Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Ownership and Production Costs: Choosing between Public Production and Contracting-Out in the Case of Swedish Refuse Collection

Contents:

Author Info

  • Henry Ohlsson

Abstract

Many comparisons of public and private firms use a public/private ownership dummy variable to capture cost differences. If, however, public and private firms use different production technologies, the dummy-variable approach is misspecified. Data from public and private firms should not be pooled. Secondly, selectivity bias may arise, making it more difficult to identify cost differentials that actually exist. Thirdly, if data should be pooled, the resulting empirical model may be logically inconsistent. This paper compares public and private firms using the refuse collection costs of 170 firms in 115 Swedish municipalities. First, public production costs were 6 per cent lower than private production costs. Secondly, cost differences did not affect producer choice. It is crucial to adjust for selectivity. Data for private and public firms should not be pooled. The dummy-variable model is misspecified.

Download Info

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Institute for Fiscal Studies in its journal Fiscal Studies.

Volume (Year): 24 (2003)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
Pages: 451-476

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:ifs:fistud:v:24:y:2003:i:4:p:451-476

Contact details of provider:
Postal: The Institute for Fiscal Studies 7 Ridgmount Street LONDON WC1E 7AE
Phone: (+44) 020 7291 4800
Fax: (+44) 020 7323 4780
Email:
Web page: http://www.ifs.org.uk
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Postal: The Institute for Fiscal Studies 7 Ridgmount Street LONDON WC1E 7AE
Email:

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. A. Marcincin & S. van Wijnbergen, 1997. "The Impact of Czech Privatisation Methods on Enterprise Performance Incorporating Initial Selection Bias Correction," CERT Discussion Papers 9704, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
  2. 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 438-48, August.
  3. Dubin, Jeffrey A & Navarro, Peter, 1988. "How Markets for Impure Public Goods Organize: The Case of Household Refuse Collection," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 217-41, Fall.
  4. Edwards, Franklin R & Stevens, Barbara J, 1978. "The Provision of Municipal Sanitation Services by Private Firms: An Empirical Analysis of the Efficiency of Alternative Market Structures and Regulatory Arrangements," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 133-47, December.
  5. Ohlsson, Henry, 1996. "Ownership and input prices: A comparison of public and private enterprises," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 33-38, October.
  6. Schmidt, Klaus M., 1997. "The Political Economy of Mass Privatization and the Risk of Expropriation," CEPR Discussion Papers 1542, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Schmidt, Klaus M., 2000. "The political economy of mass privatization and the risk of expropriation," Munich Reprints in Economics 19771, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
  8. Vining, Aidan R & Boardman, Anthony E, 1992. " Ownership versus Competition: Efficiency in Public Enterprise," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 205-39, March.
  9. Wittman, Donald, 1989. "Why Democracies Produce Efficient Results," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1395-1424, December.
  10. Bos, Dieter, 1991. "Privatization: A Theoretical Treatment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283690, Octomber.
  11. G. S. Maddala & Lung-Fei Lee, 1976. "Recursive Models with Qualitative Endogenous Variables," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 525-545 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Bivand, Roger & Szymanski, Stefan, 2000. "Modelling the spatial impact of the introduction of Compulsory Competitive Tendering," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 203-219, March.
  13. E. Dijkgraaf & R. Gradus, 2003. "Cost Savings of Contracting Out Refuse Collection," Empirica, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 149-161, June.
  14. Bruno Biais & Enrico Perotti, 2002. "Machiavellian Privatization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 240-258, March.
  15. Anton Marcinèin & Sweder Wijnbergen, 1997. "The impact of Czech privatization methods on enterprise performance incorporating initial selection-bias correction," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 5(2), pages 289-304, November.
  16. Gary A. Hoover & James Peoples, 2003. "Privatization of Refuse Removal and Labor Costs ," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 24(2), pages 294-305, April.
  17. E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus & B. Melenberg, 2003. "Contracting out refuse collection," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 553-570, July.
  18. James J. Heckman, 1977. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," NBER Working Papers 0177, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. John Cubbin & Simon Domberger & Shirley Meadowcroft, 1987. "Competitive tendering and refuse collection: identifying the sources of efficiency gains," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 8(3), pages 49-58, August.
  20. Nelson, Michael A, 1997. "Municipal Government Approaches to Service Delivery: An Analysis from a Transactions Cost Perspective," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 35(1), pages 82-96, January.
  21. AndréS GóMez-Lobo & Stefan Szymanski, 2001. "A Law of Large Numbers: Bidding and Compulsory Competitive Tendering for Refuse Collection Contracts," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 105-113, February.
  22. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, December.
  23. 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 109-30, August.
  24. 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.
  25. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119, Octomber.
  26. Domberger, Simon & Jensen, Paul, 1997. "Contracting Out by the Public Sector: Theory, Evidence, Prospects," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 67-78, Winter.
  27. 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.
  28. Eoin Reeves & Michael Barrow, 2000. "The Impact of Contracting Out on the Costs of Refuse Collection Services - The Case of Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 31(2), pages 129-150.
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 in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ifs:fistud:v:24:y:2003:i:4:p:451-476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Stephanie Seavers).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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