The Importance Of Financial Reporting During Privatization: Turkish Case

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.

Assessment of Privatization in Turkey

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.

This article provides a comprehensive look at the area of privatization in Poland. It provides a context and discusses the two major forces that have spurred the privatization process, as well as privatizations carried out in developing countries under the auspices of the World Bank and the IMF.The article begins with an explanation of the background to privatization in the context of state central planning, a discussion of the derivative traits of the command-and-control economy, the collapse of the system in the 1990s, the actions necessitated in society in an attempt to reform and change the system, and the reform strategies that were implement as a response to both the economic and political challenges.The article includes a discussion of the core objectives of the privatization process, the requirements of the privatization process, and an important section dealing with the actions that are necessary and complementary in preparing society and individual entities for privatization. The article concludes with an analysis of the models of privatization that were adopted in the region, along with tables delineating proceeds from privatization; the number of privatizations carried out both world-wide and in the region.

A Decentralized Broker Architecture for Collaborative Business Process Modelling and Enactment

SummaryIntroduction.Food-borne disease outbreaks remain a major global health challenge and cross-contamination from raw meat due to poor handling is a major cause in developing countries. Adequate knowledge of meat handlers is important in limiting these outbreaks. This study evaluated and compared the safe meat-handling knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) of private (PMPP) and government meat processing plants' (GMPP) workers in south-western Nigeria.Methods.This cross sectional study comprised 190 meat handlers (PMPP = 55; GMPP = 135). Data concerning their safe meat-handling knowledge, attitudes and practices as well as their socio-demographic characteristics, such as age, gender and work experience were collected.Results.A significant association was observed between the type of meat processing plants and their knowledge (p = 0.000), attitudes (p = 0.000) and practices (p = 0.000) of safe meat-handling. Meat handlers in the GMPP were respectively, about 17 times (OR = 0.060, 95%CI: 0.018-0.203), 57 times (OR = 0.019, 95% CI: 0.007-0.054) and 111 times (OR = 0.009, 95%CI: 0.001- 0.067) less likely to obtain good knowledge, attitude and practice level of safe meat-handling than those from PMPP. Further, KAP levels were significantly associated with age group, education and work experience (p < 0.05).Discussion.Study findings suggest the need for future policy in food industry in developing countries to accommodate increased involvement of private sector for improved food safety and quality delivery. Public health education on safe food handling and hygiene should be on the front burner among food handlers in general.

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.

The Spanish privatisation process: Implications on the performance of divested firms

Extended Abstract: Introduction Many governments use the Privatization process to promote their economic system. This process can have a great impact on banking sector. The need for a research in Privatization’ programs, implemented by many developed countries, is felt today more that ever before. In the state-owned banking system of Iran, there are only 4 banks which are considered as “private banks” The next phase of the privatization of the Iranian banking system will shift a wide range of state-owned banks to the private banks. There are many ways to privatize, and each country has its own set of methods depending on the economic structure and type of enterprises. The most common methods of privatization in the world are: a. Offer shares to the public b. Offer shares to specific groups c. Separation of unit's subject to transfer to smaller units and transfer of ownership or management d. Attracting private sector participation in new investment required by governmental units e. Transfer of Management or Lease of Assets The beneficial effects of privatization can only come from properly implemented privatizations. The key is how to privatize? The World Bank recommends in a circular for privatization: The legal framework of the country should support privatization in two respects: First, there may be laws required in the process of preparing banks for privatization and transactions; Second, the overall legal environment should be one in which newly established entrepreneurs can access credit, and compete on an equal footing with the remaining government. There are three types of transfer methods in Iran: a. Sales through the public offering of stock in domestic or foreign stock exchanges b. The complete sale or supply of block shares through public bidding c. Complete sale or block sale through negotiation Theoretical frame work This article will examin different challenges of implementing the privatization process to provide the most adaptable privatization model for Iranian banking system So, what are the legal requirements for the privatization process in a way the banks can benefit from this process? Methodology This research is under the study of public economic law. From this perspective, although from a methodological point of view, this field does not analyze economic phenomena, the framework of formative interpretations of conventional legal rules in traditional and sometimes Iranian civil law will not be considered. This is because the legal tools of public economy include a wide range of legal regulations and practices and various issuing authorities and focus on the interrelationship of economics with realistic law. In other words, the banking law system created in the context of economic law, will focus more on managerial and sometimes non-legal analysis, which is defined in line with legal and economic issues. Results & Discussion Nowadays, the function of privatization has become a tool to create a complex ownership structure in privatized banks. While government is taking control of the transferred banks, the process of privatization seems to be far from being realistic. Having said that, the process of privatization can be realized by reducing the role of the government in economic activities and promoting the efficiency and productivity of the banking system. However, it is important to bear in mind that the banking system in Iran is still under control of the government. Therefore, it is important to examin the nature of governance in the privatization process. Generally speaking, privatization of enterprises should take place through the public offering. But when there is no purchase after two auctions, privatization is permitted through negotiation and after the board approvals. lack of capacity of the non-government sector is the main reason for the privatization process of the banks that happens through any other ways rather than public offering. But, in such an economy where its main part is dominated by the public sector, how small private sector can take control of the large public sector? The challenges experienced in the first wave of privatization showed that failure to use proper privatization methods can have a devastating effect on the future of the banking industry. Therefore, choosing the right method for privatization is very important. In our country, the privatization of banks not only has not reduced the economic problems, but also has increased the problems of the banking industry and the national economy. Therefore, we need to use this experience and apply alternative ways to reconsider the privatization process and empower the private sector in a way that it becomes the dominant part of the banking industry. Conclusions & Suggestions Privatization takes place through transfer of ownership and management Due to the lack of sufficient liquidity for the buyers in the country, the first method was not successful. In this regard, the transfer committee has decided to privatize the banks in the first wave of privatization through non-public offering. However, it has not achieved the goals of privatization. On the other hand, regarding different challenges of the Iranian bankning privatization we can considere changing of methdoes and approaches at this field in both regulatory system and the banking actors. For the last one, it could happen by downsizing of banks through the transfer of assets and subsidiaries, as well as the use of bank management transfer methods to empower the private sector for buying. bank shares.

