IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpmi/0303002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Firm Ownership and Economic Efficiency

Author

Listed:
  • George C. Bitros

    (Athens University of Economics & Business)

Abstract

The objective in this paper is to improve the existing evidence regarding the role ownership plays in economic efficiency. It is pursued through enhancements in modeling, estimation techniques, and experimental design. With respect to modeling, state ownership is explicitly introduced into the simple model of the financially constrained firm in order to trace its implications. In turn, the interrelated, three-equation input demand model that emerges is estimated with consistent panel data techniques, using information gathered from state and private firms that operated in large-scale Greek manufacturing during the 1979-1988 period. The results show that, per unit of output, the amounts of labor, capital, and credits employed by state firms were 15.7, 12.2, and 49.1 percent larger than those employed by private firms in the same industries. Moreover, taking input prices into consideration, these findings indicated that state firms incurred 46.2 percent higher costs per unit of output and that liable for their relative inefficiency were technical, allocative and ownership reasons by contributing respectively 16.3, 25.5 and 4.4 percentage points. Last, but not least, state ownership was found to alter significantly the conventional patterns in which the employment of inputs responds to equity and input price changes. Thus, in contrast to claims made by some researchers, state ownership may influence economic efficiency as well as exercise several other important effects.

Suggested Citation

  • George C. Bitros, 2003. "Firm Ownership and Economic Efficiency," Microeconomics 0303002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpmi:0303002
    Note: Type of Document - Acrobat.pdf; prepared on IBM PC - PC; to print on HP/PostScript; pages: 31 ; figures: included. Acrobat PDF document submitted via ftp.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/mic/papers/0303/0303002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrei Shleifer, 1998. "State versus Private Ownership," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 133-150, Fall.
    2. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas & Newey, Whitney & Rosen, Harvey S, 1989. "The Revenues-Expenditures Nexus: Evidence from Local Government Data," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 30(2), pages 415-429, May.
    3. Nadiri, M Ishaq & Rosen, Sherwin, 1969. "Interrelated Factor Demand Functions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(4), pages 457-471, Part I Se.
    4. Pranab Bardhan & John E. Roemer, 1992. "Market Socialism: A Case for Rejuvenation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 101-116, Summer.
    5. M. Ishaq Nadiri & George C. Bitros, 1980. "Research and Development Expenditures and Labor Productivity at the Firm Level: A Dynamic Model," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Measurement and Analysis, pages 387-418, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas & Newey, Whitney & Rosen, Harvey S, 1988. "Estimating Vector Autoregressions with Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(6), pages 1371-1395, November.
    7. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    8. Paul H. Malatesta & Kathryn L. DeWenter, 2001. "State-Owned and Privately Owned Firms: An Empirical Analysis of Profitability, Leverage, and Labor Intensity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 320-334, March.
    9. Ehrlich, Isaac & Georges Gallais-Hamonno & Zhiqiang Liu & Randall Lutter, 1994. "Productivity Growth and Firm Ownership: An Analytical and Empirical Investigation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 1006-1038, October.
    10. I. Ehrlich & Georges Gallais-Hamonno & Zh Liu & R. Lutter, 1994. "Productivy Growth & Firm Ownership : an Analytical & Empirical Investigation," Post-Print halshs-00276861, HAL.
    11. 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.
    12. De Fraja, Giovanni, 1991. "Efficiency and Privatisation in Imperfectly Competitive Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 311-321, March.
    13. Arellano, Manuel, 1989. "A note on the Anderson-Hsiao estimator for panel data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 337-341, December.
    14. Rafael La Porta & Florencio López-de-Silanes, 1999. "The Benefits of Privatization: Evidence from Mexico," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(4), pages 1193-1242.
    15. Lau, Lawrence J & Yotopoulos, Pan A, 1971. "A Test for Relative Efficiency and Application to Indian Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 94-109, March.
    16. Ohlsson, Henry, 1996. "Ownership and input prices: A comparison of public and private enterprises," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 33-38, October.
    17. Vining, Aidan R & Boardman, Anthony E, 1992. "Ownership versus Competition: Efficiency in Public Enterprise," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 205-239, March.
    18. Zhenhui Xu & Melissa Birch, 1999. "The Economic Performance of State-owned Enterprises in Argentina an Empirical Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 14(4), pages 355-375, June.
