Assessment of Privatization in Turkey

Privatization has been on a lot of countr ies' agenda, especially for the emerging countries for a long time. In Turkey, as an emergin g country, privatization plan has been a very high priority among the State Budget income items f or three decades. To identify and to explore the accounting role in privatization is the critical issue for the countries under privatization process. In this study, the importance of financial reporting d uring privatization process is examined. The overall responsibility of accounting in privatizati on is to develop investor confidence to channel the flows of funds and to ensure the effective and effi cient use of capital funds. Therefore, without a sound accountancy framework, the privatization proc ess would not generate the desired long term economic, social, and financial development results . Therefore, we analyzed the period of Turkish privatization experience by underlying the importan ce of financial reporting in this process. For this purpose, in the first part of the study, we defined the privatization and argued the positive and negative opinions about it. In the second part, we clarified the role of accounting in privatization process under disclosure, transitional problems, tr aining, valuation problems, and inflation accounting subsections. In the third part, we dis cussed the recent accounting developments which may effects privatization in Turkey. In the fourth part, we summarized the implementation of privatization in Turkey. Then, we mentioned the key issues in privatization process for emerging economies. Based on the Turkey's privatization prac tices, financial reporting has a very important role in the SOE's privatization process. In our poi nt of view, since accounting has an important role in privatization, this role takes place before , during and also after the privatization. It shoul d be taken into consideration that the main objective of privatization is not only to privatize SOE's, but also keep the sustainability of privatized SOE' s. While privatization creates sources for new investments of the governments, it should support t he effectiveness and economics of goods and services in the area of privatization. So the susta inability of privatized companies is very important as well as their sales. All of the above purposes c an be controlled by solely accounting.

In the 1970s, as a result of oil shocks, Keynesian policies were replaced by neoclassical economic policies, and the liberation movements had the opportunity to be widely implemented at the country level. In this context, developing countries are aiming to increase productivity by transferring large amount of investment responsibilities to the private sector. As a matter of fact, State Economic Enterprises, which are State Economic Enterprises, have started to be taken into the scope of privatization. Turkey also, along with the decisions of January 24 was declared in 1980 he joined the current liberalization, privatization moves are especially important after 2003 were carried out. Globalized economy and began following the introduction of economic liberalization and opening-up policy in 1980, the privatization process in Turkey has brought in. In the process, privatization policies have been adopted in order to abandon the protectionism and statism approach adopted since 1977 and to provide a more competitive environment. Continued privatization process gradually starting in 1990 in Turkey and reached until 2018.
 The Turkish Sugar Factories, whose privatization process has already begun, have become a star in privatization in 2018. They are as common as those who think the customization process is necessary. In this study, the effects of privatization of Turkish Sugar Factories on Turkish economy and Turkish food market will be tried to be investigated.

Despite more than two decades of transition from a centrally planned to a market-oriented economy, Myanmar's economic transition is still only partly complete. The government's initial strategy for dealing with the swelling deficits of the state economic enterprises (SEEs) was to put them under direct control in order to scrutinise their expenditure. This policy change postponed restructuring and exacerbated the soft budget constraint problem of the SEEs. While the installation of a new government in March 2011 has increased prospects for economic development, sustainable growth still requires full-scale structural reform of the SEEs and institutional infrastructure building. Myanmar can learn from the gradual approaches to economic transition in China and Vietnam, where partial reforms weakened further impetus for reforms.

This chapter presents a political economic analysis of the privatization movement in Turkey. In terms of pace and volume, the privatization experience in Turkey can be examined in two different periods. In the period 1985–2003, privatization amounted to only 8.2 billion dollar, while it reached approximately 36.4 billion dollar in the period 2004–2009. The radical transformation in the privatization policies of Turkey is worth analyzing from a political economy perspective. To this purpose, first, the historical background to privatization in Turkey and the circumstances leading to liberalization and privatization policies will be examined. Second, the factors influencing the privatization process such as objectives, strategies, and the effects of economic, legal, institutional, and political conditions will be discussed. Analysis of the privatization experience in Turkey reveals that factors such as legal and institutional structures, political will, unstable macroeconomic conditions, ideological resistance, and rent seeking activities shaped the privatization movement and its consequences.

