Andres, L A (2005) The impact of privatization on firms in the infrastructure sector in latin American countries. PhD thesis, University of Chicago, USA.
Abstract
This research analyzes the impact of privatization on the performance of 181 utilities in Latin American countries. Two different methodologies are applied over indicators of output, inputs, productivity, efficiency, quality, coverage, and prices, for electric, water, and telecommunication firms. The results suggest that changes in ownership generated significant improvements in labor productivity, efficiency, and product/service quality. For telecommunications, significant improvements in output and coverage can be observed. However, changes are not so remarkable after two years following the change in ownership, suggesting that most of the effects happened during the transition. For the telecommunications sector, in addition to the change in ownership, this research also analyzes the impact of competition on the indicators mentioned above. Although most of the previous results hold, those concerning prices are particularly affected by the presence of competition.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Goolsbee, A D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competition; ownership; privatization; productivity; service quality; utilities |
| Index terms: | methodology, service quality, competition, telecommunication, infrastructure sector, presence, labour productivity, ownership, privatization, efficiency, productivity, utilities |
| Subjects: | market analysis, research methods, environmental science, economic analysis, construction type, industry analysis, performance measurement, management, economics, performance management, communication |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Site Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Construction Technology, Quality Management, Engineering Principles, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here