Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T05:13:16.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Privatisation (Asset Sales) in New Zealand, 1987–1992

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Michael Williams
Michael Williams*
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is argued that New Zealand’s privatisation programme is unlikely to meet its main overt objective of easing fiscal problems. In the case of sales of major public utilities, neither allocative, internal nor social efficiency are likely to be enhanced either. A brief history, and calendar, of the asset sales programme is provided.

Type
Symposium: An International Perspective on Privatisation
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , December 1992 , pp. 43 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrow, K.J. (1986) “Agency and the Market”, in Arrow, , Intriligator, (eds) Handbook of Mathematical Economics iii, Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
Atkinson, S.E., Halvorsen, R. (1986) “The Relative Efficiency of Public and PrivateFirms in a Regulated Environment: The case of US electric utilities”, Journal of Public Economics, 29, pp. 281–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auditor-General (1987) Report of, for year ending 31st March 1987, Government Printer, Wellington.Google Scholar
Averch, H, Johnson, L.L. (1962) “Behaviour of the Firm under Regulatory Constraint”, American Economic Review. 52, pp.1052–69.Google Scholar
Bailey, E.E. (1981) “Contestability and the Design of Regulatory and Anti-trust Policies”, American Economic Review, 71, pp. 178–203.Google Scholar
Baumol, W.J., Panzar, J.C., Willig, R.D. (1982) Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industrial Structure, Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, New York.Google Scholar
Baumol, W.J., Klevorick, A.K. (1985) “Input Choices and Rate of Return Regulation: An overview of the discussion”, Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 1, pp. 162–90.Google Scholar
Baumol, W.J. (1987) “Natural Monopoly and Contestable Market Analysis”, in Gillie, A., Levacic, R., Thompson, G. Politics and Economic Policy, Open University Press, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Boardmand, A.E., Vining, A. R. (1989) “Ownership and Performance in Competitive Markets: A comparison of the performance of private, mixed and state owned enterprises”, Journal of Law and Economics, 32, pp. 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borcherding, T.E., Paunerchne, W.W., Schneider, F. (1982) “Comparing the Efficiency of Private and Public Production: The evidence from five countries”, Zeitscrift für Nationalökonomie, supplement 2, pp. 127–56.Google Scholar
Boston, J. (1988) Public sector reform in New Zealand: from corporatization to privatization, PSA conference paper.Google Scholar
Brittan, S. (1986) “Privatization: A comment on Kay and Thompson”, Economic Journal, 95, pp. 33–8.Google Scholar
Brock, W. A. (1983) “Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industrial Structure: Areview article”, Journal of Political Economy, 91, pp. 1055–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budget (1988) Sale of Government business — principles and procedures Government Printer, Wellington, Annex 4 to Part II.Google Scholar
Caves, D. W., Christiansen, L. R. (1980) “The Relative Efficiency of Public and Private Firms in a Competitive Environment: The case of Canadian railroads”, Journal of Political Economy, 88, pp. 958–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, S.N.S. (1978) The Myth of Social Cost, Hobart Paper 82, Institute of Economic Affairs, London.Google Scholar
Collins, S. (1987) Rogernomics: is there a better way? Pitman, Wellington.Google Scholar
Commerce Commission (NZ)(1992) Telecommunications Industry Inquiry Report, Government Printer, Wellington.Google Scholar
Crain, M.W., Zardkoohi, A. (1977) “A Test of the Property Rights Theory of the Firm: Water utilities in the United States”, Journal of Law and Economics, 14, pp. 149–65.Google Scholar
Dalziel, P., Lattimore, R. (1991) A Briefing on the New Zealand Macroeconomy, Oxford University Press, Auckland.Google Scholar
Department of Trade and Industry (1987) The Competitive Environment for State Owned Enterprises, DTI, Wellington.Google Scholar
Economic Development Commission (NZ)(1989) Privatising State Owned Enterprises, EDC, Wellington.Google Scholar
Fare, R., Logan, J. (1985) “The Relative Performance of Publicly-Owned and Privately-Owned Electric Utilities”, Journal of Public Economics, 26, pp. 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fershtman, C. (1990) “The Interdependence between Ownership Status and Market Structure: The case of privatization”, Economica, 57, pp. 319–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finsinger, J., Hammond, E.M., Tapp, J. (1985) Insurance: competition or regulations comparative study of the insurance markets in the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany, IFS Report Series, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London.Google Scholar
Foreman-Peck, J., Waterson, M. (1985) “The Comparative Efficiency of Private and Public Enterprise in Britain: Electricity generation between the World Wars”, Economic Journal Supplement, pp. 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsyth, P.J. (1984) “Airlines and Airports: Privatisation, competition and regulation”, Fiscal Studies 5–1, pp. 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giedrojc, J. (1989) Privatisation: the New Zealand approach, unpublished research paper, Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Gravelle, H.S.E., Katz, E. (1976) “Financial Targets and X-efficiency in Public Enterprises”, Economic Journal, 90, pp. 243–65.Google Scholar
Hansard (NZ) (1991) Income from State Asset Sales (as at 30/9/91), reply by Minister for SOEs to a question by Jim Anderton.Google Scholar
Heald, D. (1984) “Privatisation: Analyzing its appeal and limitations”, Fiscal Studies 5–1, 1984, pp. 36–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, D., Yarrow, G. (1989) “The Assessment: The regulation of utilities”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 4–2, pp. i–xxxi.Google Scholar
