Scholars have long regarded government fiscal stress as a crucial factor driving public service outsourcing; however, further investigation is still needed to determine whether service outsourcing in turn helps governments improve fiscal conditions. Public choice theory suggests that outsourcing services can lead to efficiency improvement and cost savings. Nevertheless, transaction costs theory implies that the costs associated with service outsourcing may offset or even outweigh its potential benefits. Moreover, the extent of transaction costs depends on contextual factors such as market competition, bureaucrat support, and government management capacity. Empirically, we employ an instrumental variable estimation approach to examine the impact of service outsourcing on the budget balances and debt levels of U.S. municipalities. We find that service outsourcing improves government fiscal conditions, with contextual factors playing an important role in moderating this effect. Additionally, outsourcing services to different types of contractors has varying implications for government fiscal conditions.
AlonsoJ. M.AndrewsR. (2020). Political ideology and social services contracting: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Public Administration Review, 80(5), 743–754. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13177
2.
AlonsoJ. M.AndrewsR. (2021). Government-created nonprofit organizations and public service turnaround: Evidence from a synthetic control approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(2), 346–362. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa035
3.
AlonsoJ. M.CliftonJ.Díaz-FuentesD. (2015). Did new public management matter? An empirical analysis of the outsourcing and decentralization effects on public sector size. Public Management Review, 17(5), 643–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.822532
4.
BartleJ. R.KorosecR. L. (1996). Are city managers greedy bureaucrats?Public Administration Quarterly, 20(1), 89–102. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40800466
5.
BauerZ.JohnstonJ. M. (2020). Who does it better? Comparing immigration detention facility performance in an intergovernmental and intersectoral context. Public Administration Review, 80(2), 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13127
6.
BelG.FagedaX. (2007). Why do local governments privatise public services? A survey of empirical studies. Local Government Studies, 33(4), 517–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930701417528
7.
BelG.FagedaX. (2017). What have we learned from the last three decades of empirical studies on factors driving local privatisation?Local Government Studies, 43(4), 503–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2017.1303486
8.
BelG.FagedaX.WarnerM. E. (2010). Is private production of public services cheaper than public production? A meta-regression analysis of solid waste and water services. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29(3), 553–577. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20509
9.
BoyneG. A. (1998a). Bureaucratic theory meets reality: Public choice and service contracting in US local government. Public Administration Review, 58(6), 474–484. https://doi.org/10.2307/977575
10.
BoyneG. A. (1998b). The determinants of variations in local service contracting: Garbage in, garbage out?Urban Affairs Review, 34(1), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/107808749803400107
11.
BrownT.PotoskiM. (2003b). Managing contract performance: A transaction cost approach. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(2), 275–297. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.10117
12.
BrownT.PotoskiM. (2003a). Transaction costs and institutional explanations for government service production decisions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(4), 441–468. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mug030
13.
BrudneyJ. L.FernandezS.RyuJ. E.WrightD. S. (2005). Exploring and explaining contracting out: Patterns among the American states. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3), 393–419. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui019
14.
BrysonJ. M.CrosbyB. C.BloombergL. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238
15.
BuergerC.HarrisD. N. (2021). The impact of government contracting out on spending: The case of public education in New Orleans. The American Review of Public Administration, 51(2), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020942257
16.
DahlströmC.NistotskayaM.TyrbergM. (2018). Outsourcing, bureaucratic personnel quality and citizen satisfaction with public services. Public Administration, 96(1), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12387
17.
ElkomyS.CooksonG.JonesS. (2019). Cheap and dirty: The effect of contracting out cleaning on efficiency and effectiveness. Public Administration Review, 79(2), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13031
18.
EstacheA.RossiM. A. (2002). How different is the efficiency of public and private water companies in Asia?The World Bank Economic Review, 16(1), 139–148. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/16.1.139
FernandezS.RyuJ. E.BrudneyJ. L. (2008). Exploring variations in contracting for services among American local governments: Do politics still matter?The American Review of Public Administration, 38(4), 439–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074007311386
21.
FernandezS.SmithC. R.WengerJ. B. (2007). Employment, privatization, and managerial choice: Does contracting out reduce public sector employment?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(1), 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20227
22.
FerrisJ.GraddyE. (1986). Contracting out: For what? With whom?Public Administration Review, 46(4), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.2307/976307
23.
FlorestanoP. S.GordonS. B. (1980). Public vs. private: Small government contracting with the private sector. Public Administration Review, 40(1), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/976105
24.
GirthA. M. (2017). Incentives in third-party governance: Management practices and accountability implications. Public Administration Review, 77(3), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12645
25.
GirthA. M.HefetzA.JohnstonJ. M.WarnerM. E. (2012). Outsourcing public service delivery: Management responses in noncompetitive markets. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02596.x
26.
HartO.ShleiferA.VishnyR. W. (1997). The proper scope of government: Theory and an application to prisons. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1127–1161. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300555448
27.
HefetzA.WarnerM. (2004). Privatization and its reverse: Explaining the dynamics of the government contracting process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muh012
28.
HefetzA.WarnerM. E. (2012). Contracting or public delivery? The importance of service, market, and management characteristics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(2), 289–317. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur006
29.
