IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wei/journl/v9y2019i2p55-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has Privatization Promoted Efficiency in Ethiopia?: A Panel Data Analysis on Large and Medium Scale Manufacturing Firms

Author

Listed:
  • Misganaw Badasa

    (Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia)

Abstract

Privatization, as a program, has been implemented in Ethiopia since EPRDF took power, with the motive, among other things, to increase efficiency of firms. This study aimed at investigating whether the program has promoted efficiency of privatized large and medium scale manufacturing firms. A panel data ranging from 1995 to 2009 was collected from Central Statistical Agency for 71 privatized and 333 publicly remained firm. The results revealed the overall insignificant effect of privatization on the efficiency of large and medium scale manufacturing firms. Based on the findings of the study, one can forward the following recommendations. If the privatization program is being implemented in the motive of increasing efficiency of firms as a major and immediate objective, it is better to stop the process, since it has nothing to do with improvement in efficiency. On the other hand, if the motives other than increasing efficiency such as promoting participation of the private sector and generating reveue outweigh as causes of implementing the program, the assessment of its effect on these goals is important to provide a realistic recommendation.

Suggested Citation

  • Misganaw Badasa, 2019. "Has Privatization Promoted Efficiency in Ethiopia?: A Panel Data Analysis on Large and Medium Scale Manufacturing Firms," Economic Research Guardian, Weissberg Publishing, vol. 9(2), pages 55-74, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wei:journl:v:9:y:2019:i:2:p:55-74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ecrg.ro/files/p2019.9(2)1y1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boycko, Maxim & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1996. "A Theory of Privatisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(435), pages 309-319, March.
    2. Bos, Dieter, 1991. "Privatization: A Theoretical Treatment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283690.
    3. Padmasai Arora, 2014. "Reforms, Ownership and Determinants of Efficiency: An Empirical Study of Commercial Banks in India," Journal of Emerging Market Finance, Institute for Financial Management and Research, vol. 13(1), pages 103-138, April.
    4. Alemu, Mekonnen, 1992. "Efficiency of Ethiopia in Public Manufacturing Enterprises and the policy Environment," Ethiopian Journal of Economics, Ethiopian Economics Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-85.
    5. Brada, Josef C & King, Arthur E & Ma, Chia Ying, 1997. "Industrial Economics of the Transition: Determinants of Enterprise Efficiency in Czechoslovakia and Hungary," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 104-127, January.
    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. Jones, Derek & Klinedinst, Mark & Rock, Charles, 1998. "Productive Efficiency during Transition: Evidence from Bulgarian Panel Data," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 446-464, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Jain, Ritika, 2017. "Public sector enterprise disinvestment in India: Efficiency gains in a political context," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 18-36.
    4. Dermot McCarthy & Eoin Reeves & Tom Turner, 2010. "The impact of privatization and employee share ownership on employee commitment and citizen behaviour," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 31(3), pages 307-326, August.
    5. Topalli, Margerita & Ivanaj, Silvester, 2016. "Mapping the evolution of the impact of economic transition on Central and Eastern European enterprises: A co-word analysis," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 744-759.
    6. Bozec, Richard, 2004. "L’analyse comparative de la performance entre les entreprises publiques et les entreprises privées : le problème de mesure et son impact sur les résultats," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 80(4), pages 619-654, Décembre.
    7. Imam, M. & Jamasb, T. & Llorca, M. & Llorca, M., 2018. "Power Sector Reform and Corruption: Evidence from Electricity Industry in Sub-Saharan Africa," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1801, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    8. Birgitte Grøgaard & Asmund Rygh & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2019. "Bringing corporate governance into internalization theory: State ownership and foreign entry strategies," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(8), pages 1310-1337, October.
    9. Ding, Mingfa, 2014. "Political Connections and Stock Liquidity: Political Network, Hierarchy and Intervention," Knut Wicksell Working Paper Series 2014/7, Lund University, Knut Wicksell Centre for Financial Studies.
    10. Randall Morck & Lloyd Steier, 2005. "The Global History of Corporate Governance: An Introduction," NBER Chapters, in: A History of Corporate Governance around the World: Family Business Groups to Professional Managers, pages 1-64, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Barberis, Nicholas & Maxim Boycko & Andrei Shleifer & Natalia Tsukanova, 1996. "How Does Privatization Work? Evidence from the Russian Shops," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 764-790, August.
    12. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pc:p:3573-3630 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. N.F. Cruz & R.C. Marques & A. Marra & C. Pozzi, 2014. "Local Mixed Companies: The Theory And Practice In An International Perspective," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(1), pages 1-9, March.
    14. Pursey Heugens & Stelios Zyglidopoulos, 2008. "From social ties to embedded competencies: the case of business groups," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 12(4), pages 325-341, November.
    15. Muhamad, Goran M. & Heshmati, Almas & Khayyat, Nabaz T., 2021. "How to reduce the degree of dependency on natural resources?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    16. Riham Ahmed Ezzat, 2015. "Paving the way for better telecom performance: Evidence from the telecommunication sector in MENA countries," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01164199, HAL.
    17. Wei, Zuobao & Varela, Oscar, 2003. "State equity ownership and firm market performance: evidence from China's newly privatized firms," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 65-82, May.
    18. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2001. "The Soft Budget Constraint: A Theoretical Clarification," Post-Print hal-00629160, HAL.
    19. repec:tur:wpaper:9 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Parker, David, 2001. "Economic Regulation: A Preliminary Literature Review and Summary of Research Questions Arising," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30616, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    21. Claessens,Constantijn A. & Djankov, Simeon, 1998. "Politicians and firms in seven central and eastern European countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1954, The World Bank.
    22. Walsh, Patrick Paul & Whelan, Ciara, 2001. "Firm performance and the political economy of corporate governance: survey evidence for Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 85-112, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Privatization; Efficiency; Panel Data; Ethiopia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • L60 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - General

    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:wei:journl:v:9:y:2019:i:2:p:55-74. 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: Mihai Mutascu (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.