The Determinants of Water Utilities Performance

  • Andrea GuerriniEmail author
  • Giulia Romano
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Water Science and Technology book series (BRIEFSWATER)


Over the last 25 years, the governance of public services has undergone important reforms in many countries. During the 1990s, efforts to reform the corporate entities established to pursue public policy and commercial objectives wholly owned either by the state or local governments (state-owned enterprises, or SOEs) were aimed at promoting privatization even if, for both political and economic reasons, the state remained a major owner of productive assets in many economies (Menozzi et al. 2011).


Efficiency Score Private Firm Water Utility Water Service Public Firm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abbott M, Cohen B (2010) Industry Structure Issues in the Water and Wastewater sector in Australia. Econ Pap: J Appl Econ Policy 29(1):48–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott M, Cohen B (2009) Productivity and efficiency in the water industry. Utilities Policy 17:233–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams RB, Hermailin BE, Weisbach MS (2010) The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: a conceptual framework and survey. J Econ Lit 48(1):58–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Agrawal A, Knoeber CR (2001) Do some outside directors play a political role? J Law Econ 44(1):179–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aida K, Cooper WW, Pastor JT, Sueyoshi T (1998) Evaluating water supply services in Japan with RAM: a range-adjusted measure of inefficiency. OMEGA. Int J Manage Sci 26(2):207–232Google Scholar
  6. Alsharif K, Feroz EH, Klemer A, Raab R (2008) Governance of water supply systems in the Palestinian territories: a data envelopment analysis approach to the management of water resources. J Environ Manage 87:80–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aly HY, Grabowski R, Pasurka C, Rangan N (1990) Technical, scale and allocative efficiencies in US banking: an empirical investigation. Rev Econ Stat 72:211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Antonioli B, Filippini M (2001) The use of a variable cost function in the regulation of the Italian water industry. Utilities Policy 10:181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Anwandter L, Ozuna T (2002) Can public sector reforms improve the efficiency of public water utilities? Environ Dev Econ 7(4):687–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Arocena P, Oliveros D (2012) The efficiency of state-owned and privatized firms: does ownership make a difference? Int J Prod Econ 140:457–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ashton JK (2000) Total factor productivity growth and technical change in the water and sewerage industry. Serv Ind J 20(4):121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bakker K (2003) From public to private to…public? Re-regulating and mutualising private water supply in England and Wales. Geoforum 34(3):359–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Banker R, Charnes A, Cooper W (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci 30(9):1078–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Berg SV, Marques RC (2011) Quantitative studies of water and sanitation utilities: a literature survey. Water Policy 13(5):591–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bhattacharyya A, Harris T, Narayanan R, Raffiee K (1995) Specification and estimation of the effect of ownership on the economic efficiency of the water utilities. Reg Sci Urban Econ 25:759–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Boardman A, Vining A (1989) Ownership and performance in competitive environments: a comparison of the performance of private, mixed and state-owned enterprises. J Law Econ 32(1):1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boubakri N, Cosset J, Saffar W (2008) Political connections of newly privatized firms. J Corp Financ 14:654–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Boycko M, Shleifer A, Vishny RW (1996) A theory of privatization. Econ J 106:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bozec R, Dia M (2007) Board structure and firm technical efficiency: evidence from Canadian State-Owned Entesrprises. Eur J Oper Res 177(3):1734–1750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Brockett PL, Golany B (1996) Using rank statistics for determining programmatic efficiency differences in data envelopment analysis. Manage Sci 42:466–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Byrnes P, Grosskopf S, Hayes K (1986) Efficiency and ownership: further evidence. Rev Econ Stat 668:337–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carrozza C (2011) Italian water services reform from 1994 to 2008: decisional rounds and local modes of governance. Water Policy 13(6):751–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Carvalho P, Marques RC (2011) The influence of the operational environment on the efficiency of water utilities. J Environ Manage 92:2698–2707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Carvalho P, Marques RC (2014) Computing economies of vertical integration, economies of scope and economies of scale using partial frontier nonparametric methods. Eur J Oper Res 234(1):292–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Caves WC, Christensen LR, Swanson JA (1981) Productivity growth, scale economies, and capacity utilization in U.S. railroads, 1955–74. Am Econ Rev 71:994–1002Google Scholar
