Socio-Economic Effects of National IPO Program in Kazakhstan

2015

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.15584/nsawg.2015.3.30
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to present the gist and consequences of a specific privatization program implemented by the government of the Republic of Kazakhstan. We are currently at the final phase of the National IPO Program in late 2014, so first evaluations of socio-economic effects of this initiative are possible. Employing a holistic approach in the analysis of the process of privatizing the biggest and the most successful state-owned companies in Kazakhstan delivered several interesting insights into benefits obtained by the RK citizens and institutions. First, the National IPO Program offered numerous incentives in the process of creating a modern civil society, based on inclusion, awareness and responsibility for one’s fate and for fellow citizens. Second, the privatization was a transformation factor that motivated state-owned companies to improve their financial standing and implement global standards in management and communication with investors and with other stakeholders. Third, the domestic legal and institutional framework was adjusted for a modern form to allow for involving society in financial market transactions. One can conclude that the government of Kazakhstan has been fully successful in achieving a set of socioeconomic goals with this original form of modest privatization. As such, this case could serve as a role model for other countries in Central Asia that still hold substantial portfolios of state-owned enterprises and are planning to share the national wealth with fellow citizens for the sake of the national economy. Due to many problems and missed opportunities associated with privatization plans implemented in Central and Eastern Europe we can issue a positive recommendation for this form of distributing ownership of state-owned companies among domestic investors. Not only it worked very well in mitigating the social exclusion in Kazakhstan, but also allowed achieving multitude of other goals that brought benefits for all stakeholders.