IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Outsourcing Public Services: Ownership, Competition, Quality and Contracting

We survey the literature on the effects of public sector outsourcing. Guided by theory, we systematically arrange services according to the type and magnitude of their contractibility problems. Taken as a whole, the empirical literature indicates that public sector outsourcing generally reduces costs without hurting quality. This is clearly the case for “perfectly contractible services” like garbage collection, but outsourcing often seems to work reasonably well also for some services with more difficult contracting problems, e.g. fire protection and prisons. Outsourcing seems to be more problematic for credence goods, with residential youth care as the prime example. In contrast to previous reviews, we conclude that ownership and competition appear to be about equally important for the consequences of public sector outsourcing.

If 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.

File URL: http://project.nek.lu.se/publications/workpap/papers/WP11_20.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Lund University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2011:20.

as
in new window

Length: 36 pages
Date of creation: 15 Jun 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2011_020
Contact details of provider: Postal: Department of Economics, School of Economics and Management, Lund University, Box 7082, S-220 07 Lund,Sweden
Phone: +46 +46 222 0000
Fax: +46 +46 2224613
Web page: http://www.nek.lu.se/en

More information through EDIRC

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. Andersson, Fredrik, 2009. "Make-or-buy decisions and the manipulability of performance measures," Working Papers 2009:16, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 20 Nov 2009.
  2. Nicholas Bloom & Carol Propper & Stephan Seiler & John van Reenan, 2010. "The Impact of Competition on Management Quality: Evidence from Public Hospitals," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 10/237, Department of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
  3. 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.
  4. John Bennett & Elisabetta Iossa, 2004. "Building and Managing Facilities for Public Services," Public Policy Discussion Papers 02-08, Economics and Finance Section, School of Social Sciences, Brunel University.
  5. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. "Auction Theory: a Guide to the Literature," CEPR Discussion Papers 2163, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  6. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver, 1985. "The Cost and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," CEPR Discussion Papers 70, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Hermalin, Benjamin E. & Katz, Michael L., 1990. "Moral Hazard and Verifiability: The Effects of Renegotiation in Agency," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1678w3w9, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  8. 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.
  9. Patrick Bajari & Gregory Lewis, 2009. "Procurement Contracting with Time Incentives: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 14855, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Klemperer, Paul, 2002. "How (Not) to Run Auctions: The European 3G Telecom Auctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 3215, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  11. Blom-Hansen, Jens, 2003. " Is Private Delivery of Public Services Really Cheaper? Evidence from Public Road Maintenance in Denmark," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 115(3-4), pages 419-38, June.
  12. Giuseppe Nicoletti & Stefano Scarpetta, 2003. "Regulation, productivity and growth: OECD evidence," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 18(36), pages 9-72, 04.
  13. José Manuel González-Páramo & Pablo Hernández Cos, 2005. "The Impact of Public Ownership and Competition on Productivity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 495-517, November.
  14. Henrik Christoffersen & Martin Paldam & Allan Würtz, 2007. "Public versus private production and economies of scale," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(3), pages 311-328, March.
  15. Oliver Hart, 2003. "Incomplete Contracts and Public Ownership: Remarks, and an Application to Public-Private Partnerships," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(486), pages C69-C76, March.
  16. Ann P. Bartel & Ann E. Harrison, 2005. "Ownership Versus Environment: Disentangling the Sources of Public-Sector Inefficiency," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 135-147, February.
  17. Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 1998. "Not-For-Profit Entrepreneurs," NBER Working Papers 6810, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Canice Prendergast, 2003. "The Limits of Bureaucratic Efficiency," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(5), pages 929-958, October.
  19. Alesina, Alberto F & Ardagna, Silvia & Nicoletti, Giorgio & Schiantarelli, Fabio, 2003. "Regulation and Investment," CEPR Discussion Papers 3851, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  20. Patrick Bayer & David E. Pozen, 2003. "The Effectiveness of Juvenile Correctional Facilities: Public versus Private Management," Working Papers 863, Economic Growth Center, Yale University, revised Nov 2004.
  21. Baker, George P, 1992. "Incentive Contracts and Performance Measurement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(3), pages 598-614, June.
  22. Paul Gregg & Paul A. Grout & Anita Ratcliffe & Sarah Smith & Frank Windmeijer, 2008. "How important is pro-social behaviour in the delivery of public services?," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 08/197, Department of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
