The Experts below are selected from a list of 33624 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Margherita Ciervo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Les acteurs dominants de la finance mondiale par rapport aux processus de Privatisation des services en eau
Bulletin de la Société Géographique de Liège, 2009Co-Authors: Margherita CiervoAbstract:L'article analyse, sur la base des données quantitatives et qualitatives, les intérêts, le pouvoir et le\nrôle des acteurs de la finance mondiale par rapport aux processus de Privatisation des services en\neau qui produisent des effets environnementaux, sociaux, économiques et politiques très graves.\nL'échelle spatiale de leurs actions définit d'un côté, la grande influence exercée par la finance\nmondiale - d'un point de vue politique (centralisation des décisions et leur imposition à niveau\nglobal), économique (réorganisation de l'espace-monde) et culturel (diffusion du concept de\nl'eau comme un bien économique) - de l'autre coté, la construction d'un réseau global contre la\nPrivatisation des services hydriques, pour leur gestion publique et participative, pour la culture\nde l'eau comme un droit humain. La conception de l'eau comme un bien économique est basée\nsur la rareté de la ressource qui, toutefois, loin d'être une condition naturelle, dépend du stress\nhydrique et écologique produit par le système productifet économique dominant. La rareté est le\nfondement pour la réalisation du profit et, donc, de la Privatisation qui concerne, comme on argue\ndans le texte, un service « produit» en condition de monopole naturel et non de concurrence,\navec des effets négatifs même pour les« clients ». L'analyse proposée soulève des questions sur\nla légitimité du pouvoir et des réflexions de type éthique.
-
Les acteurs dominants de la finance mondiale\npar rapport aux processus de Privatisation\ndes services en eau
Bulletin de la Société Géographique de Liège, 2009Co-Authors: Margherita CiervoAbstract:L'article analyse, sur la base des données quantitatives et qualitatives, les intérêts, le pouvoir et le\nrôle des acteurs de la finance mondiale par rapport aux processus de Privatisation des services en\neau qui produisent des effets environnementaux, sociaux, économiques et politiques très graves.\nL'échelle spatiale de leurs actions définit d'un côté, la grande influence exercée par la finance\nmondiale - d'un point de vue politique (centralisation des décisions et leur imposition à niveau\nglobal), économique (réorganisation de l'espace-monde) et culturel (diffusion du concept de\nl'eau comme un bien économique) - de l'autre coté, la construction d'un réseau global contre la\nPrivatisation des services hydriques, pour leur gestion publique et participative, pour la culture\nde l'eau comme un droit humain. La conception de l'eau comme un bien économique est basée\nsur la rareté de la ressource qui, toutefois, loin d'être une condition naturelle, dépend du stress\nhydrique et écologique produit par le système productifet économique dominant. La rareté est le\nfondement pour la réalisation du profit et, donc, de la Privatisation qui concerne, comme on argue\ndans le texte, un service « produit» en condition de monopole naturel et non de concurrence,\navec des effets négatifs même pour les« clients ». L'analyse proposée soulève des questions sur\nla légitimité du pouvoir et des réflexions de type éthique.
Colin Kirkpatrick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Privatisation in developing countries a review of the evidence and the policy lessons
Journal of Development Studies, 2005Co-Authors: David Parker, Colin KirkpatrickAbstract:Privatisation is widely promoted as a means of improving economic performance in developing countries. However, the policy remains controversial and the relative roles of ownership and other structural changes, such as competition and regulation, in promoting economic performance remain uncertain. This article reviews the main empirical evidence on the impact of Privatisation on economic performance in developing economies. The evidence suggests that if Privatisation is to improve performance over the longer term, it needs to be complemented by policies that promote competition and effective state regulation, and that Privatisation works best in developing countries when it is integrated into a broader process of structural reform.
-
competition regulation and Privatisation of electricity generation in developing countries does the sequencing of the reforms matter
The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 2005Co-Authors: Yinfang Zhang, David Parker, Colin KirkpatrickAbstract:Recent years have seen countries introducing reform of their utility industries with a view to promoting private ownership and competition. This paper studies the effect of the sequencing of Privatisation, competition and regulation reforms in electricity generation using data from 25 developing countries for the period 1985 to 2001. A fixed effects panel data model is used. The study finds that establishing an independent regulatory authority and introducing competition before Privatisation is correlated with higher electricity generation, higher generation capacity and, in the case of the sequence of competition before Privatisation, improved capital utilisation.