    19. Atkinson, Scott E. & Halvorsen, Robert, 1986. "The relative efficiency of public and private firms in a regulated environment: The case of U.S. electric utilities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 281-294, April.
    20. Eytan Sheshinski & Luis F. López-Calva, 2003. "Privatization and Its Benefits: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 49(3), pages 429-459.
    21. Katsoulacos Yannis, 1994. "Firms' Objectives in Transition Economies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 392-409, 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. Bitros, George C. & Karayiannis, Anastassios D., 2008. "Entrepreneurial Morality: Some Indications from Greece," MPRA Paper 13837, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Dec 2008.
    2. Almas Heshmati & Rachid El-Rhinaoui, 2009. "Effects of Ownership and Market Share on Performance of Mobile Operators in MENA Region," TEMEP Discussion Papers 200921, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Nov 2009.
    3. Vidya Mahambare & V. N. Balasubramanyam, 2005. "Trade Liberalisation and India’s Manufacturing Sector," Development and Comp Systems 0505010, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. O'Toole, Conor M. & Morgenroth, Edgar L.W. & Ha, Thuy T., 2016. "Investment efficiency, state-owned enterprises and privatisation: Evidence from Viet Nam in Transition," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 93-108.
    2. Filippo Belloc, 2014. "Innovation in State-Owned Enterprises: Reconsidering the Conventional Wisdom," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(3), pages 821-848.
    3. Alberto Chong & Florencio de, 2003. "The Truth about Privatization in Latin America," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm436, Yale School of Management.
    4. Michael E. Bradbury & Jill Hooks, 2015. "Ownership and Performance in a Lightly Regulated Environment," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 25(1), pages 100-112, March.
    5. Bongo Adi & Ernest Ndukwe & Nkemdilim Iheanachor & Chukwuma Dim, 2013. "Do Privatisation Model, Contractual and Institutional Factors Play Any Role in Infrastructure Post-privatisation Efficiency? Exploring Port Concessions in Nigeria," Journal of Infrastructure Development, India Development Foundation, vol. 5(2), pages 121-135, December.
    6. Bozec, Richard, 2004. "L’analyse comparative de la performance entre les entreprises publiques et les entreprises privées : le problème de mesure et son impact sur les résultats," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 80(4), pages 619-654, Décembre.
    7. Pradeep Kautish, 2010. "Study On Impact Of Environmental Change On Selected Public Sector Enterprises In India," Romanian Economic Business Review, Romanian-American University, vol. 5(2), pages 68-88, June.
    8. Laura Cabeza García & Silvia Gómez Ansón, 2012. "What Drives the Operating Performance of Privatised Firms?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-27, February.
    9. Asatryan, Zareh & Heinemann, Friedrich & Nover, Justus, 2022. "The other government: State-owned enterprises in Germany and their implications for the core public sector," ZEW Expert Briefs 22-08, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Rossi, Martin, 2021. "The Performance of Privatized Utilities: Evidence from Latin America," MPRA Paper 110534, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Brada, Josef C. & Ma, Chia-Ying, 2007. "The optimal timing of initial public offerings in the course of privatization: Theory and an illustrative application," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 121-137, June.
    12. Panu Poutvaara & Andreas Wagener, 2008. "Why is the public sector more labor-intensive? A distortionary tax argument," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 105-124, July.
    13. López-Calva, Luis F. & Bitrán, Eduardo, 2004. "Comments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 123101, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Chi, Wei & Wang, Yijiang, 2007. "Ownership, Performance and Executive Turnover," MPRA Paper 15302, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Apr 2009.
    15. Luis A. Andrés & J. Luis Guasch & Thomas Haven & Vivien Foster, 2008. "The Impact of Private Sector Participation in Infrastructure : Lights, Shadows, and the Road Ahead," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6545.
    16. Calomiris, Charles W. & Fisman, Raymond & Wang, Yongxiang, 2010. "Profiting from government stakes in a command economy: Evidence from Chinese asset sales," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 399-412, June.
    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. Francesca Di Pillo & Nathan Levialdi & Laura Marchegiani, 2020. "The Investments in Energy Distribution Networks: Does Company Ownership Matter?," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(5), pages 41-49.
    19. Arocena, Pablo & Oliveros, Diana, 2012. "The efficiency of state-owned and privatized firms: Does ownership make a difference?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 457-465.
    20. Haikun Zhu, 2018. "Social Stability and Resource Allocation within Business Groups," Working Papers Series 79, Institute for New Economic Thinking.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ownership; firm governance; factor of production interrelations; economic efficiency.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out

    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:wpa:wuwpmi:0303002. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.