From ancient Greece to the Renaissance period, up to privatization, which showed the effect on both Britain from Nazi Germany it emerges both in and outside Turkey. In this study the historical process of privatization in the world and in Turkey, the process of privatization, privatization has been mentioned in the domain. The first arrangement made in 1984 on privatization in Turkey, privatization, which began in 1986, the species, in taking the scope of privatization of SOEs No. 233 Decree, and for compatibility with the Constitution on 2018 703 Decree Law No. 85 Amendments to Article It was mentioned that the privatization authority was given to the President. The aims, benefits and disadvantages of privatization have been addressed using the current figures and data. This process was tried to be revealed by making a literature review.

The paper provides a comprehensive survey of privatization transastions in Turkey which took place between 1986 and 2000. The objectives of the privatization programme and privatized and nominated SOEs are discussed. The breakdown of total proceeds by sales methods and scope of the privatization programme by economic sectors are examined. The saleability of relatively large public enterprises is reviewed and utilization of privatization proceeds during and after privatization process is critically appraised. In addition, an attempt is made to discuss the politics of privatization by referring to key political and economic factors which have influenced implementation of the privatization programme. Following a short review of the economic environment and macroeconomic indicators in Turkey, focus is also placed on the research results that are available on the performance of public, private and privatized SOEs, particularly in the cement sector. In the final section, some key issues relevant to Turkish privatization are accentuated and some conclusion are drawn. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Aid has played a prominent role in the Turkish economy at various stages in the postwar period. In the immediate postwar period, US aid was an important source of funds for investment in agriculture and infrastructure (Krueger, 1974). Turkey was land-abundant and relatively well endowed with resources; it was more 'dualistic' than the average middle income country, the share of agriculture in GDP being close to the norm for all developing countries (Baysan and Blitzer, 1991). It was well placed to be a major exporter of agricultural commodities from the 1950s. However, the exchange rate was fixed at 2.8 Turkish Lira (TL) to the dollar from 1946 to 1958. While aid flows were able to sustain this initially, relatively high inflation (fuelled by a large budget deficit due to agricultural price support and the favourable position of State Economic Enterprises (SEEs)) lead to real overvaluation. Exports were discriminated against while the importcompeting sector was protected. An inability to finance necessary imports led Turkey to accept an IMF stabilization programme in 1958 and a substantial devaluation in 1960. While IMF credits helped to finance imports, the principle of government intervention, the favourable position of SEEs and protection for the import-substitution (IS) sector remained unquestioned and unchanged (Krueger, 1987).

Public-Private Wage Gap: Case of North Cyprus

Privatization not only results in the transfer of state assets, but it also reduces economic role of the government. Developing and developed countries have experienced privatization in different ways for years. This article focuses upon the issue of privatization in Turkey. Turkey launched its comprehensive economic liberalization program named ‘structural adjustment reform' in 1980 by the stimulation of the World Bank and IMF. Later on, privatization has been an official state ideology with two institutions, the Privatization Higher Council and the Privatization Administration. Some of their implementations have been given. Privatization policies have multiple, often together with often inter-related and conflicting political, economic and financial objectives. They must be evaluated according to political, social and economical structures and conditions of the country concerned. Together with privatization, competition and its institutional framework with implementations have also been analyzed in the paper. The paper maintains that there seemed no direct and strong relationship between the privatization endeavours and institutional competition. Finally, the study points out that Turkey seems to be a bare-foot runner in its privatization venture unless there is a proper competitive market, together with a sound social security system and a profound capital market.

As promotion of economic growth becomes a declared aim of policy-makers in less developed countries (LDC), more and more emphasis is placed on the public sector as an essential instrument of policy implementation. The public sector is considered more capable of inducing higher rates of savings and of channeling them into development-promoting outlets than the economy can do by itself. State Economic Enterprises (SEE) financed wholly or in large part through government budgets become the instruments of such policies. In an environment where the private sector invests mainly along traditional lines and is shy of long gestation periods, the absorption of modern technology depends on an ability to amass and channel large amounts of finance capital into productive ventures with relatively little direct short-run profitability. The absence of organized markets for equity capital so prevalent in LDC also points in the direction of the state's active participation in economic activities.

The ‘spoils of war’ after division of Cyprus provided opportunity for the economic development of north Cyprus. However, the politicians were quick to realize the rentierist and rent-seeking opportunities for securing political power. This chapter shows how the policymakers used these opportunities to satisfy their own close clients and ignored the rest of the population. The chapter discusses the key law and modifications thereof that regulate the working of these semi-state-owned enterprises and provides an overview of histories of some of the significant enterprises, including the national airlines company (KTHY), the Electricity Board (KIBTEK) and the key agricultural product exporter (Cypfruvex), as well as other examples.

