Has private participation in water and sewerage improved coverage? Empirical evidence from Latin America
Introducing private sector participation (PSP) into the water and sewerage sectors is difficult and controversial. Empirical studies on its effects are scant and generally inconclusive. Case studies tend to find improvements following privatisation, but they suffer from selection bias and it is diff...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of international development 2009-04, Vol.21 (3), p.327-361 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 361 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 327 |
container_title | Journal of international development |
container_volume | 21 |
creator | Clarke, George R.G. Kosec, Katrina Wallsten, Scott |
description | Introducing private sector participation (PSP) into the water and sewerage sectors is difficult and controversial. Empirical studies on its effects are scant and generally inconclusive. Case studies tend to find improvements following privatisation, but they suffer from selection bias and it is difficult to generalise their results. To explore empirically the effects of private sector participation on coverage, we assemble a new dataset of connections to water and sewerage services at the city and province level based on household surveys in Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. The household surveys, conducted over a number of years, allow us to compile data before and after the introduction of private sector participation as well as from similar (control) regions did not privatise. Our analysis reveals that, in general, the share of households connected to piped water and sewerage improved following the introduction of private sector participation, consistent with the case study literature. We also find, however, that the share of households connected similarly improved in the control regions, suggesting that private sector participation, per se, may not have been responsible for those improvements. Results are similar when looking only at the poorest households. The share of poor households connected to piped water and sewerage increased similarly in areas both with and without private sector participation, suggesting that—in terms of connections at least—private sector participation did not harm the poor. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jid.1458 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_VO9</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_58814321</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>37123438</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5996-853d5e177edd1728e82cb5ef600e980eb5076c3e23dd4fa12c4ff5eeec4384513</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhiMEEktB4idYHBCXFH8mzglVbekH2yKhAhIXy2tPWu8mdrCzu-y_x2FXPSAhDp6xZp55PZ4pitcEHxOM6fuls8eEC_mkmBHcNCVhVD4tZrgRvCQ1l8-LFyktMc45zmbFw6VOaIhuo0dAg46jM27QowseOY-2ORqR9hYl2ELU94BcP8SwAYtMtlPkAzrvBxed0R2CjbPgDaA2hh7Ns45HJz1MyZfFs1Z3CV4d_FHx9eP53ellOf98cXV6Mi-NaJqqlIJZAaSuwVpSUwmSmoWAtsIYGolhIXBdGQaUWctbTajhbSsAwHAmuSDsqHi7181t_lxDGlXvkoGu0x7COikhJeGM_h9kNaEsi2bwzV_gMqyjz59QlPAGyzzMDL3bQyaGlCK0Kg-113GnCFbTYlRejJoWk9HrPRphAPPIbbvd0vnRbtRGMU1JNrvpkjeVncuH5TNMntaKVUQ9jH0WY3uxbYidXWi_UmEAv_Jh24G9h_xGSG4MfxppZKWEYFWuKg9VroPdP1tV11dnh5YPvEsj_HrkdVypqma1UN9vL9Td7acvN_zHjfrGfgOF-8py</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>214908000</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Has private participation in water and sewerage improved coverage? Empirical evidence from Latin America</title><source>Open Knowledge Repository</source><creator>Clarke, George R.G. ; Kosec, Katrina ; Wallsten, Scott</creator><creatorcontrib>Clarke, George R.G. ; Kosec, Katrina ; Wallsten, Scott</creatorcontrib><description>Introducing private sector participation (PSP) into the water and sewerage sectors is difficult and controversial. Empirical studies on its effects are scant and generally inconclusive. Case studies tend to find improvements following privatisation, but they suffer from selection bias and it is difficult to generalise their results. To explore empirically the effects of private sector participation on coverage, we assemble a new dataset of connections to water and sewerage services at the city and province level based on household surveys in Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. The household surveys, conducted over a number of years, allow us to compile data before and after the introduction of private sector participation as well as from similar (control) regions did not privatise. Our analysis reveals that, in general, the share of households connected to piped water and sewerage improved following the introduction of private sector participation, consistent with the case study literature. We also find, however, that the share of households connected similarly improved in the control regions, suggesting that private sector participation, per se, may not have been responsible for those improvements. Results are similar when looking only at the poorest households. The share of poor households connected to piped water and sewerage increased similarly in areas both with and without private sector participation, suggesting that—in terms of connections at least—private sector participation did not harm the poor. