hal-02504990, HAL.
    3. Friedrich Schneider, 2001. "Privatisierung und Deregulierung in Österreich in den 90er Jahren: Einige Anmerkungen aus Sicht der Neuen Politischen Ökonomie," Economics working papers 2001-06, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    4. Bel, Gema, 1998. "Privatization on the stock market: Sale at one go or sale in tranches?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 113-117, January.
    5. Lahmandi-Ayed, Rim & Laussel, Didier, 2022. "When do privatizations have popular support? A voting model," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    6. Sumit K. Majumdar, 2008. "Why Privatize? The Decline of Public Ownership in India and its Impact on Industrial Performance," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 9(2), pages 293-336, September.
    7. Kun Jiang & Susheng Wang, 2016. "Staged Privatization: Transforming State-Owned Enterprises into Market-Based Firms," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 172(4), pages 694-726, December.
    8. Cullinane, Kevin & Ji, Ping & Wang, Teng-fei, 2005. "The relationship between privatization and DEA estimates of efficiency in the container port industry," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 433-462.
    9. Esa Mangeloja, 2004. "Interrelationship of economic growth and regional religious properties," ERSA conference papers ersa04p94, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    11. Ireland, Peter N., 2003. "Endogenous money or sticky prices?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(8), pages 1623-1648, November.
    12. Giuseppe Croce & Emanuela Ghignoni, 2011. "Overeducation and spatial flexibility in Italian local labour markets," Working Papers in Public Economics 145, Department of Economics and Law, Sapienza University of Roma.
    13. Carranza, Luis J. & Cayo, Juan M. & Galdon-Sanchez, Jose E., 2003. "Exchange rate volatility and economic performance in Peru: a firm level analysis," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 472-496, December.
    14. David M. Brasington & Diane Hite, 2005. "Demand for Environmental Quality: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," Departmental Working Papers 2005-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    15. Juan Carlos Conesa & Timothy J. Kehoe & Kim J. Ruhl, 2007. "Modeling great depressions: the depression in Finland in the 1990s," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, vol. 31(Nov), pages 16-44.
    16. SangHyun Cheon & Dong-Wook Song & Sungjin Park, 2018. "Does more competition result in better port performance?," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 20(3), pages 433-455, September.
    17. Jonas Agell & Helge Bennmarker, 2003. "Endogenous Wage Rigidity," CESifo Working Paper Series 1081, CESifo.
    18. Baltagi, Badi H. & Yen, Yin-Fang, 2014. "Hospital treatment rates and spillover effects: Does ownership matter?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 193-202.
    19. Élodie Bertrand, 2006. "La thèse d'efficience du « théorème de Coase ». Quelle critique de la microéconomie ?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(5), pages 983-1007.
    20. Anastassios Gentzoglanis, 2002. "Privatization, Investment and Efficiency in the Telecommunications Industry: Theory and Empirical Evidence from MENA Countries," Working Papers 0230, Economic Research Forum, revised 10 Oct 2002.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    privatization; regulation;

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:nov:artigo:v:10:y:2000:i:2:p:145-170. 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: Lucas Resende de Carvalho (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fufmgbr.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.