Analysis of the State Ownership Realization Process on the Example of Kazakhstan

  • Bakhytgul Tulegenovna CHEREYEVA Narxoz University, Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan
  • Olga Ivanovna MALYARENKO Chelyabinsk State University, Kostanay Branch, Kostanay, Republic of Kazakhstan
  • Gulder Ivanovna ABAYEVA Kostanay State University named After A. Baitursynov, Kostanay, Republic of Kazakhstan
  • Olga Iosifovna MAYER Chelyabinsk State University, Kostanay Branch, Kostanay, Republic of Kazakhstan
  • Tatyana Kenzhebekovna OSTRYANINA Kostanay Engineering and Economics University named after M. Dulatov, Kostanay, Republic of Kazakhstan

Abstract

The research sets out the theoretical and methodological foundations of state property management. The use of privatization as the main tool for managing the public sector of the economy is shown, as a proof of which, a review of studies on reforming the economies of various countries is carried out, the main methodology and the results are shown. The authors chose a dynamically developing country of the post-socialist space as an object of research, where an unsuccessful attempt to reform the public sector has already been made, and today, the second one is being conducted. The study uses statistical data from 1991-2004 and 2014-2018, in the context of two periods of privatization of Kazakhstan. The authors give preliminary results of the current reform of the privatization of property and give alternative ways to reduce the public sector of the economy. It is concluded that the problem of quantitative and qualitative growth of the public sector can be solved not only through privatization, but also by maintaining restrictions and requirements on state-owned companies. In the end, this will lead to the promotion of healthy competition; improving the investment climate; increasing business activity and labor productivity, which is so necessary for countries with developing economies.

References

[1] Adams, S., Mengistu, B. 2008. Privatization, governance and economic development in developing countries. Journal of Developing Societies, 24(4): 415–438.
[2] Barnett, S. 2000. Evidence on the fiscal and macroeconomic impact of privatization. IMF Working Paper, W P/00/130, July, IMF, Washington, DC. Available at: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2000/wp00130.pdf
[3] Blanchard, O. 1997. The economics of post-communist transition. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN-10: 019828926X, ISBN-13: 978-0198289265, 149 pp. Available at: file:///C:/Users/ASERS1/Downloads/ 0198293992_sample.pdf
[4] Boardman, A.E., Laurin, C., and Vining, A.R. 2002. Privatization in Canada: Operating and stock price performance with international comparisons. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 19(2): 137–154.
[5] D’Souza, J., Megginson, W. 1999. The financial and operating performance of privatized firms during the 1990s. Journal of Finance, 54 (4): 1397–1438.
[6] Estrin, S., Hanousek, J., Kocenda, E., Svejnar, J. 2009. The effects of privatization and ownership in transition economies. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(3): 1–30.
[7] Filipovic, A. 2005. Impact of privatization on economic growth. Undergraduate Economic Review, 2 (1): Article 7. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/59225546.pdf
[8] Gasmi, F., Maingard, A., Noumba, P., and Virto, R L. 2011. Empirical evidence on the impact of privatization of fixed-line operators on telecommunications performance – Comparing OECD, Latin American, and African countries, TSE Working Paper, N. 11-241 pp. Available at: http://ideas.repec.org/p/ide/wpaper/24155.html
[9] Laffont, J.J., Tirole, J. 1991. Privatization and incentives. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 7: 84-105.
[10] Parker, D. 2004. The UK’s privatization experiment: The passage of time permits a sober assessment. CESIFO Working Paper. No. 1126.
[11] Plane, P. 1997. Privatization and economic growth: An empirical investigation from a sample of developing market economies. Applied Economics, 29(2): 161–79.
[12] Popov, V. 2011. Privatizatsiya v teorii i na praktike (Privatization in theory and practice). Otkrytaya Ekonomika -Open Economy, February 18, 2011. Available at: http://opec.ru/1345942.html (in Russian)
[13] Sappington, D.E.M. and Stiglitz, J.E. 1987. Privatization, information and incentives. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 6(4): 567–582.
[14] Shapiro, C., and Willig, R.D. 1990. Economic rationales for the scope of privatization. In E.N. Suleiman and J. Waterbury (eds), The Political Economy of Private Sector Reform and Privatization. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 55-87 pp.
[15] Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R.W. 1994. Politicians and firms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4): 995–1025.
[16] Straska, M., and Waller, G. 2012. Does investment improve when firms go private? Managerial Finance, 38(2): 124–142.
[17] Villalonga, B. 2000. Privatization and efficiency: Differentiating ownership effects from political, organizational, and dynamic effect. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 42(1): 43–77.
Published
2019-06-30
How to Cite
CHEREYEVA, Bakhytgul Tulegenovna et al. Analysis of the State Ownership Realization Process on the Example of Kazakhstan. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, [S.l.], v. 10, n. 4, p. 1013-1021, june 2019. ISSN 2068-696X. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jarle/article/view/4712>. Date accessed: 19 nov. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.14505//jarle.v10.4(42).03.