The authors develop and apply a schema to evaluate outcomes of privatization. The schema is applied to evaluative research conducted on privatizations in France, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. The findings indicate that comprehensive evaluations of privatization outcomes are wanting.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbbottW FMonsenR J, 1979, “On the measurement of corporate social responsibility: Self-reported disclosures as a method of measuring corporate social involvement”Academy of Management Journal22501–515
2.
AlexanderG JBuchholzR A, 1978, “Corporate social responsibility and stock market performance”Academy of Management Journal21479–486
3.
BallI, 1993, “Making ministries more accountable: The New Zealand experience”, presented to the International Consortium on environmental financial management conference, Arlington, VA; copy available from the Treasury of New Zealand
4.
BalladurE, 1988, “Bilan et perspective de la politique de privatisation”Notes Bleuesnumber 375, 22–27 mars 1988; available from La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75840 Paris Cedex 07
5.
BaumolW, 1993, “On the perils of privatization”Eastern Economic Journal19419–440
6.
BhargavaMDubelaarCRamaswamiS, 1994, “Reconciling diverse measures of performance: A conceptual framework and test of methodology”Journal of Business Research31235–246
7.
BishopMKayJ, 1988Does Privatization Work? (London Business School, London)
8.
BizaguetA, 1992Que Sais-je Collection. Le Secteur Public et les Privatisations (PUF, Paris)
9.
BollardABuckleR, (Eds), 1987Economic Liberalization in NZ (Allen and Unwin, Wellington)
10.
BollardAMayesD, 1993, “Corporatization and privatization in New Zealand”, in The Political Economy of Privatization Eds ClarkeTPitelisC, (Routledge, London) pp 308–336
11.
BraybrookeDLindblomC E, 1963A Strategy of Decision (Free Press, New York)
12.
CaponNFarleyJ UHoenigS, 1990, “Determinants of financial performance: A meta-analysis”Management Science361143–1159
13.
CNUCED, 1993, “Présentation de l'expérience française des années 1986–1988”, Dossier de la Direction du Trésor, Bureau E3, Ministère de l'Économie, 139 rue Borey, 75012 Paris
14.
CochranP LWoodR A, 1984, “Corporate social responsibility and financial performance”Academy of Management Journal2742–56
15.
CrockfordD, 1994, “Strategic management in privatized businesses”Long Range Planning27(2) 111–118
16.
DanticoMJurikN, 1986, “Where have all the good jobs gone? The effect of government service privatization on women workers”Contemporary Crises10421–439
17.
DeaneR, 1989, “Reflections on privatizations”, in Corporatization and Privatization: A Discussion of the IssueElectricity Corporation of New Zealand, Auckland
18.
DouglasR, 1994, “Unfinished business”, presented at the Canadian Centre for Management Development, Ottawa, 6 April; copy available from the Centre, 150 York Street, Toronto
19.
DuruptyM, 1988Les Privatisations en France (Documentation Française, Paris)
20.
EastonB, 1989The Making of Rogernomics (University Press, Auckland, NZ)
21.
EckelCEckelDSingalV, 1994, “Privatization and competition: Industry effects of the sale of British Airways and Air Canada”, working paper, Department of Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
22.
Economic Development Commission, 1993, “Report”, New Zealand Commerce Commission, PO Box 2351, Wellington
23.
FeigenbaumH BHenigJ, 1994, “The political underpinnings of privatization: A typology”World Politics46185–208
24.
FriedlandJ, 1995, “The master plan”Wall Street Journal 2 October, page R4
25.
GalalAJonesLTandonPVogelsangI, 1994Welfare Consequences of Selling Public Enterprises: An Empirical Analysis (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
26.
HarrisS, 1993, “New Zealand: Why the Prime Minister is all smiles in an election year”National Business Review 5 February
27.
MaskelJ, 1992, “UK privatizations: Process and outcomes”, WP 273, Department of Economics, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London
28.
MaskelJSzymanskiS, 1993, “Privatization, liberalization wages and employment; theory and evidence for the UK”Economica60161–182
29.
Haut Conseil du Secteur Public, 1988, “Report”, in Notes et études documentairesnumber 4857, Paris
30.
HollandMBostonJ, 1990The Fourth Labor Government (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
31.
HowardM, 1991, “Effectiveness and quality of service data: Public sector ‘affluence’, private sector ‘squalor’?”Australian Journal of Public Administration50263–273
32.
