IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wdi/papers/2000-335.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutional Technology and the Chains of Trust: Capital Markets and Privatization in Russia and the Czech Republic

Author

Listed:
  • Bruce Kogut
  • Andrew Spicer

Abstract

The introduction of mass privatization policies in Russia and the Czech Republic depended on the creation of impersonal capital markets to finance the needs of privatized companies and to provide a secondary market for the trading of securities. Yet, mass privatization created the contradictory conditions of generating millions of poorly informed shareholders, with no efficient markets for the sale of the shares. The absence of financial markets created systematic pressures to move assets by illegal or non-transparent means to users who value them. Privatization created the incentives to destroy the financial markets critical to its success. A comparative case analysis of post-privatization market formation in both these countries demonstrates that the functional necessity for these markets does not engender their own creation. In the absence of institutional mechanisms of state regulation and trust, markets become arenas for political contests and economic manipulation. The irony of these policies is that a principal lesson has been that market reforms cannot create viable markets, only institutional formation can.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruce Kogut & Andrew Spicer, 2000. "Institutional Technology and the Chains of Trust: Capital Markets and Privatization in Russia and the Czech Republic," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 335, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    • Handle: RePEc:wdi:papers:2000-335
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39719/3/wp335.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Podpiera, 1996. "The Czech Investment Fund Industry: Development and Behaviour," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 22, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    2. Fox, Merritt B. & Heller, Michael A., 1999. "Lesson from Fiascos in Russian Corporate Governance," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt1fk9b8g8, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    3. Simon Johnson, 2000. "Tunneling," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 22-27, May.
    4. Hayri, Aydin & McDermott, Gerald A, 1998. "The Network Properties of Corporate Governance and Industrial Restructuring: A Post-Socialist Lesson," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(1), pages 153-193, March.
    5. Michael A. Heller & Merritt B. Fox, 1999. "Lessons from Fiascos in Russian Corporate Governance," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 282, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    6. Simon Johnson & Andrei Shleifer, 1999. "Coase v. the Coasians," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1885, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    7. North, Douglass C. & Weingast, Barry R., 1989. "Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 803-832, December.
    8. Peter Murrell, 1995. "The Transition According to Cambridge, Mass," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 164-178, March.
    9. Hingorani, Archana & Lehn, Kenneth & Makhija, Anil K., 1997. "Investor behavior in mass privatization: The case of the Czech voucher scheme," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 349-396, June.
    10. D. Stark, 1996. "Recombinant Property in East European Capitalism," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, vol. 6.
    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. Bruce Kogut & Andrew Spicer, 2001. "Institutional Technology and the Chains of Trust: Capital Markets and Privatization in Russia and the Czech Republic," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 291, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    2. Djankov, Simeon & Glaeser, Edward & La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The new comparative economics," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 595-619, December.
    3. Gerald A. McDermott, 2000. "Network Restructuring and Firm Creation in East-Central Europe: A Public-Private Venture," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 361, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    4. John Marangos, 2005. "A Political Economy Approach to the Neoclassical Gradualist Model of Transition," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 263-293, April.
    5. Thorsten Beck & Luc Laeven, 2006. "Institution building and growth in transition economies," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 157-186, June.
    6. Gerald A. McDermott, 2003. "Institutional Change and Firm Creation in East-Central Europe: An Embedded Politics Approach," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2003-590, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    7. Winfred Trexler Proffitt Jr, 2003. "Gouvernance des entreprises:la construction d'un champ social par la loi américaine," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 6(4), pages 133-154, December.
    8. Satoshi Mizobata & Norio Horie, 2019. "Path-Dependency of Economic Transition: An Analytical Review," KIER Working Papers 1014, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    9. D'Souza, Juliet & Nash, Robert, 2017. "Private benefits of public control: Evidence of political and economic benefits of state ownership," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 232-247.
    10. Atanasov, Vladimir, 2005. "How much value can blockholders tunnel? Evidence from the Bulgarian mass privatization auctions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 191-234, April.
    11. Zhou, Wubiao, 2017. "Institutional environment, public-private hybrid forms, and entrepreneurial reinvestment in a transition economy," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 197-214.
    12. Scott Gehlbach & Konstantin Sonin & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "Businessman Candidates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 718-736, July.
    13. Robert MacCulloch & Silvia Pezzini, 2010. "The Roles of Freedom, Growth, and Religion in the Taste for Revolution," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 329-358, May.
    14. Francis,David C. & Kubinec ,Robert, 2022. "Beyond Political Connections : A Measurement Model Approach to Estimating Firm-levelPolitical Influence in 41 Economies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10119, The World Bank.
    15. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Cristian Pop-Eleches & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "The Guarantees of Freedom," NBER Working Papers 8759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Jan Schnellenbach, 2023. "The concept of Ordnungspolitik: rule-based economic policymaking from the perspective of the Freiburg School," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(3), pages 283-300, June.
    17. Andrea Asoni, 2008. "Protection Of Property Rights And Growth As Political Equilibria," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 953-987, December.
    18. Guriev, Sergei & Treisman, Daniel, 2020. "A theory of informational autocracy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    19. Luis Alfonso Dau & Aya S. Chacar & Marjorie A. Lyles & Jiatao Li, 2022. "Informal institutions and international business: Toward an integrative research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 985-1010, August.
    20. Michael K Miller, 2013. "Electoral authoritarianism and democracy: A formal model of regime transitions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 25(2), pages 153-181, April.

    More about this item

    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:wdi:papers:2000-335. 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: WDI (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wdumius.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.