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0954-1748</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1099-1328</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jid.1458</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JINDEV</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Air Pollution ; Argentina ; Bolivia ; Brazil ; Brownfields ; Comparison of Public and Private Enterprises ; Contracting Out L330 ; Development studies ; Economic Development: Agriculture ; Energy ; Environment ; Hazardous Waste ; Households ; Impact analysis ; Initiatives ; Latin America ; Natural Resources ; Noise ; Other Primary Products O130 ; Participation ; Private sector ; privatisation ; Privatization ; Public services ; Public utilities ; Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets H440 ; Recycling Q530 ; Renewable Resources and Conservation: Water Q250 ; Sewage disposal ; Sewer systems ; sewerage ; Social systems ; Solid Waste ; Studies ; Urban government ; Urban planning ; Water Pollution ; Water supply ; Water utilities</subject><ispartof>Journal of international development, 2009-04, Vol.21 (3), p.327-361</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>World Bank</rights><rights>Copyright Wiley Periodicals Inc. Apr 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5996-853d5e177edd1728e82cb5ef600e980eb5076c3e23dd4fa12c4ff5eeec4384513</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5996-853d5e177edd1728e82cb5ef600e980eb5076c3e23dd4fa12c4ff5eeec4384513</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjid.1458$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjid.1458$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,3994,18961,27842,27843,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://hdl.handle.net/10986/5536$$EView_record_in_World_Bank$$FView_record_in_$$GWorld_Bank</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/wlyjintdv/v_3a21_3ay_3a2009_3ai_3a3_3ap_3a327-361.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Clarke, George R.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kosec, Katrina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallsten, Scott</creatorcontrib><title>Has private participation in water and sewerage improved coverage? Empirical evidence from Latin America</title><title>Journal of international development</title><addtitle>J. Int. Dev</addtitle><description>Introducing private sector participation (PSP) into the water and sewerage sectors is difficult and controversial. Empirical studies on its effects are scant and generally inconclusive. Case studies tend to find improvements following privatisation, but they suffer from selection bias and it is difficult to generalise their results. To explore empirically the effects of private sector participation on coverage, we assemble a new dataset of connections to water and sewerage services at the city and province level based on household surveys in Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. The household surveys, conducted over a number of years, allow us to compile data before and after the introduction of private sector participation as well as from similar (control) regions did not privatise. Our analysis reveals that, in general, the share of households connected to piped water and sewerage improved following the introduction of private sector participation, consistent with the case study literature. We also find, however, that the share of households connected similarly improved in the control regions, suggesting that private sector participation, per se, may not have been responsible for those improvements. Results are similar when looking only at the poorest households. The share of poor households connected to piped water and sewerage increased similarly in areas both with and without private sector participation, suggesting that—in terms of connections at least—private sector participation did not harm the poor. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</description><subject>Air Pollution</subject><subject>Argentina</subject><subject>Bolivia</subject><subject>Brazil</subject><subject>Brownfields</subject><subject>Comparison of Public and Private Enterprises</subject><subject>Contracting Out L330</subject><subject>Development studies</subject><subject>Economic Development: Agriculture</subject><subject>Energy</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Hazardous Waste</subject><subject>Households</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Initiatives</subject><subject>Latin America</subject><subject>Natural Resources</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Other Primary Products O130</subject><subject>Participation</subject><subject>Private sector</subject><subject>privatisation</subject><subject>Privatization</subject><subject>Public services</subject><subject>Public utilities</subject><subject>Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets H440</subject><subject>Recycling Q530</subject><subject>Renewable Resources and Conservation: Water Q250</subject><subject>Sewage disposal</subject><subject>Sewer systems</subject><subject>sewerage</subject><subject>Social systems</subject><subject>Solid Waste</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Urban government</subject><subject>Urban planning</subject><subject>Water Pollution</subject><subject>Water supply</subject><subject>Water utilities</subject><issn>0954-1748</issn><issn>1099-1328</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>VO9</sourceid><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhiMEEktB4idYHBCXFH8mzglVbekH2yKhAhIXy2tPWu8mdrCzu-y_x2FXPSAhDp6xZp55PZ4pitcEHxOM6fuls8eEC_mkmBHcNCVhVD4tZrgRvCQ1l8-LFyktMc45zmbFw6VOaIhuo0dAg46jM27QowseOY-2ORqR9hYl2ELU94BcP8SwAYtMtlPkAzrvBxed0R2CjbPgDaA2hh7Ns45HJz1MyZfFs1Z3CV4d_FHx9eP53ellOf98cXV6Mi-NaJqqlIJZAaSuwVpSUwmSmoWAtsIYGolhIXBdGQaUWctbTajhbSsAwHAmuSDsqHi7181t_lxDGlXvkoGu0x7COikhJeGM_h9kNaEsi2bwzV_gMqyjz59QlPAGyzzMDL3bQyaGlCK0Kg-113GnCFbTYlRejJoWk9HrPRphAPPIbbvd0vnRbtRGMU1JNrvpkjeVncuH5TNMntaKVUQ9jH0WY3uxbYidXWi_UmEAv_Jh24G9h_xGSG4MfxppZKWEYFWuKg9VroPdP1tV11dnh5YPvEsj_HrkdVypqma1UN9vL9Td7acvN_zHjfrGfgOF-8py</recordid><startdate>200904</startdate><enddate>200904</enddate><creator>Clarke, George R.G.