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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of international development 2009-04, Vol.21 (3), p.327-361
Hauptverfasser: Clarke, George R.G., Kosec, Katrina, Wallsten, Scott
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Sons, Ltd.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; 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