IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ivi/wpasad/1999-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

- Competition And Privatization

Author

Listed:
  • Ramón Faulí-Oller

    (Universidad de Alicante)

  • Antonia Díaz

    (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

Abstract

In this paper we study the interaction between privatization and competition (liberalization) in the market. privatization is understood as a change in the objective of the owners of the firm. A public firm maximizes social welfare and a private firm maximizes profits. We find that this diference in objectives matters less the greater the level of competition because then the behavior of a welfare maximizing firm converges to the behavior of a profit maximizing firm. This result implies that privatization works better the greater the competition. On the other hand, the revenues obtained from privatization are decreasing with the level of competition. This implies that privatization aimed to raise revenues impose a cost in terms of allocative eficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramón Faulí-Oller & Antonia Díaz, 1999. "- Competition And Privatization," Working Papers. Serie AD 1999-13, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    • Handle: RePEc:ivi:wpasad:1999-13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ivie.es/downloads/docs/wpasad/wpasad-1999-13.pdf
    File Function: Fisrt version / Primera version, 1999
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1997. "Privatization and efficiency in a differentiated industry," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1635-1654, December.
    2. Leonard Waverman & Esen Sirel, 1997. "European Telecommunications Markets on the Verge of Full Liberalization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 113-126, Fall.
    3. repec:bla:econom:v:57:y:1990:i:227:p:319-28 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Michael L. Katz, 1991. "Game-Playing Agents: Unobservable Contracts as Precommitments," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(3), pages 307-328, Autumn.
    5. Barros, Fatima, 1995. "Incentive schemes as strategic variables: An application to a mixed duopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 373-386, September.
    6. Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987. "Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-940, December.
    7. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    8. David M. Newbery & Michael G. Pollitt, 1997. "The Restructuring and Privatisation of Britain's CEGB—Was It Worth It?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 269-303, September.
    9. Matsumura, Toshihiro, 1998. "Partial privatization in mixed duopoly," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 473-483, December.
    10. Juan Carlos Barcena‐Ruiz & Maria Paz Espinosa, 1996. "Long‐Term or Short‐Term Managerial Incentive Contracts," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 343-359, September.
    11. Steve Dowrick, 1986. "von Stackelberg and Cournot Duopoly: Choosing Roles," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(2), pages 251-260, Summer.
    12. 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)

    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. João Correia-da-Silva & Joana Pinho, 2018. "Collusion in mixed oligopolies and the coordinated effects of privatization," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 19-55, May.
    2. Nakamura, Yasuhiko, 2019. "Combining the endogenous choice of the timing of setting incentive parameters and the contents of strategic contracts in a managerial mixed duopoly," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 207-233.
    3. Rupayan Pal, 2010. "How much should you own? Cross-ownership and privatization," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2010-015, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    4. Manipushpak Mitra & Rupayan Pal & Arindam Paul & P. M. Sharada, 2020. "Equilibrium Coexistence of Public and Private Firms and the Plausibility of Price Competition," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 176(2), pages 217-242.
    5. Mukherjee, Arijit & Suetrong, Kullapat, 2009. "Privatization, strategic foreign direct investment and host-country welfare," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 775-785, October.
    6. John S. Heywood & Guangliang Ye, 2009. "Delegation in a mixed oligopoly: the case of multiple private firms," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 71-82.
    7. Arghya Ghosh & Manipushpak Mitra, 2008. "Comparing Bertrand and Cournot Outcomes in the Presence of Public Firms," Discussion Papers 2008-18, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    8. Juan Carlos Bárcena-Ruiz & F. Javier Casado-Izaga, 2005. "Spatial competition and the duration of managerial incentive contracts," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 29(2), pages 331-349, May.
    9. Corrado Benassi & Alessandra Chirco & Marcella Scrimitore, 2014. "Optimal manipulation rules in a mixed oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 112(1), pages 61-84, May.
    10. Arghya Ghosh & Manipushpak Mitra & Bibhas Saha, 2015. "Privatization, Underpricing, and Welfare in the Presence of Foreign Competition," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(3), pages 433-460, June.
    11. John S. Heywood & Zerong Wang & Guangliang Ye, 2022. "Strategic delegation in an international mixed oligopoly," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1888-1898, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Haraguchi, Junichi & Matsumura, Toshihiro & Yoshida, Shohei, 2018. "Competitive pressure from neighboring markets and optimal privatization policy," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-8.
    14. María José Gil‐Moltó & Joanna Poyago‐Theotoky, 2008. "Flexible versus Dedicated Technology Adoption in the Presence of a Public Firm," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(4), pages 997-1016, April.
    15. Wenhui Zhou & Weixiang Huang & Vernon N. Hsu & Pengfei Guo, 2023. "On the Benefit of Privatization in a Mixed Duopoly Service System," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1486-1499, March.
    16. 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.
    17. Toshihiro Matsumura, 2003. "Endogenous Role in Mixed Markets: A Two‐Production‐Period Model," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 403-413, October.
    18. 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.
    19. Liu, Qian & Wang, Leonard F.S. & Chen, Charlie L., 2019. "Upstream privatization in mixed markets with retailer's efforts," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 338-345.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Privatization; liberalization;

    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:ivi:wpasad:1999-13. 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: Departamento de Edición (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ievages.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.