Volume 9, Issue 4, August 2020, Page: 211-227
Liberalization and Nationalization in South America: A Comparative Analysis of Economics Impact Through Telecommunications and Electricity Sectors
Arturo Davalos Yoshida, Doctorate Department, Faculty of Social Sciences, American University of Europe, Cancun, Mexico; ABS Consulting Group, La Paz, Bolivia
Richard-Jesus Gil-Herrera, Doctorate Department, Faculty of Social Sciences, American University of Europe, Cancun, Mexico
Received: May 24, 2020;       Accepted: Jun. 17, 2020;       Published: Jul. 4, 2020
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijber.20200904.18      View  155      Downloads  53
To achieve better levels of development, the "infrastructure for development" of the countries must be strengthened, particularly in strategic sectors such as telecommunications and electricity. By the other hand, the universal access to electricity and telecommunications, are considered nowadays as basic factors of welfare and social equality. With this argumentation, the structural reforms about the 1980s promoted the resizing of State scope and encouraging private-enterprise participation. Over time, the most important criticisms of the economic model adopted during the eighties were its results, which, far from promoting equality, would have caused greater inequity. Then, some countries under populist governments, gone back to active state intervention in the economy, including sectors of public services among others the electrical and telecommunications. This phenomenon, during the last of 90 decade and beginnings of this century led to existence of two groups of countries in South America: by one side, countries with neo-populist governments (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, and Venezuela) and, on the other hand, countries that persisted with the reforms adopted during the eighties for to adopt market oriented economies (Chile, Colombia, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay), disparagingly named neo liberals by the early. The electrical and telecommunications sectors are considered pillars of the development and basic human right. Taking this on mind, one would expect that in the neo-populist governments, since its speech is based in a strong defense of poor population, should achieve higher levels of welfare than the liberal States, particularly in the infrastructure sectors named above. To prove this, in the present work, by comparing the general economic performance and particularly in both mentioned sectors between 2000 to 2015, through analysis of selected indicators it has been found quantitative evidence that those South American countries that are operating under the market model, have reached a better performance than the other ones. Furthermore, in both sectors under analysis, particularly in the telecommunications, it has been established that the first group countries (with neo-populist governments), the cost of access to services turns out to be more onerous than in those of the second group.
Telecommunications, Electricity, Regulation, Economic Growth, Development, Economic Models
To cite this article
Arturo Davalos Yoshida, Richard-Jesus Gil-Herrera, Liberalization and Nationalization in South America: A Comparative Analysis of Economics Impact Through Telecommunications and Electricity Sectors, International Journal of Business and Economics Research. Vol. 9, No. 4, 2020, pp. 211-227. doi: 10.11648/j.ijber.20200904.18
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Chong, Alberto and Benavides, Juan (2007), Privatization and regulation in Latin America, The state of state reforms in Latin America Cap. 8
Oszlak, Oscar (2004) Privatization and Capacity for State Regulation: A Theoretical Approach to Methodology, Policy and Public Management - Fund of Economic Culture, CLAD, Buenos Aires.
Dávalos, Arturo (2016) Comparative Analysis of the Electricity and Telecommunications Market: Performance of the Countries in an Environment with Uncertainty and Structural Changes, XXI CLAD International Congress on Reform of the State and Public Administration CLAD, Santiago, Chile.
Stiglitz, J. E. (1992). Asymmetric Information in Credit Markets and its Implications for Macro-Economics. Oxford University Papers, Pp. 694-724.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2003) The economy of the public sector, Antoni Bosch ed., 2003, Part Two.
Ferguson, C. E.; Gould, J. P. T. Microeconomic, Economic Culture Fund of Spain, 1990.
Neuman, Manfred (2001). Competition Policy: History, Theory and Practice. Cap 1.
Kikeri, Sunita and Nellis, John (2004), An Assessment of Privatization. World Bank Research Observer Volume 19, Pages: 87 – 118.
Arrow, Kenneth J. (1996). "Discounting, Morality, and Gaming," Working Papers 97004, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
Dembe, Allard and Boden, Leslie (2000). Moral Hazard: A Question of Morality?, New Solutions a Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy.
Vickers, John and Yarrow (1988), George. Privatization: An economic analysis. The Mit Press, Cambridge, MA.
La Porta, Rafael et. Al. (1999). Corporate Ownership Around The World. The Journal Of Finance, Vol. Liv, No. 2, April 1999.
Sheshinski, Eytan and López-Calva, Luis (2003). Privatization and Its Benefits: Theory and Evidence, CESifo Economic Studies Volume 49, Pp. 429-459.