Hemming, R., Mansoor, A.M. (1988) Privatization and Public Enterprises Occasional Paper No. 56, International Monetary Fund, Washington.Google Scholar
Henry, C. (1989) Microeconomics for Public Policy: helping the invisible hand, Clarendon, Oxford.Google Scholar
Morgan, Jarden (NZ) (1988) Ownership and Regulation, Paper prepared for the Electricity Industry Task Force, Treasury, Wellington, October.Google Scholar
Jones, L.P., Tandon, P., Vogelsang, I. (1990) Selling Public Enterprise: a cost-benefit methodology, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mas.Google Scholar
Kay, J. A., Mayer, C., Thompson, D.J. (1986) Privatisation and Regulation: the UK experience, Clarendon, Oxford.Google Scholar
Lipsey, R.G., Lancaster, K. (1956–7) “The General Theory of the Second Best”, Review of Economic Studies, 24, pp. 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascarenhas, R.C. (1982) Public Enterprise in New Zealand NZ Institute of Public Administration, Wellington.Google Scholar
Mayer, C.P., Meadowcroft, S.A. (1985) “Selling Public Assets: Techniques and financial implications”, Fiscal Studies 6–4, pp. 42–55.Google Scholar
McCann, E. (1988) “Budget Deficits and Asset Sales”, University of Canterbury, Discussion Paper, No. 8809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinlay, P. (1987) Corporatisation: the solution for state-owned enterprises? (2nd edn) Institute of Policy Studies, Wellington.Google Scholar
McKinlay, P. (1992) Corporatisation of Power Boards: public policy issues relevant to initial ownership for the NZ Local Government Association, McKinlay-Douglas Ltd, Wellington.Google Scholar
Meyer, R.A. (1975) “Publicly Owned versus Privately Owned Utilities: A policy choice”, Review of Economics and Statistics 17, pp. 391–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millward, R. (1982) “The Comparative Performance of Public and Private Ownership”, in Roll, Lord (ed) The Mixed Economy, proceedings of section F (economics) of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Salford 1980, Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
New Zealand Business Round Table (1992) The Public Benefit of Private Ownership: the case for privatisation NZ Business Round Table, Wellington, June.Google Scholar
Papps, I. (1975) Government and Enterprise: an analysis of the economics of government regulation or control of industry Institute of Economic Affairs, London.Google Scholar
Pescatrice, D.R., Trapani, J.M. (1980) “The Performance and Objectives of Public and Private Utilities Operating in the United States”, Journal of Public Economics, 13, pp. 259–76.Google Scholar
Pint, E.M. (1991) “Nationalization vs. Regulation of Monopolies: The effects of ownership on efficiency”, Journal of Public Economics, 44, pp. 131–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Primeaux, W.J. (1977) “An Assessment of X-efficiency Gained Through Competition”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 59, pp. 105–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pryke, R. (1983) “The Comparative Performance of Private and Public Enterprise”, Fiscal Studies 3–2, pp. 68–81.Google Scholar
Pryke, R. (1981) The Nationalised Industries: policies and performance since 1968, Martin Robertson, Oxford.Google Scholar
Pryke, R. (1971) Public Enterprise in Practice: the British experience of nationalisation over two decades, MacGibbon and Kee, London.Google Scholar
Rees, R. (1986) “Is there an Economic Case for Privatization?”, Public Money, 5, pp. 19–26.Google Scholar
Reuten, G., Williams, M. (1989) Value-form and the State: the tendencies of accumulation and the determination of economic policy in capitalist society Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
Sappington, D.E.M., Stiglitz, J.E. (1987) “Privatization, Information and Incentives”, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 6, pp. 567–82.Google Scholar
Savas, E.S. (1982) Privatizing the Public Sector: how to shrink government Chatham House, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Savas, E.S. (1977) “An Empirical Study of Competition in Municipal Service Delivery”, Public Administration Review, Nov/Dec, pp. 717–24.Google Scholar
Scherer, F. (1980) Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, (2nd edn), Rand McNally, Chicago.Google Scholar
Scherer, F. (1988) “Corporate Takeovers: The efficiency arguments”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2, pp. 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seed, P. (1992) Draft Research Proposal for Applying Option Pricing Theory to Public Policy Evaluation: appraising corporatisation and privatisation policies in New Zealand, Wellington, 27/4/92.Google Scholar
Sheshinski, E. (1986) “Positive Second-Best Theory”, in Arrow, , Intriligator, (eds), Handbook of Mathematical Economics iii, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Singh, A. (1975) “Takeovers, Economic Natural Selection and the Theory of the Firm”, Economic Journal, 85, pp. 497–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SOE Advisory Unit (NZ)(1990) Briefing Papers to the Minister of SOEs, Wellington, 27/10.Google Scholar
Thomas, J.C. (1975) The Decline of Ideology in Western Political Parties: a study of changing policy orientations, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Treasury (NZ)(1991) Investments and Advances, Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand, Note 8.Google Scholar
Vickers, J., Yarrow, G. (1988) Privatisation: an economic analysis, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mas.Google Scholar
Vickers, J., Yarrow, G. (1986) Privatisation and Natural Monopolies, Public Policy Centre, London.Google Scholar
Williamson, O.E. (1990) Industrial Organisation, London, Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Yunker, J.A. (1975) “The Economic Performance of Public and Private Enterprise: The case of US electric utilities”, Journal of Economics and Business, 28, pp. 60–7.Google Scholar