IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00754216.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Changes in ownership concentration in mass privatizd firms: Evidence from Poland and the Czech Republic

Author

Listed:
  • Irena Grosfeld

    (PJSE - Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UW - University of Warsaw, PSE - Paris School of Economics - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

  • Iraj Hashi

    (Staffordshire University Business - Staffordshire University)

Abstract

We analyse the changes in ownership concentration in firms included in two mass privatisation programmes in Poland and the Czech Republic. We find that despite important differences in the design of the two privatisation schemes and despite different quality of regulatory environments, the ownership structure emerging 4-5 years after the initial distribution of assets is remarkably similar in the two countries. Ownership concentration defined as the share of the largest equity holder has significantly increased. Exploring the determinants of ownership concentration, we check whether such revealed preference for higher participation in firm equity does not hide different motivations and behaviour of investors. Our results reveal interesting differences between the two countries: in the Czech Republic the increase in ownership concentration was less likely in poorly performing firms, while in Poland the quality of past performance did not affect investors' willingness to increase their holdings. This contrasting result may reflect the difference in the quality of laws and regulations in Poland and in the Czech Republic. In the Czech Republic, where tunnelling was a common practice in the period covered by our study, shareholders increasing their stakes in a company could have been motivated by the objective of extracting value rather than by the willingness to impose a specific direction on the way the firm is managed. This might explain why they prefer to increase their control in those companies which perform well rather than those that perform poorly.

Suggested Citation

  • Irena Grosfeld & Iraj Hashi, 2007. "Changes in ownership concentration in mass privatizd firms: Evidence from Poland and the Czech Republic," Post-Print halshs-00754216, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00754216
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00585.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlin, Wendy & Mayer, Colin, 2003. "Finance, investment, and growth," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 191-226, July.
    2. Derek Jones & Panu Kalmi & Niels Mygind, 2005. "Choice of Ownership Structure and Firm Performance: Evidence from Estonia," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 83-107.
    3. repec:zbw:bofitp:2003_007 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Lucian Arye Bebchuk, 1999. "A Rent-Protection Theory of Corporate Ownership and Control," NBER Working Papers 7203, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Iwasaki, Ichiro & Kočenda, Evžen, 2017. "Are some owners better than others in Czech privatized firms? Even meta-analysis can’t make us perfectly sure," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 537-568.
    2. Zorica Kalezić, 2015. "Ownership Concentration and Firm Performance in Transition Economies: Evidence from Montenegro," Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, Central bank of Montenegro, vol. 4(3), pages 5-64.
    3. Buchen, Clemens, 2010. "Emerging economic systems in Central and Eastern Europe – a qualitative and quantitative assessment," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 37141, September.
    4. Dolgopyatova, T., 2010. "Concentration of Ownership in Russian Industry: Firm-Level Evolution," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 8, pages 80-99.
    5. Farhad Shahveisi & Farshid Khairollahi & Mohammad Alipour, 2017. "Does ownership structure matter for corporate intellectual capital performance? An empirical test in the Iranian context," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 7(1), pages 67-91, April.
    6. Bersant Hobdari & Aleksandra Gregoric & Evis Sinani, 2011. "The role of firm ownership on internationalization: evidence from two transition economies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 15(3), pages 393-413, August.
    7. Kravchenko Grygorii, 2021. "International Experts’ Influence on Company Internationalization," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 29(4), pages 57-90, December.
    8. Cabeza-García, Laura & Gómez-Ansón, Silvia, 2011. "Post-privatisation ownership concentration: Determinants and influence on firm efficiency," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 412-430, September.
    9. Bersant Hobdari, 2008. "Insider Ownership and Capital Constraints: An Empirical Investigation of the Credit Rationing Hypothesis in Estonia," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 536-549, November.
    10. Robert Lindorfer & Anne d’Arcy & Igor Filatotchev, 2023. "When Institutional Plates Collide: The Dynamic Impact of Informal Institutions on Capital Market Development," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Marc van Essen & J. (Hans) van Oosterhout & Pursey P. M. A. R. Heugens, 2013. "Competition and Cooperation in Corporate Governance: The Effects of Labor Institutions on Blockholder Effectiveness in 23 European Countries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 530-551, April.
    12. Abdallah, Abed Al-Nasser & Ismail, Ahmad K., 2017. "Corporate governance practices, ownership structure, and corporate performance in the GCC countries," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 98-115.
    13. Sprenger, Carsten, 2011. "The choice of ownership structure: Evidence from Russian mass privatization," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 260-277, June.
    14. Dorota Dobija, 2015. "Exploring audit committee practices: oversight of financial reporting and external auditors in Poland," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 19(1), pages 113-143, February.

