THE THEORY AND EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT MIXED ENTERPRISES

type="main" xml:lang="de"> Cet article traite de certaines lacunes a la fois dans la classification et la theorie des entreprises publiques locales mixtes et propose des predictions concernant leur performance. Les auteurs identifient d'abord les differentes formes d'entites ayant les caracteristiques d'entreprises mixtes et les situent dans une taxonomie detaillee. La plupart des entreprises mixtes fournissent des biens publics. Des lors leur objectif premier devrait etre d'accroitre le bien-etre social. Cet objectif devrait generer des developpements theoriques et mener a evaluer la performance des entreprises mixtes. Les auteurs presentent 3 modeles principal-agent qui offrent des theories contrastantes de la performance des entreprises mixtes avec des hypotheses differentes sur les motivations et les comportements des acteurs concernes: (1) un modele “du meilleur des deux mondes” ; (2) un modele “du pire des deux mondes” et (3) un modele “de monde de collusion pour le profit”. Les auteurs testent indirectement ces modeles en analysant et evaluant la performance empirique des entreprises mixtes via leurs effets en terme de bien-etre social ou bien en utilisant des mesures de performance la ou il n'y a pas de preuve directe d'effets de bien-etre social. Pour conclure, sur base de la theorie et des resultats empiriques, les auteurs emettent quelques predictions sur le comportment et la performance des entreprises locales mixtes.

[1]  Rui Cunha Marques,et al.  LOCAL MIXED COMPANIES: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE IN AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE , 2014 .

[2]  M. García-valiñas,et al.  Is the price of water for residential use related to provider ownership? Empirical evidence from Spain , 2013 .

[3]  A. Massarutto,et al.  Drowned in an inch of water , 2013 .

[4]  G. Wang,et al.  Impact of privatization on port efficiency and effectiveness: results from Panama and US ports , 2013 .

[5]  Antonio Massarutto,et al.  The Municipal Waste Management Sector in Europe: Shifting Boundaries between Public Service and the Market , 2012 .

[6]  Andrea Zatti,et al.  New Organizational Models in European Local Public Transport: From Myth to Reality , 2012 .

[7]  Hugo Consciência Silvestre,et al.  Public-Private Partnerships/Private Finance Initiatives in Portugal , 2012 .

[8]  P. Bauby.  Local Services of General Economic Interest in Europe - Water Services: What are the Challenges? , 2012 .

[9]  R. Marques,et al.  MIXED COMPANIES AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE: NO MAN CAN SERVE TWO MASTERS , 2012 .

[10]  M. Siemiatycki,et al.  Value for Money and Risk in Public–Private Partnerships , 2012 .

[11]  Philip Ashton,et al.  The Financial Engineering of Infrastructure Privatization , 2012 .

[12]  A. Boardman,et al.  The Political Economy of Public‐Private Partnerships and Analysis of Their Social Value , 2012 .

[13]  Chyan Yang,et al.  Managerial efficiency in Taiwan bank branches: A network DEA , 2012 .

[14]  Giulia Romano,et al.  Measuring and comparing the efficiency of water utility companies: A data envelopment analysis approach , 2011 .

[15]  Silvana Tordo,et al.  National Oil Companies and Value Creation , 2011 .

[16]  J. Ura,et al.  The Behavioral Political Economy of Budget Deficits: How Starve the Beast Policies Feed the Machine , 2011 .

[17]  R. Marques,et al.  Viability of Municipal Companies in the Provision of Urban Infrastructure Services , 2011 .

[18]  Dennis L. Weisman,et al.  Price cap regulation: what have we learned from 25 years of experience in the telecommunications industry? , 2010 .

[19]  Saibal Ghosh.  How Did State-Owned Banks Respond to Privatization? Evidence from the Indian Experiment , 2010 .

[20]  Carlo Scarpa,et al.  Do competition and ownership matter? Evidence from local public transport in Europe , 2010 .

[21]  R. Marques,et al.  Public-Private Partnership Contracts: A Tale of Two Cities with Different Contractual Arrangements , 2010 .

[22]  O. Guedhami,et al.  The Political Economy of Residual State Ownership in Privatized Firms: Evidence from Emerging Markets , 2009 .

[23]  Christian Wolf.  Does Ownership Matter? The Performance and Efficiency of State Oil vs. Private Oil (1987-2006) , 2009 .

[24]  M. Pollitt,et al.  The Welfare Implications of Oil Privatization: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Norway's Statoil , 2009 .

[25]  Saibal Ghosh.  Does divestment matter for firm performance?: Evidence from the Indian experience , 2008 .

[26]  Christoph Reichard,et al.  Municipal corporatization in Germany and Italy , 2008 .

[27]  T. Oum,et al.  Ownership Forms Matter for Airport Efficiency: A Stochastic Frontier Investigation of Worldwide Airports , 2008 .

[28]  Aidan R. Vining,et al.  Public‐private partnerships in Canada: Theory and evidence , 2008 .

[29]  H. Frech,et al.  Prison health care: is contracting out healthy? , 2007, Health economics.

[30]  L. Robotti,et al.  The Provision of Local Public Services Through Mixed Enterprises: The Italian Case , 2007 .

[31]  Emanuele Lobina,et al.  Experience with private sector participation in Grenoble, France, and lessons on strengthening public water operations , 2007 .

[32]  Alessandro Marra.  Internal Regulation by Mixed Enterprises: The Case of the Italian Water Sector , 2007 .

[33]  C. Greve,et al.  Public-Private Partnerships: An International Performance Review , 2007 .

