For citation:
Sotskova, A., & Pushkarev, A. (2021). Evaluation of the Effects of Competition on Labor Productivity of Enterprises of Different Forms of Property. Zhurnal Economicheskoj Teorii [Russian Journal of Economic Theory], 18(1), 147-152, https://doi.org/10.31063/2073-6517/2021.18-1.11
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to propose a theoretical model for measuring the susceptibility of companies of different ownership types to competitive selection. The study tests the hypothesis about the role of market effects for public and private companies. The peculiarity of the proposed model is that the elements of productivity and a firm’s market share are divided into three components according to the form of ownership, taking into account the market share of each form of ownership in the industry. Most of the existing research confirms that state-owned enterprises are less efficient than private ones. Taking into account this fact and the ownership structure in a number of key industries in Russia, it can be assumed that the proposed model will measure to what extent state-owned companies or companies with state participation are less susceptible to the effects of competitive selection compared to conventional firms. We can also assess the contribution of firms of each type of ownership to productivity growth of industries. The model can also be used to detect industries and forms of ownership with ineffective competition mechanisms, which makes this model particularly relevant to the Russian context.
Savin, I. V., Mariev, O. S., & Pushkarev, A. A. (2019). Vyzhivaet sil’neyshiy? Izmerenie konkurentnogo otbora na primere Ural’skogo federal’nogo okruga. [Survival of the fittest? Measuring the strength of market selection on the example of the Urals federal district]. Ekonomicheskiy zhurnal VShE [The HSE Economic Journal], 23(1), 90–117. (In Russ.)
Shatin, A. Y. (2012). Effektivnost’ gosudarstvennoy sobstvennosti krupnykh kompaniy v Rossii: sovremennyy aspekt [Efficiency of state ownership of the large companies in Russia: modern aspect]. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ekonomika [CSU Bulletin. Economics], 9(263), 37, 25–28. (In Russ.)
Dewenter, K., & Malatesta, P. (2001). State-owned and privately-owned firms: an empirical analysis of profitability, leverage and labour intensity. The American Economic Review, 91(1), 320–334. DOI: 10.1257/aer.91.1.320.
Djankov, S., & Murrell, P. (2002). Enterprise restructuring in transition: a quantitative survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(3), 739–792. DOI: 10.1257/002205102760273788.
Estrin, S., Hanousek, J., Kocenda, E., & Svejnar, J. (2009). The effects of privatization and ownership in transition economies. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(3), 699–728. DOI: 10.1257/jel.47.3.699.
Iootty, M., Correa, P., Radas, S., & Skrinjaric, B. (2014). Stylized facts on productivity growth: evidence from firm-level data in Croatia. Policy Research Working Paper Series 6990. The World Bank. 43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-6990.
Iwasaki, I., & Mizobata, S. (2018). Post‐privatization ownership and firm performance: a large meta‐analysis of the transition literature. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 89(2), 263–322. DOI: 10.1111/apce.12180.
Muravyev, A., Iwasaki, I., & Mizobata, S. (2018). Ownership dynamics and firm performance in an emerging economy: a meta-analysis of the Russian literature. Post-Communist Economies, 30(3), 290–333. DOI: 10.1080/14631377.2018.1442036.
Yu, X., Dosi, G., Lei, J., & Nuvolari, A. (2015). Institutional change and productivity growth in China’s manufacturing: the microeconomics of knowledge accumulation and “creative restructuring”. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(3), 565–602. DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtv011.
Wright, M., Buck, T., & Filatotchev, I. (2002). Post-privatization effects of management and employee buy-outs. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 73(3), 303–352. DOI: 10.1111/1467–8292.0019.