  26. Charnes A, Cooper W, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6):429–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Chirkos TN, Sears AM (1994) Technical efficiency and the competitive behaviour of hospitals. Socio Econ Plann Sci 28:219–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Coelli T (1996) A guide to DEAP Version 2.1: a data envelopment analysis (computer) program. In: CEPA working paper 96/08. Departments of Econometrics, University of New England, Armidale, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  29. Coelli T (1998) A multi-stage methodology for the solution of orientated DEA models. Oper Res Lett 23:143–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Correia T, Marques R (2011) Performance of Portuguese water utilities: how do ownership, size, diversification and vertical integration relate to efficiency? Water Policy 13(3):343–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Cruz N, Marques R (2012) Mixed companies and local governance: no man can serve two masters. Public Adm 90(3):737–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Cruz N, Marques R, Romano G, Guerrini A (2012) Measuring the efficiency of water utilities: a cross-national comparison between Portugal and Italy. Water Policy 14(5):841–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cubbin J, Tzanidakis G (1998) Regression versus data envelopment analysis for efficiency measurement: an application to the England and Wales regulated water industry. Utilities Policy 7:75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. De Witte K, Marques RC (2010) Designing performance incentives, an International benchmark study in the water sector. CEJOR 18:189–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. De Witte K, Marques RC (2011) Big and beautiful? On non-parametrically measuring scale economies in non-convex technologies. J Prod Anal 35:213–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Dewenter KL, Malatesta PH (2001) State-owned and privately owned firms: an empirical analysis of profitability, leverage, and labor intensity. Am Econ Rev 91(1):320–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Dietsch M, Weill L (1999) Les performances des banques de dépots francaises: une evaluation par la méthod DEA. In: Badillo PY, Paradi JC (eds) La Méthod DEA. Hermes Science Publications, ParisGoogle Scholar
  38. Dinc S, Gupta N (2011) The decision to privatize: finance and politics. J Financ LXVI(1):241–269Google Scholar
  39. Eckel C, Vining A (1985) Elements of a theory of mixed enterprise. Scott J Polit Econ 32(1):82–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Estache A, Kouassi E (2002) Sector organization, governance and the inefficiency of African water utilities. In: Policy research working paper no. 2890. The World Bank, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  41. Fabbri P, Fraquelli G (2000) Costs and structure of technology in the Italian water industry. Empirica 27:65–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Faccio M (2006) Politically connected firms. Am Econ Rev 96(1):369–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Faccio M (2010) Differences between politically connected and non-connected firms: a cross country analysis. Financ Manage 39(3):905–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Fan JPH, Wong TJ, Zhang T (2007) Politically-connected CEOs, corporate governance and post-IPO performance of China’s newly partially privatized firms. J Financ Econ 84:330–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Filippini M, Hrovatin N, Zori J (2008) Cost efficiency of slovenian water distribution utilities: an application of stochastic Frontier methods. J Prod Anal 29(2):169–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ford J, Warford J (1969) Cost functions for the water industry. J Ind Econ 18(1):53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Fraquelli G, Giandrone R (2003) Reforming the wastewater treatment sector in Italy: implications of plant size, structure and scale economics. Water Resour Res 39(10):1293Google Scholar
  48. Fraquelli G, Piacenza M, Vannoni D (2004) Scope and scale economies in multi- utilities: evidence from gas, water and electricity combinations. Appl Econ 36(18):2045–2057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. García S, Moreaux M, Reynaud A (2007) Measuring economies of vertical integration in network industries: an application to the water sector. Int J Ind Organ 25:791–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. García-Sánchez IM (2006) Efficiency measurement in Spanish local government: the case of municipal water services. Rev Policy Res 23(2):355–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Goldman E, Rocholl J, So J (2009) Do politically connected boards affect firm value? Rev Financ Stud 22(6):2331–2360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. González-Gómez F, García-Rubio MA (2008) Efficiency in the management of urban water services. What have we learned after four decades of research? Hacienda Pública Española 185(2):39–67Google Scholar
  53. Guerrini A, Romano G, Campedelli B (2011) Factors affecting the performance of water utility companies. Int J Public Sector Manag 24(6):543–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Guerrini A, Romano G, Campedelli B (2013) Economies of scale, scope, and density in the Italian water sector: A two-stage data envelopment analysis approach. Water Resour Manage 27(13):4559–4578Google Scholar
  55. Guerrini A, Romano G, Martini M (2014) Determinants of efficiency in Danish wastewater utilities. In: Working paper accepted at ECOstp IWA conference, VeronaGoogle Scholar
  56. Gupta N (2005) Partial privatisation and firm performance. J Financ 15:987–1015Google Scholar
