Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
This chapter discusses the relationship between post-privatization ownership and firm performance in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the former Soviet Union (FSU). Based on the literature of enterprise privatization, it predicts that CEE countries perform better than FSU countries in enterprise restructuring. It also assumes that (a) the voucher system is the worst privatization method; (b) direct sales are superior to management-employee buyouts (MEBOs); and (c) the speed of policy implementation is related to progress in firm restructuring. The chapter reports that a research synthesis of 2,894 estimates drawn from 121 previous studies support these hypotheses overall. The results also indicate that in CEE and the FSU countries, private entities were more desirable corporate owners compared to the state; therefore, privatization policy was an essential element for the restructuring of the former socialist companies in the transition economies. The chapter concludes that the lesson obtained from enterprise privatization in CEE and the FSU is that the policy design for enterprise privatization is crucial, but that whatever it is, the free transfer of state assets must be avoided at all costs.
This chapter discusses the relationship between post-privatization ownership and firm performance in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the former Soviet Union (FSU). Based on the literature of enterprise privatization, it predicts that CEE countries perform better than FSU countries in enterprise restructuring. It also assumes that (a) the voucher system is the worst privatization method; (b) direct sales are superior to management-employee buyouts (MEBOs); and (c) the speed of policy implementation is related to progress in firm restructuring. The chapter reports that a research synthesis of 2,894 estimates drawn from 121 previous studies support these hypotheses overall. The results also indicate that in CEE and the FSU countries, private entities were more desirable corporate owners compared to the state; therefore, privatization policy was an essential element for the restructuring of the former socialist companies in the transition economies. The chapter concludes that the lesson obtained from enterprise privatization in CEE and the FSU is that the policy design for enterprise privatization is crucial, but that whatever it is, the free transfer of state assets must be avoided at all costs.
After the collapse of socialism, there was not a single country in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the former Soviet Union (FSU) that did not experience a serious economic crisis. Furthermore, the process of economic recovery from the crisis varied greatly among these countries. This economic phenomenon, known as the J-curve growth path, has caused a great deal of controversy among economists over its determinants. This chapter traces one of the most important debates in the transition economics, and elucidates the mechanism of the J-curve growth path through a meta-analysis of previous studies. The results of the meta-analysis, which employs 3,279 estimates drawn from 123 previous studies, reveal that while the growth-enhancing effects of structural change and transformation policy were small yet significant, inflation and regional conflict had a highly significant and strongly negative effect on output. In addition, the legacy of socialism might exacerbate the decline in production in the early stages of transition. Although these five factors have been repeatedly argued in the extant literature as main causes of the economic crisis and recovery in CEE and FSU countries, the meta-analysis is the first to compare their effect sizes, finally providing a complete picture of the mechanism of J-curve phenomenon.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.