IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csc/cerisp/200111.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technology Transfer: Spatial Indicators

Author

Abstract

The main viewpoint related to privatisation is concerned with the aim of verifying the presence of incentive mechanisms on the managerial behaviour. This paper, differently from other earlier studies on this topic, is aimed to study, with an econometric approach, the dynamic of economic performance in the years before privatisation, over a sample of Italian privatised firms in the last decade. The results show an interesting growth in the productivity levels in the four years preceding the shift from public to private ownership. This suggests that other mechanisms than property rights influence managerial efforts. The main source of such improvement can be attributed to the labour factor, in agreement with many theoretical and empirical studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabrizio Erbetta, 2001. "Technology Transfer: Spatial Indicators," CERIS Working Paper 200111, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    • Handle: RePEc:csc:cerisp:200111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.byterfly.eu/islandora/object/librib:364845
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertero, Elisabetta & Rondi, Laura, 2000. "Financial pressure and the behaviour of public enterprises under soft and hard budget constraints: evidence from Italian panel data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 73-98, January.
    2. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-1158, December.
    3. Attiat F. Ott & Keith Hartley (ed.), 1991. "Privatization And Economic Efficiency," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 345.
    4. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 691-719, August.
    5. Megginson, William L & Nash, Robert C & van Randenborgh, Matthias, 1994. "The Financial and Operating Performance of Newly Privatized Firms: An International Empirical Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(2), pages 403-452, June.
    6. J.E. Haskel & S. Syzmanski, 1993. "The Effects of Privatisation, Restructuring and Competition on Productivity Growth in UK Public Corporations," Working Papers 286, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    7. repec:bla:econom:v:60:y:1993:i:238:p:161-81 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Estrin, Saul, 1994. "Comments : The behaviour of state firms in eastern Europe, pre-privatization by P. Aghion, O. Blanchard and R. Burgess," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1350-1356, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, April.
    11. Leroy P. Jones & Pankaj Tandon & Ingo Vogelsang, 1990. "Selling Public Enterprises: A Cost/Benefit Methodology," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262600625, April.
    12. Schmidt, Klaus M., 1996. "Incomplete contracts and privatization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 569-579, April.
    13. Nickell, Stephen & Wadhwani, Sushil & Wall, Martin, 1992. "Productivity growth in U.K. companies, 1975-1986," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 1055-1085, June.
    14. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, April.
    15. Keith Hartley & David Parker & Stephen Martin, 1991. "Organisational Status, Ownership and Productivity," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 46-60, May.
    16. Parker, David & Martin, Stephen, 1995. "The Impact of UK Privatisation on Labour and Total Factor Productivity," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 42(2), pages 201-220, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Nickell, Stephen & Nicolitsas, Daphne & Dryden, Neil, 1997. "What makes firms perform well?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 783-796, April.
    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. Giovanni Fraquelli & Fabrizio Erbetta, 1999. "Privatization in Italy: an analysis of factors productivity and technical efficiency," CERIS Working Paper 199905, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    2. Patrick W. Schmitz, 2001. "Partial Privatization and Incomplete Contracts: The Proper Scope of Government Reconsidered," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 57(4), pages 394-411, August.
    3. Jorge Pinilla & Joaquim Vergés, 2007. "Efectos De La Privatización En La Eficiencia De Iberia Líneas Aéreas De España S.A," Revista Economía y Administración, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Administrativas, Universidad de Concepción, vol. 69, pages 7-38, December.
    4. Giovanni Fraquelli, 1998. "Before and after privatization: a comparison between competitive firms," CERIS Working Paper 199802, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    5. Stephen King & Rohan Pitchford, 2008. "Private or Public? Towards a Taxonomy of Optimal Ownership and Management Regimes," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 84(266), pages 366-377, September.
    6. Dyck, I. J. Alexander & Wruck, Karen Hopper, 1998. "Organization structure, contract design and government ownership: A clinical analysis of German privatization1," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 265-299, September.
    7. Lulfesmann, Christoph, 2007. "On the virtues of privatization when government is benevolent," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 17-34, September.
    8. Oliver Tiemann & Jonas Schreyögg, 2012. "Changes in hospital efficiency after privatization," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 310-326, December.
    9. Oliver Tiemann & Jonas Schreyögg, 2012. "Changes in hospital efficiency after privatization," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 310-326, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Sliwka, Dirk, 2003. "Management Incentives, Signaling Effects and the Costs of Vertical Integration," IZA Discussion Papers 856, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Hoppe, Eva I. & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2010. "Public versus private ownership: Quantity contracts and the allocation of investment tasks," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(3-4), pages 258-268, April.
    13. Eva I. Hoppe & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2013. "Public-private partnerships versus traditional procurement: Innovation incentives and information gathering," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(1), pages 56-74, March.
    14. 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.
    15. Patrick W. Schmitz, 2006. "Information Gathering, Transaction Costs, and the Property Rights Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 422-434, March.
    16. Süssmuth Bernd & von Weizsäcker Robert K., 2011. "Shooting Rampages and Maintenance of Campus Safety: An Incomplete Contracts Perspective," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(2), pages 573-600, December.
    17. Jean-Etienne de Bettignies & Thomas W. Ross, 2010. "The Economics of Public–Private Partnerships: Some Theoretical Contributions," Chapters, in: Graeme A. Hodge & Carsten Greve & Anthony E. Boardman (ed.), International Handbook on Public–Private Partnerships, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Céline Chatelin, 2002. "Quels enjeux théoriques et méthodologiques de la théorie de la gouvernance partenariale ? La privatisation comme illustration," Working Papers 2002-5, Laboratoire Orléanais de Gestion - université d'Orléans.
    19. Robert Gibbons & John Roberts, 2012. "The Handbook of Organizational Economics," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 9889.
    20. Schmitz, Patrick W., 2023. "The proper scope of government reconsidered: Asymmetric information and incentive contracts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • L32 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Enterprises; Public-Private Enterprises
    • 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:csc:cerisp:200111. 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: Anna Perin or Giancarlo Birello (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cerisit.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.