David Parker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Privatisation and Corporate Performance
2020Co-Authors: David ParkerAbstract:This is a carefully edited selection of the most important articles concerning the impact of Privatisation on corporate performance. It consists of 26 of the most significant papers on the subject previously published in leading journals around the world. Following a new introductory overview of the subject by the editor, Privatisation and Corporate Performance is divided into four main sections. Part I features material on the theory of Privatisation. Part II follows with empirical studies of state and private ownership. Part III consists of papers on empirical studies of Privatisation. The final part focuses on outstanding issues of Privatisation and corporate performance and includes pointers to future research.
-
Inertia in The Implementation of a Privatisation Programme
The GeoJournal Library, 2020Co-Authors: David ParkerAbstract:Today more than 100 countries claim to have Privatisation programmes and the year 1999/2000 saw the largest value of global state asset sales so far, breaking the previous annual record figure of US$160bn.. At the same time, in a number of these countries Privatisation seems to have been more talked about than carried out (e.g. Cooke & Minogue, 1990; Adam et al., 1992, p.39; Astbury, 1996; Fundanga & Mwaba, 1997). Of the Privatisation proceeds in 1999/2000, Western Europe was responsible for 53%. By contrast, Latin America and Asia accounted for 15% each and the whole of the Middle East and Africa for a mere 2% (Privatisation International, October 2000, no. 145, p.7).
-
Privatisation in developing countries a review of the evidence and the policy lessons
Journal of Development Studies, 2005Co-Authors: David Parker, Colin KirkpatrickAbstract:Privatisation is widely promoted as a means of improving economic performance in developing countries. However, the policy remains controversial and the relative roles of ownership and other structural changes, such as competition and regulation, in promoting economic performance remain uncertain. This article reviews the main empirical evidence on the impact of Privatisation on economic performance in developing economies. The evidence suggests that if Privatisation is to improve performance over the longer term, it needs to be complemented by policies that promote competition and effective state regulation, and that Privatisation works best in developing countries when it is integrated into a broader process of structural reform.
-
competition regulation and Privatisation of electricity generation in developing countries does the sequencing of the reforms matter
The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 2005Co-Authors: Yinfang Zhang, David Parker, Colin KirkpatrickAbstract:Recent years have seen countries introducing reform of their utility industries with a view to promoting private ownership and competition. This paper studies the effect of the sequencing of Privatisation, competition and regulation reforms in electricity generation using data from 25 developing countries for the period 1985 to 2001. A fixed effects panel data model is used. The study finds that establishing an independent regulatory authority and introducing competition before Privatisation is correlated with higher electricity generation, higher generation capacity and, in the case of the sequence of competition before Privatisation, improved capital utilisation.
-
the uk s Privatisation experiment the passage of time permits a sober assessment
2004Co-Authors: David ParkerAbstract:This chapter looks at the UK’s Privatisation experiment, which began from the late 1970s. It considers the background to the UK’s Privatisations, which industries were privatised and how, and summarises the results of studies of performance changes in privatised companies in the UK. It looks at the relative roles of competition, regulation and ownership changes in determining performance improvement. It concludes by looking at the wider lessons that might be learned from the UK’s Privatisation experiment, including the importance of developing competitive markets and, in their absence, effective regulatory regimes.
Mika Kivimaki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
does transfer of work from a public sector organisation to a commercial enterprise without staff reductions increase risk of long term sickness absence among the staff a cohort study of laboratory and radiology employees
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2013Co-Authors: Lauri Kokkinen, Marianna Virtanen, Jaana Pentti, Jussi Vahtera, Mika KivimakiAbstract:BACKGROUND: Privatisations of public sector organisations are not uncommon, and some studies suggest that such organisational changes may adversely affect employee health. In this study, we examined whether transfer of work from public sector hospital units to commercial enterprises, without major staff reductions, was associated with an increased risk of long-term sickness absence among employees. METHODS: A cohort study of 962 employees from four public hospital laboratory and radiology units in three hospitals which were privatised during the follow-up and 1832 employees from similar units without such organisational changes. Records of new long-term sick leaves (>90 days) were obtained from national health registers and were linked to the data. Mean follow-up was 9.2 years. RESULTS: Age- and sex-adjusted HR for long-term sickness absence after Privatisation was 0.83 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.00) among employees whose work unit underwent a change from a public organisation to a commercial enterprise compared with employees in unchanged work units. Further adjustments for occupation, socioeconomic status, type of job contract, size of residence and sick leaves before Privatisation had little impact on the observed association. A sensitivity analysis with harmonised occupations across the two groups replicated the finding (multivariable adjusted HR 0.92 (0.70-1.20)). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, transfer of work from public organisation to commercial enterprise did not increase the risk of long-term sickness absence among employees.
