Privatization and competition in the delivery of local services: An empirical examination of the dual market hypothesis
AbstractThis paper empirically analyses the hypothesis of the existence of a dual market for contracts in local services. Large firms that operate on a national basis control the contracts for delivery in the most populated and/or urban municipalities, whereas small firms that operate at a local level have the contracts in the least populated and/or rural municipalities. The dual market implies the high concentration and dominance of major firms in large municipalities, and local monopolies in the smaller ones. This market structure is harmful to competition for the market as the effective number of competitors is low across all municipalities. Thus, it damages the likelihood of obtaining cost savings from privatization.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP) in its series Working Papers with number XREAP2008-04.
Length: 35 pages
Date of creation: Apr 2008
Date of revision: Apr 2008
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Espai de Recerca en Economia, Facultat de Ciències Econòmiques i Empresarials, Universitat de Barcelona, c/ Tinent Coronel Valenzuela, 1-11, 08034 Barcelona
Web page: http://www.pcb.ub.edu/xreap
More information through EDIRC
Competition; Concentration; Local Services; Privatization.;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2008-04-29 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2008-04-29 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-MIC-2008-04-29 (Microeconomics)
- NEP-URE-2008-04-29 (Urban & Real Estate Economics)
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.:
- Ferris, James M & Graddy, Elizabeth, 1994. "Organizational Choices for Public Service Supply," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 126-41, April.
- Germa Bel & Xavier Fageda, 2008.
"Reforming the local public sector: economics and politics in privatization of water and solid waste,"
Journal of Policy Reform,
Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 45-65.
- Germa Bel & Xavier Fageda, 2008. "Reforming the local public sector: economics and politics in privatization of water and solid waste," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 45-65.
- 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.
- Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2004.
"Cost savings of contracting out refuse collection,"
- 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.
- 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.
- Oliver Hart & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 1996.
"The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and an Application to Prisons,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1778, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Hart, Oliver & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. "The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and an Application to Prisons," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 112(4), pages 1127-61, November.
- Oliver Hart & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1996. "The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and an Application to Prisons," NBER Working Papers 5744, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Mildred Warner & Amir Hefetz, 2003. "Rural - urban differences in privatization: limits to the competitive state," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 21(5), pages 703-718, October.
- John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1991. "Economic Perspectives on Privatization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 111-132, Spring.
- E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus, 2007. "Fair competition in the refuse collection market?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 14(10), pages 701-704.
- 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.
- Dubin, Jeffrey A. & Navarro, Peter., 1987. "How Markets for Impure Public Goods Organize: The Case of Household Refuse Collection," Working Papers 633, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus, 2005. "Collusion in the Dutch waste collection market," Industrial Organization 0502006, EconWPA.
- Jonathan Levin & Steven Tadelis, 2007. "Contracting for Government Services: Theory and Evidence from U.S. Cities," NBER Working Papers 13350, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Scott J. Callan & Janet M. Thomas, 2001. "Economies of Scale and Scope: A Cost Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Services," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 548-560.
- 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.
- Barbara Antonioli & Massimo Filippini, 2002. "Optimal Size in the Waste Collection Sector," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 239-252, May.
- 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.
- 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: () The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct address.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.