  23. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-58, December.
  24. Ohlsson, Henry, 1996. "Ownership and input prices: A comparison of public and private enterprises," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 33-38, October.
  25. Gaynor, Martin & Moreno-Serra, Rodrigo & Propper, Carol, 2011. "Death by Market Power: Reform, Competition and Patient Outcomes in the National Health Service," CEPR Discussion Papers 8203, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  26. Robin G. Milne & Robert E. Wright, 2004. "Competition and Costs: Evidence from Competitive Tendering in the Scottish National Health Service," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 51(1), pages 1-23, 02.
  27. Paul A. Grout & Margaret Stevens, 2003. "The Assessment: Financing and Managing Public Services," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 215-234, Summer.
  28. Eggleston, Karen, 2008. "Soft budget constraints and the property rights theory of ownership," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 425-427, September.
  29. Ohlsson, Henry, 1998. "Ownership and Production Costs - Choosing Between Public Production and Contracting Out," Working Paper Series 1998:6, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
  30. Owen Thompson, 2011. "The estimated cost impact of privatizing student transportation in Minnesota school districts," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 319-339, March.
  31. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2005. "Incentives and the Efficiency of Public Sector-outsourcing Contracts," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 767-787, December.
  32. Philippe Aghion & Nicholas Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2002. "Competition and Innovation: An Inverted U Relationship," NBER Working Papers 9269, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. Domberger, S & Meadowcroft, S & Thompson, D, 1988. "Competition and efficiency in refuse collection : a reply," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 9(1), pages 86-90, February.
  34. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-94, March.
  35. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2004. "Cost savings of contracting out refuse collection," Public Economics 0409002, EconWPA.
  36. 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.
  37. Sanford Grossman & Oliver Hart, . "An Analysis of the Principal-Agent Problem," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 15-80, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
  38. E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus, 2007. "Fair competition in the refuse collection market?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(10), pages 701-704.
  39. Daron Acemoglu & Michael Kremer & Atif Mian, 2003. "Incentives in Markets, Firms and Governments," NBER Working Papers 9802, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  40. Jonathan Levin & Steven Tadelis, 2010. "CONTRACTING FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES: THEORY AND EVIDENCE FROM U.S. CITIES -super-* ," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 507-541, 09.
  41. Domberger, Simon & Hall, Christine & Li, Eric Ah Lik, 1995. "The Determinants of Price and Quality in Competitively Tendered Contracts," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(433), pages 1454-70, November.
  42. 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.
  43. 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.
  44. 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.
  45. Jeffry M. Netter & William L. Megginson, 2001. "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 321-389, June.
  46. Kelly Bedard & H. E. Frech, 2009. "Prison health care: is contracting out healthy?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(11), pages 1248-1260.
  47. Domberger, S & Meadowcroft, S & Thompson, D, 1987. "The impact of competitive tendering on the costs of hospital domestic services," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 8(4), pages 39-54, November.
  48. Schmidt, Klaus M., 1996. "Incomplete contracts and privatization," Munich Reprints in Economics 19776, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
  49. Christopher M. Snyder & Robert P. Trost & R. Derek Trunkey, 2001. "Reducing Government Spending With Privatization Competitions: A Study Of The Department Of Defense Experience," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(1), pages 108-117, February.
  50. Martimort, David & Pouyet, Jerome, 2008. "To build or not to build: Normative and positive theories of public-private partnerships," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 393-411, March.
  51. Robert McGuire & T. COTT, 1984. "Public versus private economic activity: A new look at school bus transportation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 25-43, January.
  52. Patrick Francois & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2008. "Pro-social Motivation and the Delivery of Social Services," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 54(1), pages 22-54, March.
  53. Robin Milne & Magnus McGee, 1992. "Compulsory competitive tendering in the NHS: a new look at some old estimates," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 13(3), pages 96-111, August.
  54. Gupta, Nandini & Ham, Jhon C. & Svejnar, Jan, 2008. "Priorities and sequencing in privatization: Evidence from Czech firm panel data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 183-208, February.
  55. Sandro Cabral & Sergio Lazzarini & Paulo Azevedo, 2010. "Private operation with public supervision: evidence of hybrid modes of governance in prisons," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 281-293, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2011_020. 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: (David Edgerton)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.