IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/1658.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Decentralized structures for providing roads : a cross-country comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Humplick, Frannie
  • Moini-Araghi, Azadeh

Abstract

Minimizing costs is often cited as essential for optimizing service delivery. Roads are the oldest, most important infrastructure services provided by governments. They require construction, rehabilitation, maintenance, and administration. Various institutional arrangements affect the degree to which costs can be minimized. Drawing on analyses of experiences with decentralized road provision in eight countries, a longitudinal change analysis of Korea, and vertical and horizontal analysis across states and local governments in Germany, the authors found that the impact of decentralization varies depending on which aspect one is considering: the efficiency of producing road services or the impact on road users. Resources costs are concave, increasing first and decreasing at later stages of decentralization. Preference costs are downward sloping, suggesting that road conditions improve as decentralization advances. In short, decentralization entails initial costs, mostly as losses in economies of scale. But those losses can be outweighed by increases in efficiency when the locus of roadwork is closer to the people. The advantages or limitations of decentralization are function-specific: a) maintenance functions are best provided locally; b) to minimize resource costs, construction should be either completely centralized or completely decentralized; and c) administrative activities are more efficiently provided by local units similar to local maintenance units.

Suggested Citation

  • Humplick, Frannie & Moini-Araghi, Azadeh, 1996. "Decentralized structures for providing roads : a cross-country comparison," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1658, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1658
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1996/09/01/000009265_3961214192129/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 1997. "Privatization in the United States," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(3), pages 447-471, Autumn.
    2. Antonio Estache & Frannie Humplick, 1995. "Does decentralization improve infrastructure performance?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/44079, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Antonio Estache, 1995. "Decentralizing Infrastructure: Advantages and Limitations," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/44118, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Parker, Andrew N., 1995. "Decentralization : the way forward for rural development?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1475, The World Bank.
    5. Bird, Richard, 1994. "Decentralizing infrastructure : for good or ill?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1258, The World Bank.
    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. Wong, Ho Lun & Luo, Renfu & Zhang, Linxiu & Rozelle, Scott, 2013. "Providing quality infrastructure in rural villages: The case of rural roads in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 262-274.
    2. Feng Xie & David Levinson, 2009. "Jurisdictional Control and Network Growth," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 459-483, September.
    3. Gonzalez, Eduardo T. & Mendoza, Magdalena L., 2006. "Governance in Southeast Asia: Issues and Options," Philippine Journal of Development PJD 2004 Vol. XXXI No. 1-, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    4. Diether Beuermann & Maria Amelina, 2014. "Does Participatory Budgeting Improve Decentralized Public Service Delivery?," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 87095, Inter-American Development Bank.
    5. Gonzalez, Eduardo T. & Mendoza, Magdalena L., "undated". "Governance in Southeast Asia: Issues and Options," Discussion Papers DP 2002-07, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:1658. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.