IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20110156.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficiency Effects of Privatising Refuse Collection: Be careful and Alternatives present

Author

Listed:
  • E. Dijkgraaf

    (Rotterdam School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam)

  • R. Gradus

    (VU University Amsterdam)

Abstract

For refuse collection, we estimate the cost effects of different institutional modes using panel data for almost all Dutch municipalities between 1998 and 2010. The modes we consider are private contracts, intermunicipal cooperation, public provision and own collection. For private companies, the cost advantage is substantially smaller and non-significant if municipal fixed effects are included. The cost advantage of intermunicipal cooperation is larger in this case than that of privatisation. Moreover, if yearly mode dummies and mode duration are also included, we show that for 2004, 2005 and 2006 a large cost increase is visible for privatisation. Which mode offers the most cost-saving opportunity depends strongly on the year and the mode duration. For private contracts, the duration effects lead to lower costs; for municipal cooperation and public provision, there are extra costs to begin with, which disappear after 5 or 6 years.

Suggested Citation

  • E. Dijkgraaf & R. Gradus, 2011. "Efficiency Effects of Privatising Refuse Collection: Be careful and Alternatives present," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-156/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20110156
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/11156.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond H J M Gradus, 2008. "Institutional Developments in the Dutch Waste-Collection Market," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 26(1), pages 110-126, February.
    2. Bel Germà & Fageda Xavier & E. Mildred, 2014. "Is private production of public services cheaper than public production? A meta-regression analysis of solid waste and water services," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 103-140.
    3. Domberger, Simon & Jensen, Paul, 1997. "Contracting Out by the Public Sector: Theory, Evidence, Prospects," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 13(4), pages 67-78, Winter.
    4. Maarten A. Allers & Corine Hoeben, 2010. "Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 405-428, March.
    5. Trevor L. Brown & Matthew Potoski, 2003. "Managing contract performance: A transaction costs approach," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 275-297.
    6. Germà Bel & Elbert Dijkgraaf & Xavier Fageda & Raymond Gradus, 2008. "Similar problems, different solutions: Comparing refuse collection in the Netherlands and Spain," IREA Working Papers 200815, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Nov 2008.
    7. Stefan Szymanski, 1993. "Cheap rubbish? Competitive tendering and contracting out in refuse collection, 1981-88," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 14(3), pages 109-130, August.
    8. Mattheus Wassenaar & Tom Groot & Raymond Gradus, 2010. "Contracting out, an Empirical Study on Motives," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-121/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    9. Stevens, Barbara J, 1978. "Scale, Market Structure, and the Cost of Refuse Collection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(3), pages 438-448, August.
    10. E. Dijkgraaf & R. Gradus, 2003. "Cost Savings of Contracting Out Refuse Collection," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 149-161, June.
    11. Germa Bel & Anton Costas, 2006. "Do Public Sector Reforms Get Rusty? Local Privatization in Spain," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24.
    12. E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus, 2005. "Collusion in the Dutch waste collection market," Industrial Organization 0502006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Bernardino Benito & Francisco Bastida & Jose Garcia, 2010. "Explaining differences in efficiency: an application to Spanish municipalities," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 515-528.
    14. Domberger, S & Meadowcroft, S & Thompson, D J, 1986. "Competitive tendering and efficiency: the case of refuse collection," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 7(4), pages 69-87, November.
    15. Stefan Szymanski, 1996. "The impact of compulsory competitive tendering on refuse collection services," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus, 2013. "Cost advantage cooperations larger than private waste collectors," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 702-705, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Germà Bel & Xavier Fageda, 2008. "Privatization and competition in the delivery of local services: An empirical examination of the dual market hypothesis," Working Papers XREAP2008-04, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised Apr 2008.
    2. Germà Bel & Xavier Fageda & Melania Mur, 2011. "Privatization, cooperation and costs of solid waste services in small towns," IREA Working Papers 201111, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Jul 2011.
    3. Fusco, Elisa & Allegrini, Veronica, 2020. "The role of spatial interdependence in local government cost efficiency: An application to waste Italian sector," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    4. Germa Bel & Anton Costas, 2006. "Do Public Sector Reforms Get Rusty? Local Privatization in Spain," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24.
    5. Bel, Germà & Fageda, Xavier, 2010. "Empirical analysis of solid management waste costs: Some evidence from Galicia, Spain," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 187-193.
    6. Antonio Massarutto, 2019. "Italian waste in the circular economy: A agenda for industry regulators in Italy," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2019(1), pages 9-48.
    7. Bel, Germà & Warner, Mildred, 2008. "Does privatization of solid waste and water services reduce costs? A review of empirical studies," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(12), pages 1337-1348.
    8. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
    9. E. Dijkgraaf & R.H.J.M. Gradus, 2008. "How to Get Increasing Competition in the Dutch Refuse Collection Market?," Springer Books, in: E. Dijkgraaf & R.H.J.M. Gradus (ed.), The Waste Market, chapter 0, pages 101-109, Springer.
    10. Simões, Pedro & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2011. "How does the operational environment affect utility performance? A parametric study on the waste sector," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 695-702.
    11. Henry Ohlsson, 2003. "Ownership and Production Costs: Choosing between Public Production and Contracting-Out in the Case of Swedish Refuse Collection," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 24(4), pages 451-476, December.
    12. Soukopová, Jana & Vaceková, Gabriela & Klimovský, Daniel, 2017. "Local waste management in the Czech Republic: Limits and merits of public-private partnership and contracting out," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 201-209.
    13. Jana Soukopová & Vojtìch Ficek, 2014. "Factors Influencing the Selection of Waste Collection Companies by Municipalities – Are Municipal Decision Effective?," MUNI ECON Working Papers 15, Masaryk University, revised Dec 2014.
    14. Suho Bae, 2010. "Public Versus Private Delivery Of Municipal Solid Waste Services: The Case Of North Carolina," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 28(3), pages 414-428, July.
    15. Germà Bel & Melania Mur, 2008. "Intermunicipal cooperation and privatization of solid waste services among small municipalities in Spain," IREA Working Papers 200816, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Dec 2008.
    16. Amir HEFETZ & Mildred E. WARNER, 2010. "Dynamics of service provision: service, market and place characteristics," Departmental Working Papers 2010-33, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    17. Germa Bel & Anton Costas, 2004. "Do public sector reforms get rusty? An empirical analysis on privatization of solid waste collection," Public Economics 0409014, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Soukopová Jana & Klimovský Daniel, 2016. "Local Governments and Local Waste Management in the Czech Republic: Producers or Providers?," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(2), pages 217-237, December.
    19. Graziano Abrate & Fabrizio Erbetta & Giovanni Fraquelli & Davide Vannoni, 2014. "The Costs of Disposal and Recycling: An Application to Italian Municipal Solid Waste Services," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(5), pages 896-909, May.
    20. Germà Bel & Xavier Fageda, 2009. "Factors explaining local privatization: a meta-regression analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 105-119, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Waste collection; private firms; contracting out; fixed effects;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out
    • R51 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Finance in Urban and Rural Economies

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20110156. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.