Pérez Sánchez, Alfredo (1995), External debt of Latin America: Balance of a decade (1980-1990) pp. 1-4
Del Bufalo, Enzo (2002). Economic Reforms in Latin America. Venezuelan Journal of Economy and Social Sciences, vol. 8 nº 2, pp. 129-182
Chong, Alberto and Lopez De Silanes, Florencio (2005). Privatization in Latin America: Myths and Reality. Inteamerican Development Bank – Stanford University Press.
Dávalos, Arturo (2012), Study and Proposal for the Regulation of Services Provided by Public Companies - Second Report (p.p. 4-10), PNUD – UMEP – Paraguay.
Krauze, Enrique (2012), Decalogue of populism, The Nation – Argentina, November, 1th, 2012, avalaible in https://www.lanacion.com.ar/1522419-decalogo-del-populismo.
De la Torre, Carlos (2013). Latin American populism: between democratization and authoritarianism. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. Available in http://nuso.org/media/documents/ El_populismo_latinoamericano_entre_la_democratizació_y_el_autoritarismo__Junio_2013.pdf.
Aguerre, M. L. (2017). Latin American populism. Law School Magazine, (42), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.22187/rfd201712
Tully, S. (2006). The human right to access electricity. The Electricity Journal, 19 (3), 30-39.
McCorquodale, R., & Fairbrother, R. (1999). Globalization and human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 21 (3), 735-766.
Dávalos, Arturo and Espinoza, Lourdes (2005). Why the growing perception of unrest in the face of privatization? 1st. Iberoamerican Congress of Economic Regulation, Santiago – Chile, november 2005.
Bitoraje, E. (2011). Management Indicators: Information Tool for Public Management Control. Venezuelan Journal of Public Management Research Group on Management and Public Policies. Year 2 No 2 University of Los Andes, Mérida-Venezuela. January - December 2011.
Gámez Gutiérrez, J. (2014). Economic growth is different from integral and sustainable human development: a reflection to contribute to welfare. Traza (9), 72-89.
Mateo T. J. Pablo. (2014) Expansion, imbalances and crisis in Venezuela. An analysis of half a century of capital accumulation. Economic research, vol. LXXIII, núm. 290, pp. 87-119.
Corredor C. and Díaz G. (2008). Economic policies applied in Venezuela during the period 1959-2007. Observatory of the Latin American Economy Nº 105, November 2008.
Mogrovejo, Rodrigo (2010). Political and economic model of E. Morales and the New State Constitution of Bolivia. Journal of Legal Studies nº 10/2010.
Jaramillo-Jassir, Mauricio and Tibocha, Anamaría (2008). Rafael Correa's democratic revolution. Center for Political and International Studies - CEPI–. Faculties of Political Science and Government and of International Relations. Bogotá: Editorial. Rosario University, 2008.
Jácome, Hugo (2007). The economic policy of the Rafael Correa government. Political Analysis Magazine La Tendencia No. 6, November 2008.
Dabat, Alejandro (2003). Historical catastrophe and national awakening in Argentina, Revista de Estudios Latinoamericanos, México.
Dabat, Alejandro (2003). The Course of the Argentine Economy under Kirchnerism. Journal of Economic Literature vol. 9 no. 26. UNAM Institute for Economic Research.
García, Anahí (2009). Economic policy during the administration of L. Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2008). Governmental Institutions and Processes IV. Magazine Nº 8, December 2009.
Grossman, Sanford J., and Oliver D. Hart. 1986. The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy 94 (4): 691-719.
World Bank statistics, obtained of http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?Code=NY.GDP.DEFL.KD.ZG&id=af3ce82b&report_name=Popular_indicators&populartype=series&ispopular=y#, at date 12/08/16.
World Economic Forum. The global information technology reports 2010 to 2015, documents obtained from https://www.weforum.org/reports, at date 27/07/2016.
García-Zaballos, A. and López-Rivas, R.: Governmental control on socio-economic impact of broadband in LAC countries. IDB, 2012.
McKinsey & Company, (2011) “Internet Matters: The Net’s Sweeping Impact on Growth, Jobs and Prosperity.” Briefing Note, McKinsey Global Institute, McKinsey & Company, May 2011.
Regional Dialogue Organization on the Information Society DIRSI (2016), http://dirsi.net/web/web, accessed at date 12/08/16
Allen, F. y Gale. D. (2000a). “Bubbles and Crises,” Economic Journal 110, 236-255.
Browse journals by subject