[34]  Anne Yvrande-Billon,et al.  Ownership, Contractual Practices and Technical Efficiency: The Case of Urban Public Transport in France , 2007 .

[35]  Chunxin Jia.  The Effect of Ownership on the Prudential Behavior of Banks - The Case of China , 2006 .

[36]  A. Vining,et al.  'Choice of Organizational Form Makes a Real Difference': The Impact of Corporatization on Government Agencies in Canada , 2006 .

[37]  Graeme Hodge,et al.  The challenge of public-private partnerships: Learning from international experience , 2005 .

[38]  D. Hambrick,et al.  FACTIONAL GROUPS: A NEW VANTAGE ON DEMOGRAPHIC FAULTLINES, CONFLICT, AND DISINTEGRATION IN WORK TEAMS , 2005 .

[39]  A. Boardman,et al.  Public–private partnerships in the US and Canada: “There are no free lunches”1 , 2005 .

[40]  Yang Li,et al.  OWNERSHIP AND NONPERFORMING LOANS: EVIDENCE FROM TAIWAN'S BANKS , 2004 .

[41]  D. Rondinelli,et al.  Ownership and its Impact on Coping with Financial Crisis: Differences in State-, Mixed-, and Privately-Owned Enterprises in Thailand , 2004 .

[42]  M. Filippini,et al.  The influence of ownership on the cost of bus service provision in Switzerland - an empirical illustration , 2003 .

[43]  Yung‐ho Chiu.  Estimating the Cost Efficiency of Mixed Enterprises in Taiwan , 2003 .

[44]  Wei Li,et al.  The Impact of Privatization and Competition in the Telecommunications Sector Around the World , 2002 .

[45]  Eric Gedajlovic,et al.  Public, private and mixed ownership and the performance of international airlines , 2002 .

[46]  S. Majumdar.  Assessing comparative efficiency of the state-owned mixed and private sectors in Indian industry , 1998 .

[47]  Sumit K. Majumdar,et al.  Incentive Regulation and Productive Efficiency in the U.S. Telecommunications Industry , 1997 .

[48]  Jith Jayaratne,et al.  A note on the implementation of cable TV rate caps , 1996 .

[49]  O. Hart,et al.  The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and an Application to Prisons , 1996 .

[50]  A. Worthington,et al.  The Empirical Analysis Of Fiscal Illusion , 1996 .

[51]  Zhiqiang Liu,et al.  Productivity Growth and Firm Ownership: An Analytical and Empirical Investigation , 1994, Journal of Political Economy.

[52]  R. Rubinovitz,et al.  Market power and price increases for basic cable service since deregulation , 1993 .

[53]  David Joulfaian,et al.  The relationship between on-budget and off-budget government☆ , 1991 .

[54]  Aidan R. Vining,et al.  Ownership and Performance in Competitive Environments: A Comparison of the Performance of Private, Mixed, and State-Owned Enterprises , 1989, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[55]  James A. Brickley,et al.  The Market for Corporate Control: The Empirical Evidence Since 1980 , 1988 .

[56]  Catherine C. Eckel,et al.  Elements of a Theory of Mixed Enterprise , 1985 .

[57]  Claude Wallet.  Resolution of Conflicts of Interest in The Ownership of a Firm: The Case of Mixed Firms , 1983 .

[58]  Samuel H. Baker.  The Determinants of Median Voter Tax Liability: an Empirical Test of the Fiscal Illusion Hypothesis , 1983 .

[59]  R. Mazzolini.  Strategic Decisions in Government-Controlled Enterprises , 1981 .

[60]  F. Schneider,et al.  FISCAL ILLUSION, POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS, AND LOCAL PUBLIC SPENDING , 1978 .

[61]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control Unit , 1976 .

[62]  A. Boardman,et al.  Self-interest Springs Eternal: Political Economy Reasons why Public-Private Partnerships Do Not Work as Well as Expected , 2014 .

[63]  Emili Tortosa‐Ausina,et al.  Does local public ownership matter for the efficiency of water utilities? Evidence from Italy , 2014 .

[64]  R. Marques,et al.  innovar accountability and governance in local public services: the particular case of mixed companies , 2012 .

[65]  Per Lægreid,et al.  Governance of Public Sector Organizations , 2010 .

[66]  Yi Zhang,et al.  Bank ownership reform and bank performance in China. , 2009 .

[67]  Larry H. P. Lang,et al.  CENTRE FOR NEW AND EMERGING MARKETS Discussion Paper Series Number 40 RETAINED STATE SHAREHOLDING IN CHINESE PLCS: DOES GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP REDUCE CORPORATE VALUE? * , 2005 .

[68]  Avinash Dixit,et al.  # Incentives and Organizations in the Public Sector: An Interpretative Review , 2002 .

[69]  William L. Megginson,et al.  Forthcoming, Journal of Economic Literature FROM STATE TO MARKET: A SURVEY OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES ON PRIVATIZATION , 2000 .

[70]  P. Jasiński.  Partial privatisation: The caveats and expriences , 1998 .

[71]  Catherine Waddams Price,et al.  Malmquist indices of productivity change in the UK gas industry before and after privatization , 1996 .

[72]  S. Brooks.  The Mixed Ownership Corporation as an Instrument of Public Policy , 1987 .

[73]  D. Macrae,et al.  The issue of standing in cost-benefit analysis , 1986 .

[74]  Bengt Holmstrom,et al.  Moral Hazard and Observability , 1979 .