IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mil/wpdepa/2006-07.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The British privatisation programme: a long term perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Robert MILLWARD

Abstract

The British privatisations were concentrated on the infrastructure industries of transport, communications and energy. It is important to assess the efficiency impact in a long-term context. The Milan study goes some way towards this but even better is to compare different countries of the Western world over the whole period since 1945. A distinction is made here between 1945-73 and the 1973-95 period, which followed the oil shocks and ushered in a general phase of de-regulation and privatisation. It is suggested that factors like the reconstruction after the Second World War, the process of catch-up and convergence in technologies and the resource endowments of different countries had much bigger effects on productivity levels and growth rates in the infrastructure industries than the shift from nationalised to privatised regimes. This article also, more briefly, critically evaluates two other elements of the Milan study, the treatment of excess profits and of the move to more differentiated price structures.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert MILLWARD, 2006. "The British privatisation programme: a long term perspective," Departmental Working Papers 2006-07, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
  • Handle: RePEc:mil:wpdepa:2006-07
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wp.demm.unimi.it/files/wp/2006/DEMM-2006_007wp.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Foreman-Peck & Dorothy Manning, 1988. "How well is BT performing? An international comparison of telecommunications total factor productivity," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 9(3), pages 54-67, August.
    2. Broadberry, Stephen & Ghosal, Sayantan, 2002. "From the Counting House to the Modern Office: Explaining Anglo-American Productivity Differences in Services, 1870–1990," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(4), pages 967-998, December.
    3. Foreman-Peck, James & Waterson, Michael, 1985. "The Comparative Efficiency of Public and Private Enterprise in Britain: Electricity Generation between the World Wars," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(380a), pages 83-95, Supplemen.
    4. Broadberry, Stephen N., 1998. "How Did the United States and Germany Overtake Britian? A Sectoral Analysis of Comparative Productivity Levels, 1870–1990," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 375-407, June.
    5. Massimo Florio, 2002. "A state without ownership: the welfare impact of British Privatisations 1979-1997," Departmental Working Papers 2002-24, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    6. Millward, Robert & Ward, Robert, 1987. "The Costs of Public and Private Gas Enterprises in Late 19th Century Britain," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(4), pages 719-737, December.
    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. Oliver Lewis & Avner Offer, 2021. "Railways as Patient Capital," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _195, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    2. Glen O'Hara, 2009. "'What the electorate can be expected to swallow': Nationalisation, transnationalism and the shifting boundaries of the state in post-war Britain," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(4), pages 501-528.

    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. Stephen Broadberry & Nicholas Crafts, 2003. "UK productivity performance from 1950 to 1979: a restatement of the Broadberry‐Crafts view," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 56(4), pages 718-735, November.
    2. Broadberry, Stephen N. & Irwin, Douglas A., 2006. "Labor productivity in the United States and the United Kingdom during the nineteenth century," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 257-279, April.
    3. Willner, Johan, 2001. "Ownership, efficiency, and political interference," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 723-748, November.
    4. Broadberry, Stephen & Ghosal, Sayantan, 2005. "Technology, organisation and productivity performance in services: lessons from Britain and the United States since 1870," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 437-466, December.
    5. Stephen Broadberry & Bishnupriya Gupta, 2006. "The early modern great divergence: wages, prices and economic development in Europe and Asia, 1500–1800," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 59(1), pages 2-31, February.
    6. Jeremy Atack & Robert A. Margo & Paul Rhode, 2020. "‘Mechanization Takes Command’: Inanimate Power and Labor Productivity in Late Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 27436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Seán Kenny & Jason Lennard & Kevin Hjortshøj O’Rourke, 2020. "An annual index of Irish industrial production, 1800-1921," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _185, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    8. Crafts, Nicholas & Toniolo, Gianni, 2008. "European Economic Growth, 1950-2005: An Overview," CEPR Discussion Papers 6863, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. McLean, Ian W., 2007. "Why was Australia so rich?," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 635-656, October.
    10. Nicholas Crafts & Marco Magnani, 2011. "The Golden Age and the Second Globalization in Italy," Quaderni di storia economica (Economic History Working Papers) 17, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    11. Jean-Pierre Dormois, 2006. "Tracking the elusive French productivity lag in industry 1840-1973," Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series d05-152, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    12. Eoin O'leary, 2003. "Aggregate and Sectoral Convergence among Irish Regions: The Role of Structural Change, 1960-96," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(4), pages 483-501, October.
    13. L. Rachel Ngai & Christopher A. Pissarides, 2004. "Balanced Growth With Structural Change," CEP Discussion Papers dp0627, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    14. Seán Kenny & Jason Lennard & Kevin Hjortshøj O'Rourke, 2023. "An annual index of Irish industrial production, 1800–1913," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 76(1), pages 283-304, February.
    15. George Chouliarakis & Mónica Correa-López, 2009. "Catching-up, then falling behind: Comparative productivity growth between Spain and the United Kingdom, 1950-2004," Centre for Growth and Business Cycle Research Discussion Paper Series 131, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    16. Michaels, Guy, 2007. "The division of labor, coordination, and the demand for information processing," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3251, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Ian W. Mclean, 2004. "Australian Economic Growth in Historical Perspective," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(250), pages 330-345, September.
    18. Leandro Prados de la Escosura, 2016. "Spain’s Historical National Accounts: Expenditure and Output, 1850-2015," Working Papers 0103, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    19. Lains, Pedro, 2003. "Catching up to the European core: Portuguese economic growth, 1910-1990," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 369-386, October.
    20. Ben Dolman & Dean Parham & Simon Zheng, 2007. "Can Australia Match US Productivity Performance?," Staff Working Papers 0703, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nationalization; Privatization; Great Britain;
    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
    • L32 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Enterprises; Public-Private Enterprises

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mil:wpdepa:2006-07. 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: DEMM Working Papers (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damilit.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.