Research that tries to explain the decisions of local government in the contracting out of certain services frequently disregards the temporal dimension. In this article, the authors take time into account in the analysis, proposing a duration model as an alternative to discrete choice models. The objective is to analyze the explanatory factors in the contracting out of municipal services. This methodology is applied to the water services of 744 municipalities in southern Spain during the period from 1985 to 2006. From the results, the authors conclude that complexity in the environment, economies of scale, financial restrictions, and stability of the local government are determinants in the decision.
Allison, P.D.1984. Event history analysis: Regression for longitudinal data . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Antonioli, B., and M. Filippini.2001. The use of variable cost function in the regulation of the Italian water industry. Utilities Policy10:181-7.
3.
Bakker, K.2002. From state to market? Water mercantilización in Spain . Environment and Planning A34:769-90.
4.
Bel, G., and X. Fageda.2007. Why do local governments privatize public services? A survey of empirical studies. Local Government Studies33 (4): 517-34.
5.
Bel, G., and A. Miralles.2003. Factors influencing privatization of urban solid waste collection in Spain. Urban Studies40 (7): 1323-34.
6.
Bel, G., R. Hebdon, and M. Warner.2007. Local government reform: Privatisation and its alternatives. Local Government Studies33 (4): 507-15.
7.
Benton, J., and D. Menzel.1992. Contracting and franchising county services in Florida. Urban Affairs Quarterly27 (3): 436-56.
8.
Boyne, G.A.1998. The determinants of variations in local service contracting garbage in, garbage out?Urban Affairs Review34 (1): 150-63.
9.
Cameron, A.C., and P.K. Trivedi.2005. Microeconometrics: Methods and applications . New York: Cambridge Univ. Press .
10.
Carpentier, A., C. Nauges, A. Reynaud, and A. Thomas.2006. Effets de la délégation sur le prix de l'eau potable en France: Une analyse à partir de la littérature sur les effets de traitement [Contracting out effects on the price of water in France: An analysis based on the literature about the treatment effects.]Economie et Prévision [Economics and Forecasting]174 (3): 1-20.
11.
Commission of the European Communities.2007 . Towards sustainable water management in the European Union. First stage in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC . Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. Brussels, 22.3.2007. COM (2007) 128 final.
12.
Cox, D.R.1972. Regression models and life tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 24:187-220.
13.
Dijkgraaf, E., R.H.J.M. Gradus, and B. Melenberg.2003. Contracting out refuse collection. Empirical Economics28 (3): 553-70.
14.
Domberger, S., and P. Jensen.1997. Contracting out by the public sector: Theory, evidence, prospects. Oxford Review of Economic Policy13 (4): 67-78.
15.
Donahue, J.1989. The privatization decision. Public ends, private means . New York: Basic Books.
16.
Dubin, J., and P. Navarro.1988. How markets for impure public goods organize: The case of household refuse collection. Journal of Law, Economics & Organization4 (2): 217-41.
17.
European Environment Agency.2007. Climate change and water adaptation issues. EEA technical report 2/2007. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency .
18.
Embid-Irujo, A.2005. Water pricing in Spain. Water Resources Development21 (1): 31-41.
19.
Fabbri, P., and G. Fraquelli.2000. Costs and structure of technology in the Italian water industry. Empirica27:65-82.
20.
Ferris, J.1986. The decision to contract out: An empirical analysis . Urban Affairs Quarterly22 (2): 289-311.
21.
Fitch, K.2007. Water privatisation in France and Germany: The importance of local interest groups. Local Government Studies33 (4): 589-605.
22.
González-Gómez, F., and M.A. García-Rubio .2008. Efficiency in the management of urban water services. What have we learned after four decades of research?Hacienda Pública Española185 (2): 39-67.
23.
Greene, J.1996. Cities and privatization: Examining the effects of fiscal stress, location, and wealth in medium-sized cities. Polity Studies Journal24 (1): 135-44.
24.
Harris M., Y. Katz, G. Doron, and A. Woodlief.1997. Ideology and privatization policy in Israel. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy15 (3): 363-72.
25.
Hirsch, W.Z.1995a. Factors important in local governments' privatization decisions. Urban Affairs Review31 (2): 226-43.
26.
---. 1995b. Contracting out by urban governments: A review. Urban Affairs Review30 (3): 458-72.
27.
Hosmer, D.W., S. Lemeshow, and S. May.2008. Applied survival analysis: Regression modeling of time to event data. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley.
28.