When the performance is evaluated as a terms in public administration that is expressed as the ability to achieve a given job at the desired level. For many years the private sector has been working on positive performance on their works. In recent years, both in the world and in Turkey, public institutions have made performance a priority in their work. The evaluation of the performance as a term of performance is more important in state economic enterprises. In this context, position-based work and performance management were chosen as subjects for research in a public institution. Within the scope of the research, a questionnaire was applied in order to evaluate the performance measurement for marketing in the relevant public institution. Within the scope of the study, all employees of the institution (4200 employees) were requested to be included in the survey. However, among the applied questionnaires, the number of returned and evaluable questionnaires was 480. According to the results obtained from the research, it has been concluded that the employees make a positive contribution to the company performance in terms of marketing. When the financial statements of the institution are analyzed, it is seen that this situation reflects the truth.

From the foundation of the Turkish Republic in 1923, the lack of sufficient entrepreneurs forced the public sector to be active in the economy. Even though the public sector became very important in taking on this facilitative role, Turkey has never adopted strict major state control (etatism) of economic activities. Nevertheless, the state’s role was crucial, with many state economic enterprises being founded, and it undertook the main infrastructural investments and provided employment possibilities.KeywordsFiscal DecentralizationPrimary SurplusOfficial GazetteBudget RevenueMetropolitan MunicipalityThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Tufan Ekici’s ‘The Political and Economic History of North Cyprus’ is published in 2019 by Palgrave Macmillan as a part of Studies in Economic History series. It deals with 44-years old north Cyprus government, which emerged after division of the island in 1974. Examining the political organization and structure of the government, labour market, state economic enterprises, and allocation of land, Ekici sheds light on the turbulent history of the political apparatus of north Cyprus. The 283-page book consists of nine chapters, and it is the first book-length analysis on the economic history of that part of the island. The book addresses many significant questions such as the relation between Turkey and the north Cyprus, economic development across the Cyprus, and identity of the possible perpetrators of pre-1974 violent incidents. As explained in more detail in Chap. 2, the territory of the Turkish government in north Cyprus is an artificial construction, came to existence out of one third of the island on the northern coast, where would be Turkified after the division. Turkish government in the north transformed itself into an independent state on November 15, 1983. Nevertheless, it lacks international political recognition, except Turkish Republic, and exists as a de facto state since that day. The negligence of international community is coupled with that of scholarly literature as there are few studies on the economic and political history of the north Cyprus. In that respect, Ekici’s book is an important contribution to Cyprus Studies and Turkey's role in north Cyprus’ economic and political affairs.

This paper provides a comprehensive discussion of the privatization policy that has been implemented in Turkey between 1987 and 1991. After a brief discussion of the problems of the state economic enterprises (SEES) which have led to introduction of the privatization practice in Turkey, the paper focuses on major implications of privatization in the country, including a detailed exposition of sale methods, share ownership and the role of the capital market. The highest objectives of privatization are to promote competition and improve efficiency of public enterprises, to develop the capital markets in Turkey and to ensure wider distribution of shares. However, the following points have been raised in the paper: first, in the course of privatization the selling strategy favoured block sales to domestic and foreign institutions rather than individuals where the basic goal of wider share ownership envisaged by the government has been overlooked. Secondly, Turkey has been very cautious in preserving a ‘golden share’ in a number of the privatized enterprises. Thirdly, the size and depth of the capital market has remained restricted and has been dominated by the public sector securities. By and large, investors in Turkey seem to focus on dividends and interest income rather than on capital gains or equity shares. Despite some positive trends in stocks trading in recent years, this has been achieved by governmental intervention in the stock market and the money market. It is expedient for the government to reduce the interest rates on bank deposits and the interbank interest rates, and to control more effectively the rising internal borrowing of the public sector. Fourthly, it is concluded that the question of regulation has been rather overlooked in the privatization of the airport service company which had previously enjoyed considerable monopoly power. There is a need for a ‘regulatory body’ to control monopolistic behaviour and to regulate pricing policies of private monopolies. Finally, implementation of privatization has been constrained because of the presence of chronic inflation, high interest rates and mounting internal and external debts.