</creator><creator>Kosec, Katrina</creator><creator>Wallsten, Scott</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Periodicals Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>VO9</scope><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200904</creationdate><title>Has private participation in water and sewerage improved coverage? Empirical evidence from Latin America</title><author>Clarke, George R.G. ; Kosec, Katrina ; Wallsten, Scott</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5996-853d5e177edd1728e82cb5ef600e980eb5076c3e23dd4fa12c4ff5eeec4384513</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Air Pollution</topic><topic>Argentina</topic><topic>Bolivia</topic><topic>Brazil</topic><topic>Brownfields</topic><topic>Comparison of Public and Private Enterprises</topic><topic>Contracting Out L330</topic><topic>Development studies</topic><topic>Economic Development: Agriculture</topic><topic>Energy</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Hazardous Waste</topic><topic>Households</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Initiatives</topic><topic>Latin America</topic><topic>Natural Resources</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Other Primary Products O130</topic><topic>Participation</topic><topic>Private sector</topic><topic>privatisation</topic><topic>Privatization</topic><topic>Public services</topic><topic>Public utilities</topic><topic>Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets H440</topic><topic>Recycling Q530</topic><topic>Renewable Resources and Conservation: Water Q250</topic><topic>Sewage disposal</topic><topic>Sewer systems</topic><topic>sewerage</topic><topic>Social systems</topic><topic>Solid Waste</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Urban government</topic><topic>Urban planning</topic><topic>Water Pollution</topic><topic>Water supply</topic><topic>Water utilities</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Clarke, George R.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kosec, Katrina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallsten, Scott</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Open Knowledge Repository</collection><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of international development</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Clarke, George R.G.</au><au>Kosec, Katrina</au><au>Wallsten, Scott</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Has private participation in water and sewerage improved coverage? Empirical evidence from Latin America</atitle><jtitle>Journal of international development</jtitle><addtitle>J. Int. Dev</addtitle><date>2009-04</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>327</spage><epage>361</epage><pages>327-361</pages><issn>0954-1748</issn><eissn>1099-1328</eissn><coden>JINDEV</coden><abstract>Introducing private sector participation (PSP) into the water and sewerage sectors is difficult and controversial. Empirical studies on its effects are scant and generally inconclusive. Case studies tend to find improvements following privatisation, but they suffer from selection bias and it is difficult to generalise their results. To explore empirically the effects of private sector participation on coverage, we assemble a new dataset of connections to water and sewerage services at the city and province level based on household surveys in Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. The household surveys, conducted over a number of years, allow us to compile data before and after the introduction of private sector participation as well as from similar (control) regions did not privatise. Our analysis reveals that, in general, the share of households connected to piped water and sewerage improved following the introduction of private sector participation, consistent with the case study literature. We also find, however, that the share of households connected similarly improved in the control regions, suggesting that private sector participation, per se, may not have been responsible for those improvements. Results are similar when looking only at the poorest households. The share of poor households connected to piped water and sewerage increased similarly in areas both with and without private sector participation, suggesting that—in terms of connections at least—private sector participation did not harm the poor. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/jid.1458</doi><tpages>35</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 0954-1748 |
ispartof | Journal of international development, 2009-04, Vol.21 (3), p.327-361 |
issn | 0954-1748 1099-1328 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_58814321 |
source | Open Knowledge Repository |
subjects | Air Pollution Argentina Bolivia Brazil Brownfields Comparison of Public and Private Enterprises Contracting Out L330 Development studies Economic Development: Agriculture Energy Environment Hazardous Waste Households Impact analysis Initiatives Latin America Natural Resources Noise Other Primary Products O130 Participation Private sector privatisation Privatization Public services Public utilities Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets H440 Recycling Q530 Renewable Resources and Conservation: Water Q250 Sewage disposal Sewer systems sewerage Social systems Solid Waste Studies Urban government Urban planning Water Pollution Water supply Water utilities |
title | Has private participation in water and sewerage improved coverage? Empirical evidence from Latin America |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T05%3A15%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_VO9&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Has%20private%20participation%20in%20water%20and%20sewerage%20improved%20coverage?%20Empirical%20evidence%20from%20Latin%20America&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20international%20development&rft.au=Clarke,%20George%20R.G.&rft.date=2009-04&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=327&rft.epage=361&rft.pages=327-361&rft.issn=0954-1748&rft.eissn=1099-1328&rft.coden=JINDEV&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jid.1458&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_VO9%3E37123438%3C/proquest_VO9%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=214908000&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |