PRIVATIZATION AND COMPARATIVE EFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ENTERPRISE IN TURKEY The Cement Industry

Cakmak, Erol H.; Zaim, Osman

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8292.1992.tb02089.x

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…E¤ciency di¡erences among state-owned plants can be explained by their geographical location and by the size of the regional markets they aim to serve. These ¢ndings o¡er further support for the cross-sectional study by C°akmak and Zaim (1992), who found no di¡erence between the average e¤ciency levels of private and stateowned cement plants. .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…These ¢ndings o¡er further support for the cross-sectional study by C°akmak and Zaim (1992), who found no di¡erence between the average e¤ciency levels of private and stateowned cement plants. .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…A few studies have been conducted on the Turkish cement industry. C°akmak and Zaim (1992) compared the e¤ciency of private and public plants in 1985. They employed the stochastic production frontier approach to estimate the production frontier and technical e¤ciency at the plant level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Privatization, Ownership and Technical Efficiency a Study of the Turkish Cement Industry

Saygili

Taymaz

2001

Ann Public Coop Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an empirical study of the effects of ownership and privatization on technical efficiency in the Turkish cement industry. We first summarize the characteristics of the Turkish cement industry and changes in industrial structure in the post‐privatization period. The effects of ownership and privatization on technical efficiency are estimated using the stochastic production frontier approach. The empirical tests presented, which use data on all cement plants in Turkey, suggest that neither ownership nor privatization had a significant impact on technical efficiency.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Privatization, Ownership and Technical Efficiency a Study of the Turkish Cement Industry

Saygili

Taymaz

2001

Ann Public Coop Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…High price shocks in government sector might be stemming from its inefficiency (as well as high and volatile taxation policies). This could affect capital accumulation and the labor supply (see Cakmak and Zaim, 1992). Thus government sector pricing could have a negative impact on the economy and increases unemployment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, price shocks might be capturing the inefficiency. In order to reason this out we make the assumption that government sector is less efficient than the private sector (see Cakmak and Zaim, 1992). Berument (2003) argued that the biggest source of price shock is the government sector; the volatility in the government sector is three times higher than in those of the private sector.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Macroeconomic Policy and Unemployment by Economic Activity: Evidence from Turkey

Berument

Dogan

Tansel

2009

Emerging Markets Finance and Trade

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

*This paper investigates how macroeconomic policy shocks in Turkey affect the total unemployment and provides evidence on the differential responses of the unemployment by sectors of economic activity. Our paper extends the previous work in two respects. First, we consider not only the response of total unemployment but also the response of unemployment by sectors of economic activity. Second, we consider not only the effect of monetary policy shocks, but also the effects of several other macroeconomic shocks. The quarterly data used which covers the period 1988:01 to 2004:04 from Turkey. A VAR model with a recursive order is employed to estimate the effects of shocks in real GDP, price, exchange rate, interbank interest rate, money supply and own sectoral unemployment on unemployment by sectors of economic activity. The results indicate that the positive income shock is followed by a decrease in unemployment in all economic activity groups during the initial periods except the unemployment in the Electricity sector and the Community Services sector. A positive money shock decreases unemployment in sectors of Mining, Manufacturing, Construction, Wholesale-Retail Trade, Transportation and, FinanceInsurance. Opposite results are obtained with the interbank interest rate shocks. Even if, they are not statistically significant, a positive interbank interest rate shock increases the unemployment in all economic activities at the initial levels but derives down the unemployment in the Agriculture and the Community Services sectors at the initial level. Moreover, a positive price shock increases unemployment in all economic sectors in the long run except the Mining and the Community Services. Thus, unemployment in different sectors of economic activity responds differently to various macroeconomic policy shocks. JEL Classification:E60, E24

show abstract

Privatization in Turkey: Implementation, politics of privatization and performance results

Karatas

2001

J of Intl Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper provides a comprehensive survey of privatization transastions in Turkey which took place between 1986 and 2000. The objectives of the privatization programme and privatized and nominated SOEs are discussed. The breakdown of total proceeds by sales methods and scope of the privatization programme by economic sectors are examined. The saleability of relatively large public enterprises is reviewed and utilization of privatization proceeds during and after privatization process is critically appraised. In addition, an attempt is made to discuss the politics of privatization by referring to key political and economic factors which have influenced implementation of the privatization programme. Following a short review of the economic environment and macroeconomic indicators in Turkey, focus is also placed on the research results that are available on the performance of public, private and privatized SOEs, particularly in the cement sector. In the final section, some key issues relevant to Turkish privatization are accentuated and some conclusion are drawn. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

PRIVATIZATION AND COMPARATIVE EFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ENTERPRISE IN TURKEY The Cement Industry

Cited by 10 publications

References 12 publications

Privatization, Ownership and Technical Efficiency a Study of the Turkish Cement Industry

Privatization, Ownership and Technical Efficiency a Study of the Turkish Cement Industry

Macroeconomic Policy and Unemployment by Economic Activity: Evidence from Turkey

Privatization in Turkey: Implementation, politics of privatization and performance results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About