JonesLTandonPVogelsangI, 1990Selling Public Enterprise: A Cost Benefit Methodology (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
33.
JonesS, 1991, “The road to privatization”Finance and Development28(1) 39–41
34.
JonesSMegginsonWNashRNetterJ, 1994, “Share issue privatizations as financial means to political and economic ends”, working paper, Department of Banking and Finance, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia
35.
KuhnT, 1970The Structure of Scientific Revolution (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
LewisE, 1993, “Microeconomic reform of the New Zealand public sector”Australian Economic Review10(4) 11–16
38.
McGuireJ BSundgrenASchneeweisT, 1988, “Corporate social responsibility and firm performance”Academy of Management Journal31854–872
39.
MascarenhasR C, 1993, “Building an enterprise culture in the public sector: Reform of the public sector in Australia, Britain, and New Zealand”Public Administration Review53319–328
40.
MegginsonWNashRVan RandenborghM, 1994, “The financial and operating performance of newly privatized firms: An international empirical analysis”The Journal of FinanceXLIX403–452
41.
MilbankD, 1995, “Backlash”Wall Street Journal 2 October, page R17
42.
MilneS, 1993, “Privatization process in the transportation system of New Zealand”, presented to Secretary of Transport: Transport Water and Urban Development Conference, April 1993; copy available from New Zealand Transport Department, PO Box 930, Wellington
43.
MirandaRLernerA, 1995, “Bureaucracy, organizational redundancy, and the privatization of public services”Public Administration Review55193–200
44.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07
45.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1987 Paribas, number 319
46.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1987 Société générale alsacienne de banque, number 327
47.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1987 Banque de bâtiment et des travaux publics, number 332
48.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1987 CCF, number 334
49.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1987 CGE, number 336
50.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1988 Société Générale, number 342
51.
Notes Bleues La Documentation Française, 31 quai Voltaire, 75340 Paris Cedex 07 1988 TFI, number 343–344
52.
ParkerD, 1991, “Privatisation ten years on: A critical analysis of its rationale and results”Economics47154–163
53.
ParkerDHartleyK, 1991, “Do changes in organizational status affect financial performance?”Strategic Management Journal12631–641
54.
PelkmansJWagnerN, 1990, “The economics of privatization and deregulation: Lessons from Asean and the EC”, in Privatization and Deregulation in Asean and the EC: Making Markets More Effective Eds PelkmansJWagnerN, (Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore) pp 3–28
55.
PeyrelevadeJ, 1993Pour un Capitalisme Intelligent (Grasset, Paris)
56.
PrebbleR W, 1990, “The case for complete rather than partial privatization and for economic deregulation”, address, World Bank, 24 October; copy available from the World Bank, Washington DC 20433
57.
RobinsonC, 1992, “The results of UK electricity privatization”, Seeds 62, Memorandum to the House of Commons Select Committee on Energy (The Stationery Office, London)
58.
SamsonC, 1994, “The three forces of privatization”Sociology28(1) 79–97
59.
SharpA, 1994Leap in the Dark: The Changing Role of the State in NZ since 1984 (Auckland University Press, Auckland)
60.
SteersR M, 1975, “Problems in the measurement of organizational effectiveness”Administrative Science Quarterly20546–558
61.
ThompsonJ D, 1967Organizations in Action (McGraw-Hill, New York)
62.
UNCTAD, 1993a, “Country presentation submitted by Australia”, report TD/B/WG3/Misc6, United Nations Trade and Development Board
63.
UNCTAD, 1993b, “Country presentation submitted by New Zealand”, report TD/B/WG3/Misc15, United Nations Trade and Development Board
64.
UNCTAD, 1993c, “Review of the country presentations in the light of a cross-country analysis by the secretariat on the design, implementation and results of privatization programmes”, report TD/B/WG3.7/Revl, United Nations Trade and Development Board
65.
UNCTAD, 1993d, “Ad hoc working group on comparative experiences in privatization”, report TD/B/WG3/Misc20, United Nations Trade and Development Board
66.
VickersJYarrowG, 1988Privatization: An Economic Analysis (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
67.
WalshRWetzelK, 1993, “Preparing for privatization: Corporate strategy and industrial relations in New Zealand's state owned enterprise”British Journal of Industrial Relations31(1) 57–74
68.
YarrowG, 1986, “Privatization in theory and practice”Economic policy2323–378
