Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad’s 1983 announcement
of his government’s intention
to embark on a privatization policy
represented a dramatic reversal
of preceding Malaysian government
policy although it was very much
consistent with his own personal
ideological and policy preferences
as well as the then new wave of
conservative market reforms beginning
in the West with the election of
the Thatcher Government in the United
Kingdom in 1979 and the Reagan administration
in the United States late the following
year.
This paper reviews the Malaysian
privatization policy as well as
what has happened in Malaysia in
the name of privatization, even
though some such developments may
not be considered as privatization
in the strict sense of the term.
Particular emphasis is placed on
the likely distributional consequences
of Malaysian privatization. The
first part reviews the evolution
of public policy from the colonial
period resulting in the emergence,
growth and privatization of state-owned
enterprises (SOEs) in Malaysia.
This is followed by a review of
the SOEs in the 1980s, when the
privatization policy was first announced
and then implemented. This review
begins with a critical appraisal
of the official rationale for the
privatization policy. The following
section reviews Malaysia’s
experience of privatization, or
more accurately, of what has been
done in the name of privatization.
More careful examination of the
efficiency consequences of privatization
and its implications for consumer
welfare are reviewed, with a view
to the likely distributional implications.
The distributional implications
of the under-pricing of privatized
SOE initial public offers (IPOs)
are reviewed next.
The final part deals with other
distributional implications of privatization
and other policies associated with
economic liberalization in Malaysia
from the mid-eighties. It begins
with a review of trends in income
and wealth distribution, poverty
reduction as well as NEP redistribution
policy efforts. The consequences
of the 1997-8 financial crisis for
the privatization policy are then
reviewed with a view to its distributional
implications. A brief conclusion
closes the paper.
|