Jenkins S.P.2004. Survival analysis. Unpublished manuscript, Institute for Social and Economic Research, Univ. of Essex, Colchester, UK.
29.
Jensen, P.H., and R.E. Stonecash.2005. Incentives and the efficiency of public sector- outsourcing contracts. Journal of Economic Surveys19 (5): 767-87.
30.
Joassart-Marcelli, P., and J. Musso.2005. Municipal service provision choices within a metropolitan area. Urban Affairs Review40 (4): 492-519.
31.
Kim, H.Y.1987. Economies of scale in multi-product firms: An empirical analysis. Economica54:185-206.
32.
Kim, H.Y., and R.M. Clark.1988. Economies of scale and scope in water supply. Regional Science and Urban Economics18:479-502.
33.
Kingdom, W.2005. Models of aggregation for water and sanitation provision. Water Supply & Sanitation Working Notes, 1. Washington, DC: World Bank.
34.
Kodrzycki, Y.1998. Fiscal pressures and the privatization of local services . New England Economic Review January/February:39-50.
35.
López-de-Silanes, F., A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny.1997. Privatization in the United States . RAND Journal of Economics28 (3): 447-71.
36.
Máñez, J.A., M.E. Rochina, and J.A. Sanchis.2008. Using survival models with individual data. Measuring entrepreneurship16:227-246.
37.
Marshall J.N., T. Richardson, and J. Hopkins.1999. The employment implications of civil service reform in the United Kingdom: National and regional evidence from the North East of England. Environment and Planning A31 (5): 803-17.
38.
Martínez-Espiñeira, R., M.A. García-Valiñas, and F. González-Gómez . Forthcoming. Does private management of water supply services really increase prices?An empirical analysis. Urban Studies46 (4).
39.
Ménard, C., and S. Saussier.2000. Contractual choice and performance: The case of water supply in France. Revue d'Économie Industrielle92 (2/3): 385-404.
40.
Miranda, R.1994. Explaining the privatization decision among local governments in the United States. Research in Urban Policy5:231-74.
41.
Miralles, A. Forthcoming. A duration model analysis of privatization of municipal of water services. Revista de Economía Aplicada.
42.
Morgan, D., M. Hirlinger, and R. England.1988. The decision to contract out city services: A further explanation. Western Political Quarterly41 (2): 363-72.
43.
Nauges, C., and C. Van den Berg .2007. How "natural" are natural monopolies in the water supply and sewerage sector? Case studies from developing and transition economies, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4137. February, Washington DC.
44.
Ohlsson, H.2003. Ownership and production costs: Choosing between public production and contracting-out in the case of Swedish refuse collection , Fiscal Studies24 (4): 451-76.
45.
Prentice, R.L., and L.A. Gloeckler.1978. Regression analysis of grouped survival data with application to the breast cancer data. Biometrics34:57-67.
46.
Reimer, S.1999. Contract service firms in local authorities: Evolving geographies of activity. Regional Studies33 (2): 121-30.
47.
Sauer, J.2005. Economies of scale and firm size optimum in rural water supply. Water Resources Research41:1-13.
48.
Sauer, J., and K. Frohberg.2007. Allocative Efficiency of Rural Water Supply: A Globally Flexible SGM Cost Frontier. Journal of Productivity Analysis27:31-40.
49.
Soler, M.A.2003. Water privatization in Spain. International Journal of Public Administration26 (3): 213-46.
50.
Tavares, A.F., and P.J. Camöes.2007. Local service delivery choices in Portugal: A political transaction costs framework. Local Government Studies33 (4): 535-53.
51.
Walls, M., M. Macauley, and S. Anderson.2005. Private markets, contracts, and government provision. What explains the organization of local waste and recycling markets?Urban Affairs Review40 (5): 590-613.
52.
Warner, M.E.2006. Market-based governance and the challenge for rural governments: U.S. trends. Social Policy and Administration40 (6): 612-31.
53.
Warner, M.E., and R. Hebdon.2001. Local government restructuring: Privatization and its alternatives. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management20 (2): 315-36.
54.
Warner, M., and A. Hefetz, 2002. Applying market solutions to public services: An assessment of efficiency, equity, and voice. Urban Affairs Review38 (1): 70-89.
55.
---. 2003. Rural-urban differences in privatization: Limits to the competitive state. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy21:703-18.
56.
---. 2008. Managing markets for public service: The role of mixed public/private delivery of city services. Public Administration Review68 (1): 155-66.
