Document Type : Review Article
Authors
Department of Accounting, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Privatization has become a popular panacea for solving the organizational problems of governments by reducing the role of the state and encouraging the growth of the private sector enterprises. However, privatization takes a number of forms and has been approached in various ways during the move away from state control to other forms of ownership in developing and industrialized countries. Based on Iranian constitution, No.144, public companies must change to the private companies. The government of Iran urgently needs expanded and more dynamic private sectors, more efficient and effective infrastructure/utility provision, and increased investment from both domestic and foreign sources. The most important purpose of privatization in Iran is increasing the proficiency. In this article we will discuss about the reasons of this policy, forms and trends, privatization process and volume will be surveyed, article 44 and at the end performance of the government on privatization will be explained.
Keywords
analysis of privatization in developing countries. Journal of International Development
16, 213-240.
Bortolotti, K., & Pinotti, I. (2008). The effects of privatization on the performance
of newly privatized firms in emerging markets. Emerging Markets Review. 8 (2), 134–
146.
Bortolotti, B., & Faccio, M. (2004). Reluctant privatization. Unpublished working
paper, ECGI Finance.
Bortolotti, B., & Pinotti, I. (2008). The political economy of privatization. FEEM
Note di Lavoro, n. 45.
Bjørnskov, C., & Potrafke, N. (2011). Politics and privatization in Central and
Eastern Europe: a panel data analysis. Economics of Transition, forthcoming
Boubakri, N., & Cosset, J.C. (1998). The financial and operating performance of
newly-privatized firms: evidence from developing countries. Journal of Finance 53,
1081–1110.
Boubakri, N., Cosset, J. C., & Smaoui, H., (2009). Does privatization foster changes
in thequality of legal institutions? Journal of Financial Research 32, 169–197.
Boubakri, N., Cosset, J., & Saffar, W. (2008). Political connecti ons of newly
privatized firms. J. Corp. Finance 14 (5), 654– 673.
Economist 1998. Pocket World in Figures. London: Profile Books.
Economies. ”World Bank Research Observer 9(2), 241–272.
Fisman, R. (2001). Estimating the value of political connections. American
Economic Review 91, 1095-1102.
Erel, I., Liao, R., & Weisbach, M. (2012). Determinants of cross-border mergers and
acquisitions. Journal of Finance 67 (3), 1045–1082.
Elinder, M. & Jordahl, H. (2013). Political preferences and public sector outsourcing,
European Journal of Political Economy 30, 43-57.
Malaysia. Journal of Financial Economics 67, 351-382.
Johnson, G., Smith, S. & Codling B. (2000). Microprocesses of Institutional Change
in the Context of Privatisation. Academy of Management Review 25(3), 572–580.
Kikeri, S., & Nellis, J. (2004). Privatization in competitive sectors: the record so far.
The World Bank Research Observer 19, 87–118.
Kikeri, S., J. Nellis & Shirley M. (1994). Privatization: Lessons from Market
Li, W., & Xu, L.C. (2002). The political economy of privatization and competition:
cross-country evidence from the telecommunications sector. Journal of Comparative
Economics 30, 439–462.
Miller, A.N. (1997). Ideological Motivations of Privatization in Great Britain Versus
Developing Countries. Journal of International Affairs 50(2), 391–407.
Potrafke, N. (2010). The growth of public health expenditures in OECD countries: do
government ideology and electoral motives matter? Journal of Health Economics 29,
797-810.
Shleifer, A. (1998). State versus private ownership. Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 12, 133-150.
Shleifer, A., & Robert V. (1994). Equilibrium short horizons of investors and firms,
American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 80, 148-153.
)