At the end of August, a presidential decree on reducing state involvement in the economy was signed, approving a new list of major state assets to be privatized in Uzbekistan. According to the document, shares in several financial institutions, industrial, transport, and trade enterprises will be sold. The conditions for selling state assets and land plots, as well as putting them up for auction, are also being updated.
Against this backdrop, Gazeta presents an interview with economist Otabek Bakirov discussing forms of ownership and privatization policy. It covers when Uzbekistan began moving away from a single form of ownership, the essence of selling state property to entrepreneurs and investors, how this process should ideally proceed, and its significance for ordinary citizens.
In the conversation, Otabek Bakirov, explaining why state property is privatized, emphasizes that in a market economy, ownership should be multi-structured. According to him, during the Soviet era, state property was monopolistic, and other forms were considered alien to ideology. In the late 1980s, when the system faced a crisis, the form of ownership began to change. First in Eastern Europe, then in the Soviet Union, the issue of privatization came onto the agenda. In Uzbekistan, with the adoption of the Law "On Cooperation" in 1988–1989, various forms of ownership began to be recognized.
Speaking about the goals of privatization, Bakirov notes that this process is not just about getting rid of state assets or attracting funds to the budget, but about creating a competitive environment and improving economic efficiency. He cites the example of the UK under Margaret Thatcher, where large-scale privatization was announced, and emphasizes that the role of state ownership in the economy depends on political changes. He also reminds that in some countries, socialists try to strengthen state control when they come to power.
The economist denies that privatization always guarantees efficiency. Using the example of Russia in the 1990s, he shows how assets passed to oligarchs through dubious loans-for-shares auctions, and the reason was political goals. An effective system emerges only if a competitive environment is ensured after privatization. Therefore, the process must be open, transparent, and under public control.
Speaking about ideal privatization, Bakirov recalls that first apartments were privatized, then small objects, and then large enterprises. He notes that in Uzbekistan there were also attempts through vouchers and mutual funds, but broad segments of the population could not actively participate. In his opinion, when privatizing large companies, it is necessary to ensure public participation, for example, by offering preferential shares, as in the UzNIF experience.
Bakirov emphasizes that the best tool for determining the real value of assets is the market. Through shares traded on an open stock exchange, one can know the value of a company. However, for companies fully controlled by the state, professional appraisers are engaged. They take into account factors such as the asset's market position, quality, composition, and prospects.
During the conversation, a question was also raised about what needs to be done to prevent state property from being sold off cheaply. Bakirov says this risk always exists, but it can be reduced through openness and control. According to him, privatization is a complex process that requires a long-term strategy and strong institutions.
Source: www.gazeta.uz