The paper examines the overall results achieved in the area of privatization in Serbia, as the largest part of the Serbian-Montenegrin economy. The privatization process in Serbia during the 1990s is described in some detail, including the various pieces of privatization legislation (adopted in 1989–1990, 1991, 1994, 1996, 1997), and the overall results achieved, which have been extremely poor: by late 2000, less than 40% of the country’s Gross Material Product was produced by the private sector. The main problems of corporate governance are also discussed in some detail, having in mind the specific situation in Serbia characterized by the maintenance of the ambiguous system of “social property.” The most recent privatization phase started after the political changes in late 2000, and marked a fundamental change in the approach, away from sales at privileged terms to insiders implemented throughout the 1990s, towards commercial sales to strategic owners, at tenders and auctions. The main achievements and shortcomings of the new strategy are discussed.

Impact of globalization on higher education in the Middle East and North Africa

Privatization of public enterprises or state-owned business entities has been greatly acclaimed as one of free market ideas and a sort of democratic rule on equitable distribution of wealth. However, ill-designed modes of privatization, particularly, Article 5 of the Proclamation No.146/1998 transfers the public enterprises to share companies in Ethiopia, goes out of the purpose and creates legal and practical problems on the operation of share companies. The crux of this paper focuses on the formation and operation of state-owned share companies which are evolved by the process of privatization in Ethiopia. It advocates that the new advent of formation of company is out of the Commercial Code of the State and legal jurisprudence ever experienced. Hence, the status of such companies is carefully discussed from the legal point of view. These companies situate in different place than company law perspective, the purpose of privatization sought in these companies and the economic policy which the country follows. To this effect, the legal doctrines of the area, the practice of privatization from Privatization and Public Enterprises Supervising Agency (PPESA) are explored.

Privatizing Eastern European Economies: A Critical Review and Proposal

This article aims to look at the implications of the Privatization Policy introduced by the former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in the country from 1983 to 2018 in terms of the positive and negative implications towards the economy and the people of the country. The time taken is to see how effective this policy is in the 35 years of its implementation. The policy was introduced in 1983 and continues to be implemented today as it benefits outweighs the negative impact on the nation and the people. In general, the introduction of the Privatization Policy has also served to reduce the government's financial burden especially when the country is in an economic downturn, improve efficiency and diversification of revenue, encourage economic growth, efficient resource allocation and accelerate the achievement of the New Economic Policy (NEP). This study was conducted primarily using qualitative and chronological methods and was subjective. The information obtained is extracted and analyzed from primary and secondary sources. Primary sources include economic reports, Malaysian plans, Privatization Plans, Dewan Rakyat Statements and relevant government documents. The secondary sources consist of scientific journals, books and information obtained from the web site. The results show that the privatization policy implemented has positive and negative implications on the economy and the people. The privatization process also promotes the growth of the capital market and thus enhances private sector’s contribution to GDP growth. Although this policy has negative implications, it is considered one of the policies that continues to play a role in shaping the country's future economic growth and development.

Article history: Received October 29, 2012 Received in revised format 29 January 2013 Accepted 29 March 2013 Available online April 1 2013 In this paper, we present an empirical investigation to measure the effects of privatization on some selected firms listed on Tehran Stock Exchange. The proposed study of this paper selects eleven relatively big sized Iranian firms whose structures were privatized prior year 2011. The main hypothesis of this survey studies whether there is a meaningful relationship between ownership structure and enterprise value of privatized firms. We collect the necessary information before and after privatization process completed and using a regression model examined the main hypothesis as well as five sub-hypotheses. The results of the survey indicate that the number of major shareholders has been reduced after privatization process accomplished, the number of shares had no impact on firms’ values. In addition, non-board members’ duty had not impact on firms’ value before and after privatization process, institutional investors did not play important role before and after privatization process, and separations played important role on firms’ value before and after privatization occurred. © 2013 Growing Science Ltd. All rights reserved.