PRIVATISASI BUMN DI INDONESIA

Main Article Content

Syanti Dewi

Abstract

Privatisasi dipilih menjadi jalan keluar kendala pertumbuhan PDB Indonesia. Dengan privatisasi diharapkan kinerjaBUMN meningkat dan akan menciptakan lapangan kerja dan meningkatkan PDB. Akuntansi sektor publik pada BUMN mengalami perubahan besar dengan dilakukannya privatisasi BUMN. Penelitian ini dimaksudkan untuk menguji apakah BUMN akan dapat meningkatkan perekonomian di Indonesia melalui privatisasi. Model Regresi Variabel Dummy digunakan untuk menganalisis data guna menguji pengaruh privatisasi terhadap peningkatan profitabilitas, efisiensi operasional, investasi, output, dan solvabilitas BUMN Non-Bank dan Bank BUMN di Indonesia. Hasilnya bahwa privatisasi hanya signifikan positif mempengaruhi investasi dan output BUMN non-bank, namun signifikan negatif mempengaruhi solvabilitas BUMN non-bank. Sementara privatisasi tidak signifikan positif mempengaruhi profitabilitas , efisiensi operasional, investasi, output ,dan solvabilitas Bank BUMN dan tidak signifikan positif mempengaruhi profitabilitas BUMN non-Bank. Temuan penelitian ternyata privatisasi sesuai dengan rencana pemerintah Indonesia untuk membangun perekonomian melalui BUMN non-bank, dengan cara privatisasi BUMN Indonesia.

Kata kunci: Privatisasi, BUMN, PDB, investasi, dan output

Article Details

Section
Articles

References

Albornoz, Belén Gill de Albornoz danPope, Peter F. (2004). The determinants of the going public decision: evidence from the U.K. WP-AD 2004-22

Bai, Chong-En,Lu, Jiangyong, dan Tao Zhigang. (2007). How does privatization work in china? MPRA paper. No. 6599

Beck, Thorsten, Cull, Robert, dan Jerome, Afeikhena. (2005). Bank privatization and performance empirical evidence from nigeria. World Bank policy research working paper. WPS3511

Bonin, John P., Hasan, Iftekhar, dan Wachtel, Paul. (2004). Bank performance, efficiency and ownership in transition countries. BOFIT Discussion Papers. No. 7

Bornstein, Morris. (2000). Post-Privatization Enterprise Restructuring. Working Paper Number 327

Bozo, Mauricio Garrón, Machicado, Carlos Gustav, dan Capra, Katherina. (2003). Privatization in Bolivia: the impact on firm performance. latin american research network project “costs

and benefits of privatization in latin america.”Research Network Working Paper #R-461

Chase, Richard B., Jacobs, F. Robert, dan Aquilano, Nicholas J. (2004). Operating management for competitive advantage. Edisi kesepuluh. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc

Chong, Alberto dan Galdo, Virgilio.(2003). Should state-owned firms chang CEOs before privatization? the case of the telecommunications industry. Working Paper #481

Clementi, Gian Luca. (2002). IPOs and The Growth of Firms. New York University: Department of Economics, Stern School of Business,.

Galiani, Sebastián, et.al. (2003). The costs and benefits of privatization in argentina: a microeconomic analysis. Research Network Working Paper #R-454

Halkos, George dan Salamouris, Dimitrios S. (2002). State owned enterprises, privatization and the public interest: evidence of S.O.E. performance in the greek manufacturing. MPRA Paper No. 39604

Hanousek, Jan, Ko?enda, Evzen, dan Švejnar, Jan. (2004). Ownership, Control and Corporate Performance After Large-Scale Privatization.William Davidson Institute Working Paper Number 652

_____. (2005). Origin and Concentration: Corporate Ownership, Control and Performance. Workingpaper series (ISSN 1211-3298). Vol 259

Helfert,Huang, Lingwendan Yao, Yang.(2006). Impacts of privatization on employment: evidence from china. NO. E2006008. China: China Center for Economic Research, Peking University.

Jain, Bharat A. dan Kini, Omesh Kini. (2008). The impact of strategic investment choices on postissue operating performance and survival of US IPO firms.Journal of business finance & accounting. Hal 459-490

Katz, Sharon. (2008). Earnings quality and ownership structure: the role of private equity sponsors.NBER Working Paper No. 14085

Konings, Jozef, Cayseele, Patrick Van, dan Warzynski, Frederic. (2002). The effects of privatization and competitive pressure on firms’ price-cost margins: micro evidence from emerging economies. LICOS discussion papers. Vol 125

Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio,dan Chong, Alberto. (2003). The truth about privatization in latin america. Yale ICF Working Paper No. 03-29

Luo, Dan dan Yao, Shujie. (2009). World financial crisis and the rise of chinese commercial banks. Research Paper Series: China and The World Economy. Hal 7

McGraw, Patricia A.(2005). Privatization and the corporate cost of capital in new zealand: an application of fama and french (1999). Review of Applied Economics.Vol.1, No.1.

Omran, Mohammed. (2009). Post-privatization corporate governance and firm performance: the role of private ownership concentration, identity and board composition. Working Paper No.495

Pastor, Lubos, Taylor, Lucian, dan Veronesi Pietro. (2006). Entrepreneurial learning, the IPO decision, and the post-IPO drop in firm profitability.Working Paper 12792

Quan, Qi dan Huyghebaert, N. (2004). Privatization: issues at stake in the case of china. Tijdschrift voor economie en management. Vol. XLIX

Rosen, Richard J., Smart, Scott B. Smart, dan Zutter, Chad J.(2005). Why Do Firms Go Public? Evidence from the Banking Industry.WP 2005-17

Shelor, Roger M. dan Anderson, Dwight C. (1998). The financial performance of REITs following initial public offerings. Journal of real estate research. Vol 16. Hal 375-387

Torero, Máximo. (2003). Peruvian privatization: impacts on firm performance. latin american research network project “costs and benefits of privatization in latin america. ”Research Network Working Paper #R-481

Tran, Giang. (2008). The impacts of corporate governance on the performance of privatized firmnsin vietnam.