터어키의 국가자본과 민영화

Abstract

터어키의 경제발전사는 공기업의 역사라고 할 정도로 국가의 역할은 대단히 크다. 1980년대 중반 정치와 경제의 불안정 속에서 민영화가 시작되어 현재까지 민영화가 점진적으로 추진되고 있다. 터어키의 민영화 과정은 다음과 같은 특징을 가지고 있다. (1)민영화의 마스터플랜이 국제금융자본에 의하여 작성되었다 (2)민영화가 진행되는 과정에서 민영화의 목표가 자주 변경되었다. (3)법적 제도적 정비가 갖추어지지 않은 상태에서 민영화가 추진되었다.

이러한 민영화의 특징은 민영화를 왜곡시키는 결과를 초래하여 원래 민영화가 의도했던 목표를 대부분 달성하지 못하였다. 효율성 증대, 경쟁시장의 조성, 국제수지 개선, 재정 적자 해소의 측면에서 모두 부정적인 결과를 초래하였다. 터어키에서 민영화는 인플레없는 성장을 실현하지 못하고 성장없는 인플레만 유발할 뿐이다. 터어키의 사례는 민영화가 만변통치약이 아니라 잘못 처방하면 독약일 수 있다는 교훈을 우리에게 ?斂? 있다.

Turkish state have been played a decisive role in the economic development as Hanson said "History of economic development in Turkey is the history of public enterprises". In 1984 privatization was begun to implement in political and economic unstability. The characteristics of privatization in Turkey are summarized as follows. (1)Masterplan of privatization was reported by international financial capital (2)Objectives of privatization often was changed as years went. (3)Legal framework was not prepared to implement privatization

These characteristics distorted process, strategy and result of privatization. Therefore Turkey didn't have success in improving efficiency and market mechanism nor reducing government deficits and foreing debt. Privatization drove Turkey not to 'growth without inflation' but to 'inflation without growth'. We can draw a lesson from Turkish case that privatization is not panacea, and becomes poison if not prescribe properly.

Turkish state have been played a decisive role in the economic development as Hanson said "History of economic development in Turkey is the history of public enterprises". In 1984 privatization was begun to implement in political and economic unstability. The characteristics of privatization in Turkey are summarized as follows. (1)Masterplan of privatization was reported by international financial capital (2)Objectives of privatization often was changed as years went. (3)Legal framework was not prepared to implement privatization

These characteristics distorted process, strategy and result of privatization. Therefore Turkey didn't have success in improving efficiency and market mechanism nor reducing government deficits and foreing debt. Privatization drove Turkey not to 'growth without inflation' but to 'inflation without growth'. We can draw a lesson from Turkish case that privatization is not panacea, and becomes poison if not prescribe properly.