The United States, England, and France have used a variety of forms to deliver urban services and infrastructures over time. Historically, government has been the dominant factor in the delivery of infrastructures for which no user fee is charged, whereas a variety of forms have been followed when there are user fees. This article examines changing forms of service delivery systems in the areas of water supply, mass transportation, and electrical supply in the three nations. Alterations in the form of delivery have been shaped by institutional and cultural factors and unique national styles. All three nations have moved in the direction of privatization of service delivery, but their experience shows that although privatization can reduce government's role in areas where it is poorly suited, proper oversight and maintenance of competition are vital functions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Water Works Association. (1925). Water works practice. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
2.
AndersonD. (1981). Regulatory politics and electric utilities. Boston: Auburn House.
3.
AndersonL. (1980). The diffusion of technology in the nineteenth century American city: Municipal water supply investments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Northwestern University.
4.
BagwellP. S. (1974). The transport revolution from 1770. London: B. T. Batsford.
5.
BarnekovT.BoyleR.RichD. (1989). Privatism and urban policy in Britain and the United States. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6.
ButtonK.PittfieldD. (1991). Transport deregulation: An international movement. New York: St. Martin's.
7.
CheapeC. W. (1980). Moving the masses: Urban public transit in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia, 1880–1912. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
ClarkD. (1995, March-April). Paris metro: A century-long project. Mass Transit, 20–22.
9.
CollinsM. F.PharoahT. M. (1974). Transport organization in a great city: The case of London. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
DaviziesL.Prud'HommeR. (1994). The economics of public-private partnership in infrastructure. In MartinandC. (Ed.), Private financing of public infrastructure: The French experience. Paris: Jouve.
11.
De BellG. (1970). Energy. In De BellG. (Ed.), The environmental handbook. New York: Ballantine.
12.
DrozdiakW. (1994, August 1–7). The newest Italian fashion: Rooting out scandal. Washington Post [national weekly edition].
13.
DuchèneC. (1994). Delegated management in the urban transportation sector. In MartinandC. (Ed.), Private financing of public infrastructure: The French experience (pp. 167–179). Paris: Jouve.
14.
Energy Policy Project of the Ford Foundation. (1974). A time to choose: Americas energy future. Cambridge: Ballinger.
15.
FrostR. L. (1991). Alternating currents: Nationalized power in France, 1946–1970. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
16.
Gómez-IbáñezJ. A.MeyerJ. R. (1993). Going private: The international experience with transport privatization. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
17.
GrimstoneG. (1989). Privatisation: Macroeconomics and modalities. In RamanadhamV. V. (Ed.), Privatization in developing countries. London: Routledge.
18.
HannahL. (1979). Electricity before nationalization: A study of the development of the electricity supply industry in Britain to 1948. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
19.
HealdD. (1989). The United Kingdom: Privatisation in its political context. In VickersJ.WrightV. (Eds.), The politics of privatisation in Western Europe. London: Frank Cass.
20.
HirshR. (1989). Technology and transformation in the American electric utility industry. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
21.
HirshleiferJ.De HavenJ.MillimanJ. (1960). Water supply: Economics, teclmology, andpolicy. Chicago: University of Chicago.
22.
HughesT. P. (1983). Networks of power: Electrification in western society, 1880–1930. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
23.
JacobsonC. D. (1989). “Private firms and public goods: Historical perspectives on contracting out for public services.” In KeatingA. D. (Ed.), Public private partnerships: Privatization in historical perspective. Chicago: Public Works Historical Society.
24.
JordanD. (1991, March 15). The hidden threat. Public Utilities Fortnightly.
25.
LorrainD. (1992). The French model of urban services. West European Politics, 15.
26.
LorrainD. (1994). Urban services, the market and politics. In MartinandC. (Ed.), Private financing of public infrastructure: The French experience (pp. 19–56). Paris: Jouve.
27.
LovinsA. B. (1977). Soft energy paths: Toward a durable peace. New York: Harper & Row.
28.
MacleanM. (1991). French enterprise and the challenge of the British water industry: Water without frontiers. Aldershot, UK: Avebury.
29.
McKayJ. P. (1976). Tramways and trolleys: The rise of urban mass transport in Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30.
MosherW. (1929). Electrical utilities: The crisis in public control. New York: Harper & Brothers.
31.
National Council on Public Works Improvement. (1988, February). Fragile foundations: A report on America's public works. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
32.
PasserH. C. (1953). The electrical manufacturers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33.
PhillipsC. (1988). The regulation of public utilities: Theory and practiceArlington, VA: Public Utilities Reports.
34.
PlattH. L. (1991). The electric city: Energy and the growth of the Chicago area, 1880–1930. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35.
PrigmoreB. J. (1969). On rails under Paris. Paris: Light Railway Transport League.
36.
RosenC. M. (1986). The limits of power: Great fires and the process of city growth in America. New York: Cambridge University.
37.
RosenH.KeatingA. D. (1991). Water and the city: The next century. Chicago: American Public Works Association.
38.
RothG. (1987). The private provision of public services in developing countries. New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
SuggsR. E. (1989). Minorities and privatization: Economic nubility at risk. Washington DC: Joint Center for Political Studies.
40.
SutcliffeA. (1981). Towards the planned city: Germany, the United States and France 1780–1914. New York: St. Martin's.
41.
SwidlerJ. (1991, September 15). An unthinkably horrible situation. Public Utilities Fortnightly.
42.
TarrJ. A. (1984). The evolution of the urban infrastructure in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In HansonR. (Ed.), Perspectives on urban infrastructure (pp. 4–60). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
43.
TarrJ. A.DupuyG. (Eds.) (1988). Technology and the rise of the networked city in Europe and America. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
44.
Twentieth Century Fund. (1948). Electric power and government policy. New York: Author.
45.
U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office. (1988). New directions for the nation's public works. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
46.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1991, April). Delivering the goods: Public works technologies, management, and financing. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
47.
VickersJ.WrightV. (1989). The politics of privatisation in Western Europe: An overview. In VickersJ.WrightV. (Eds.), The politics of privatisation in Western Europe. London: Frank Cass.
48.
WhittenR. H. (1911, January 19). The Paris subway system—With special reference to franchise terms and conditionsEngineering News, 65, 70–75.
49.
WilliamsonO. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.
50.
WittigG. (1930). Technological developments. In Bureau of the Census, Census of electrical industries 1927: Central electric light and power stations. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.
51.
WohlM. (1982). From private to public transit: Lessons from our 100-year experience in America (SS-243-U.3–210). Cambridge, MA: U.S. Department of Transportation.
