Annotation.

This paper reviews a selection of studies on privatization experiences in transition countries. Empirical studies almost invariably show privatized enterprises outperform state enterprises. Moreover, the literature identifies de novo firms as being clearly the best performers, followed by outsider-dominated firms, while insider-dominated firms are the least efficient among those newly privatized. The importance of de novo firms in enlarging the private sector in transition economies is reviewed, along with the question of whether privatization efforts support or hinder de novo private sector development. Finally, the paper discusses the importance of providing a suitable market environment for successful private-sector development.

The authors' view is that any privatisation is better than none, regardless of whether a stable, competitive environment has been established first. However, private companies started from scratch perform best, followed by newly privatised firms run by outsiders, either local or foreign. Privatised companies dominated by insiders do less well, but even they regularly outperform state enterprises. Without an appropriate market environment though, managers may spend more time lobbying the government for support than undertaking painful restructuring measures.

IFC Discussion Paper No. 38.QUOTEIt is now universally acknowledged that ownership matters; that private ownership in and of itself is a major determinant of good performance in firms... Decent economic policy and well-functioning legal and administrative institutions... matter greatly as well.QUOTEThis paper looks at what happens when the shift to private ownership gets far out in front of the effort to build the institutional underpinnings of a capitalist economy. The emphasis is on what went wrong and why and what, if anything, can be done to be correct it. Proposals include renationalization and/or postponement of further privatization, both to be accompanied by measures to strengthen the managerial capacities of the state. Neither approach seems likely to produce short-term improvements. The regrettable fact is that governments that botch privatization are equally likely to botch the management of state-owned firms. In a number of Central European transition countries, privatization is living up to expectations; and there is no need for such measures. For institutionally-weak countries, the less dramatic but reasonable short-term course of action is to push ahead more slowly with case- by-case and tender privatization in cooperation with the international assistance community in hopes of producing some success stories that will lead by example.

This book assesses the labor market consequences of privatization in developing countries (the Republic of Korea, India and Mexico) and transition economies (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Eastern Germany and Hungary) during the first half of the 1990s. Based on over 20 case studies in seven countries, it considers the effect of privatization on productivity and on the level and structure of employment. The evolving patterns of industrial relations in privatized firms and the subsequent changes in wages, remuneration systems and non-wage benefits are also examined.