    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. Irena Grosfeld & Iraj Hashi, 2004. "The emergence of large shareholders in mass privatized firms: Evidence from Poland and the Czech Republic," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2004-718, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    2. Becht, Marco & Bolton, Patrick & Roell, Ailsa, 2003. "Corporate governance and control," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 1-109, Elsevier.
    3. Grosfeld, Irena, 2009. "Large shareholders and firm value: Are high-tech firms different?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 259-277, September.
    4. Valentín Azofra Palenzuea & Paolo Saona Hoffmann & Eleuterio Vallelado González, 2004. "Estructura De Propiedad Y Oportunidades De Crecimiento Como Determinantes Del Endeudamiento De Las Empresas Chilenas," Abante, Escuela de Administracion. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 7(2), pages 105-145.
    5. La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert, 2000. "Investor protection and corporate governance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1-2), pages 3-27.
    6. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 1999. "Investor Protection: Origins, Consequences, Reform," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1883, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    7. Rainer Fehn & Carsten-Patrick Meier, 2001. "The Positive Economics of Labor Market Rigidities and Investor Protection," CESifo Working Paper Series 456, CESifo.
    8. Weiß, Christian, 2010. "The Ownership Concentration of Firms: Three Essays on the Determinants and Effects," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 30247, September.
    9. Davide Lombardo & Marco Pagano, 1999. "Law and Equity Markets: a Simple Model," CSEF Working Papers 25, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    10. Marc Goergen, 2005. "Corporate Governance Convergence: Evidence From Takeover Regulation Reforms in Europe," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 21(2), pages 243-268, Summer.
    11. Peter Hogfeldt, 2005. "The History and Politics of Corporate Ownership in Sweden," NBER Chapters, in: A History of Corporate Governance around the World: Family Business Groups to Professional Managers, pages 517-580, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-deSilanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1999. "Investor Protection: Origins, Consequences, and Reform," NBER Working Papers 7428, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez‐De‐Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2002. "Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(3), pages 1147-1170, June.
    14. Shleifer, Andrei & Wolfenzon, Daniel, 2002. "Investor protection and equity markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 3-27, October.
    15. Alfonso Mendoza-Velázquez & Luis Carlos Ortuño-Barba & Luis David Conde-Cortés, 2022. "Corporate governance and firm performance in hybrid model countries," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(1), pages 32-58, February.
    16. Marco Pagano & Paolo F. Volpin, 2005. "The Political Economy of Corporate Governance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1005-1030, September.
    17. Katharina Pistor & Martin Raiser & Stanislaw Gelfer, 2000. "Law and Finance in Transition Economies," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(2), pages 325-368, July.
    18. Ansgar Belke & Rainer Fehn, "undated". "Institutions and Structural Unemployment: Do Capital-Market Imperfections Matter?," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2001-default/2001/1-1008, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    19. Maria Cipollina & Giorgia Giovannetti & Filomena Pietrovito & Alberto F. Pozzolo, 2012. "FDI and Growth: What Cross-country Industry Data Say," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1599-1629, November.
    20. Suman Banerjee & Thomas H. Noe, 2017. "Legal-System Arbitrage and Parent–Subsidiary Capital Structures," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3809-3828, November.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00754216. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.