Martin Mckee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a review of the impacts of tobacco industry Privatisation implications for policy
Global Public Health, 2011Co-Authors: Anna B Gilmore, Gary Fooks, Martin MckeeAbstract:State-owned tobacco companies, which still account for 40% of global cigarette production, face continued pressure from, among others, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), to be privatised. This review of available literature on tobacco industry Privatisation suggests that any economic benefits of Privatisation may be lower than supposed, because private owners avoid competitive tenders (thus underpaying for assets), negotiate lengthy tax holidays and are complicit in the smuggling of cigarettes to avoid import and excise duties. It outlines how Privatisation leads to increased marketing, more effective distribution and lower prices, creating additional demand for cigarettes among new and existing smokers, leading to increased cigarette consumption, higher smoking prevalence and lower age of smoking initiation. Privatisation also weakens tobacco control because private owners, in their drive for profits, lobby aggressively against effective policies and ignore or overturn existing policies. This evidenc...
-
mass Privatisation and mortality authors reply
The Lancet, 2009Co-Authors: David Stuckler, Lawrence King, Martin MckeeAbstract:David Stuckler and colleagues’ claim that mass Privatisation in the postcommunist era increased mortality (Jan 31, p 399) is based on the theory that Privatisation leads to job loss, resulting in poor health and premature death. But does Privatisation in fact lead to substantial job loss? Stuckler and colleagues’ article provides no evidence on this question. My coauthors and I have found that the answer is a clear “no”. Using data on nearly every manufacturing fi rm in four economies (Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine), we found no evidence that Privatisation subs tantially lowers fi rm-level employment. The estimates vary somewhat with the statistical method, but most are positive, and where they are negative the magnitudes are always small and nearly always statistically indistinguishable from zero. The estimated eff ects of foreign Privatisation are almost always positive, large, and signifi cant, generally implying a 10–30% expansion of employment after acquisition. Even in the country with the most (in)famous mass Privatisation, Russia, the estimated eff ects of both domestic and foreign Privatisation on employment are positive. These fi ndings are supported by those of other studies we have done of layoff s and worker turnover in privatised fi rms. The empirical evidence thus strongly contradicts Stuckler and colleagues’ theory that large job cuts follow Privatisation. Some other link might account for the observed Privatisation–mortality correlation at the country level, but that account has yet to be elaborated.
-
Mass Privatisation and mortality – Authors' reply
The Lancet, 2009Co-Authors: David Stuckler, Lawrence King, Martin MckeeAbstract:David Stuckler and colleagues’ claim that mass Privatisation in the postcommunist era increased mortality (Jan 31, p 399) is based on the theory that Privatisation leads to job loss, resulting in poor health and premature death. But does Privatisation in fact lead to substantial job loss? Stuckler and colleagues’ article provides no evidence on this question. My coauthors and I have found that the answer is a clear “no”. Using data on nearly every manufacturing fi rm in four economies (Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine), we found no evidence that Privatisation subs tantially lowers fi rm-level employment. The estimates vary somewhat with the statistical method, but most are positive, and where they are negative the magnitudes are always small and nearly always statistically indistinguishable from zero. The estimated eff ects of foreign Privatisation are almost always positive, large, and signifi cant, generally implying a 10–30% expansion of employment after acquisition. Even in the country with the most (in)famous mass Privatisation, Russia, the estimated eff ects of both domestic and foreign Privatisation on employment are positive. These fi ndings are supported by those of other studies we have done of layoff s and worker turnover in privatised fi rms. The empirical evidence thus strongly contradicts Stuckler and colleagues’ theory that large job cuts follow Privatisation. Some other link might account for the observed Privatisation–mortality correlation at the country level, but that account has yet to be elaborated.