HefetzA.WarnerM. E.Vigoda-GadotE. (2012). Privatization and intermunicipal contracting: The US local government experience 1992–2007. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30(4), 675–692. https://doi.org/10.1068/c11166
30.
JangS.EgerR. J.III (2019). The effects of state delinquent tax collection outsourcing on administrative effectiveness, efficiency, and procedural fairness. The American Review of Public Administration, 49(2), 236–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018759435
31.
JohnstonJ. M.GirthA. M. (2012). Government contracts and “managing the market”: Exploring the costs of strategic management responses to weak vendor competition. Administration & Society, 44(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399711417396
32.
KettlD. F. (2011). Sharing power: Public governance and private markets. Brookings Institution Press.
33.
KlohaP.WeissertC. S.KleineR. (2005). Developing and testing a composite model to predict local fiscal distress. Public Administration Review, 65(3), 313–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00456.x
34.
LamotheM.LamotheS.BellE. (2018). Understanding local service delivery arrangements: Are the ICMA ASD data reliable?Public Administration Review, 78(4), 613–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12939
35.
LamotheS.LamotheM. (2016). Service shedding in local governments: Why do they do it?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv012
36.
LeeG. R.LeeS. (2020). How outsourcing may enhance job satisfaction in the US federal bureaucracy: Exploring the role of knowledge sharing. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(4–5), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020913980
37.
LeeG. R.LeeS.MalatestaD.FernandezS. (2019). Outsourcing and organizational performance: The employee perspective. The American Review of Public Administration, 49(8), 973–986. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074019855469
38.
Le GrandJ.BartlettW. (Eds.) (1993). Quasi-markets and social policy. Macmillan.
39.
MalatestaD.SmithC. R. (2011). Resource dependence, alternative supply sources, and the design of formal contracts. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 608–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02392.x
40.
MarvelM. K.MarvelH. P. (2007). Outsourcing oversight: A comparison of monitoring for in-house and contracted services. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 521–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00734.x
41.
MohrR.DellerS. C.HalsteadJ. M. (2010). Alternative methods of service delivery in small and rural municipalities. Public Administration Review, 70(6), 894–905. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02221.x
42.
MorganD. R.HirlingerM. W.EnglandR. E. (1988). The decision to contract out city services: A further explanation. Western Political Quarterly, 41(2), 363–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591298804100209
43.
MuellerD. C. (2003). Public choice III. Cambridge University Press.
44.
MurnaneR. J.WillettJ. B. (2010). Methods matter: Improving causal inference in educational and social science research. Oxford University Press.
45.
NiskanenW. A. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Transaction Publishers.
46.
NiskanenW. A. (1975). Bureaucrats and politicians. The Journal of Law and Economics, 18(3), 617–643. https://doi.org/10.1086/466829
47.
OsborneD. E.GaeblerT. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Addison-Wesley.
PetersenO. H.HjelmarU.VrangbækK. (2018). Is contracting out of public services still the great Panacea? A systematic review of studies on economic and quality effects from 2000 to 2014. Social Policy & Administration, 52(1), 130–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12297
50.
PragerJ. (1994). Contracting out government services: Lessons from the private sector. Public Administration Review, 54(2), 176–184. https://doi.org/10.2307/976527
51.
RhoE. (2013). Contracting revisited: Determinants and consequences of contracting out for public education services. Public Administration Review, 73(2), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02682.x
52.
SalamonL. M. (1995). Partners in public service: Government-nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state. Johns Hopkins University Press.
53.
SmithS. R.LipskyM. (2009). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting. Harvard University Press.
54.
ThompsonO. (2011). The estimated cost impact of privatizing student transportation in Minnesota school districts. Public Choice, 146(3–4), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-010-9592-y
55.
VrangbækK.PetersenO. H.HjelmarU. (2015). Is contracting out good or bad for employees? A review of international experience. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 35(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X13511087
WarnerM. E.HefetzA. (2003). Rural-urban differences in privatization: Limits to the competitive state. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21(5), 703–718. https://doi.org/10.1068/c008r
58.
WarnerM. E.HefetzA. (2008). Managing markets for public service: The role of mixed public/private delivery of city services. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00845.x
59.
WeiW. (2022). Municipal structure matters: Evidence from government fiscal performance. Public Administration Review, 82(1), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13183
60.
WeiW.ZhangZ.YangK. (2022). Local institutions and public service outsourcing: Managerial professionalism, mayoral strength, and electoral rules. Public Administration Review, 82(6), 1095–1123. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13525
61.
WilliamsonO. (1996). The mechanisms of governance. Oxford University Press.
62.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2020). Introductory econometrics (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
63.
YangK.HsiehJ. Y.LiT. S. (2009). Contracting capacity and perceived contracting performance: Nonlinear effects and the role of time. Public Administration Review, 69(4), 681–696. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02017.x
64.
YangK.KassekertA. (2010). Linking management reform with employee job satisfaction: Evidence from federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 413–436. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mup010
65.
YusufJ.-E.O’ConnellL. (2014). Outsourcing expert services by state transportation departments: A look at effects on cost, quality, and changing employment levels. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(4), 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012469460
66.
ZhangZ.GibsonB.SchaferJ. G. (2018). Reexamining the relationship between fiscal stress and outsourcing. Public Performance & Management Review, 41(1), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2017.1358645