  57. Hall D (2001) Water privatisation and quality of service. Public services international research usnit. University of Greenwich, London. Available from: Accessed 31 July 2012
  58. Hall D, Lobina E (2012) Financing water and sanitation: public realities. Public services international research unit. University of Greenwich, London Accessed 31 July 2012
  59. Hassanein AAG, Khalifa RA (2007) Financial and operational performance indicators applied to public and private water and wastewater utilities. Eng Constr Arch Manage 14(5):479–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hoff A (2007) Second stage DEA: comparison of approaches for modelling the DEA score. Eur J Oper Res 181:425–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Hunt L, Lynk E (1995) Privatization and efficiency in the UK water industry: an empirical analysis. Oxf Rev Econ Stat 57(3):371–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Idelovitch E, Klas R (1997) Private sector participation in water supply and sanitation in Latin America. World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  63. Kim H, Clark R (1988) Economies of scale and scope in water supply. Reg Sci Urban Econ 27(2):163–183Google Scholar
  64. Kirkpatrick C, Parker D, Zhang Y (2006) An empirical analysis of state and private-sector provision of water services in Africa. World Bank Econ Rev 20(1):143–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Knapp M (1978) Economies of scale in sewerage purification and disposal. J Ind Econ 27(2):163–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Li W, Xu LC (2004) The impact of privatisation and competition in the telecommunications sector around the world. J Law Econ 47:395–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lobina E, Hall D (2007) Experience with private sector participation in Grenoble, France, and lessons on strengthening public water operations. Utilities Policy 15:93–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lynk E (1993) Privatisation, joint production and the comparative efficiencies of private and public ownership: the UK water industry case. Fiscal Stud 14:98–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Marques RC, De Witte K (2011) Is big better? On scale and scope economies in the Portuguese water sector. Econ Model 28(3):1009–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Martins R, Fortunato A, Coelho F (2006) Cost structure of the Portuguese water industry: a cubic cost function application. Universidade de Coimbra, GEMFGoogle Scholar
  71. Massarutto A, Paccagnan V, Linares E (2008) Private management and public finance in the Italian water industry: a marriage of convenience? Water Resour Res 44:1–17. doi: 10.1029/2007WR006443 Google Scholar
  72. Megginson, W.L., Nash, R.C., & Van Randenbourgh, M. (1994). The financial and operating performance of newly privatized firms: an international empirical analysis. J Financ. XLIX(2), 403-452Google Scholar
  73. Ménard C, Saussier S (2000) Contractual choice and performance. The case of water supply in France. Revue d’économie industrielle 92:385–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Menozzi A, Gutiérrez Urtiaga M, Vannoni D (2011) Board composition, political connections, and performance in state-owned enterprises. Ind Corp Change 21(3):671–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mizutani F, Urakami T (2001) Identifying network density and scale economies for Japanese water supply organizations. Pap Reg Sci 80(2):211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Nauges C, Van den Berg C (2008) Economies of density, scale and scope in the water supply and sewerage sector: a study of four developing and transition economies. J Regul Econ 34(2):144–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Niessen A, Ruenzi S (2010) Political connectedness and firm performance. Evidence from Germany. Ger Econ Rev 11(4):441–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Peda P, Grossi G, Liik M (2013) Do ownership and size affect the performance of water utilities? Evidence from Estonian municipalities. J Manage Gov 17(2):237–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Picazo-Tadeo AJ, Gonzàlez-Gòmez F, Sàez-Fernàndez FJ (2009a) Accounting for operating environments in measuring water utilities’ managerial efficiency. Serv Ind J 29:761–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Picazo-Tadeo AJ, Sàez-Fernàndez FJ, Gonzàlez-Gòmez F (2009b) The role of environmental factors in water utilities’ technical efficiency. Empirical evidence from Spanish companies. Appl Econ 41:615–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Ray SC (1991) Resource-use efficiency in public schools: a study of Connecticut data. Manage Sci 37:1620–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Renzetti S, Dupont D (2009) Measuring the technical efficiency of municipal water suppliers: the role of environmental factors. Land Econ 85(4):627–636Google Scholar
  83. Romano G, Guerrini A (2011) Measuring and comparing the efficiency of water utility companies: a data envelopment analysis approach. Utilities Policy 19(3):202–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Romano G, Guerrini A, Vernizzi S (2013) Ownership, investment policies and funding choices of Italian water utilities: an empirical analysis. Water Resour Manage 27(9):3409–3419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Rossi D, Young E, Epp D (1979) The cost impact of joint treatment of domestic and poultry processing wastewaters. Land Econ 55(4):444–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Saal D, Parker D (2000) The impact of privatization and regulation on the water and sewerage industry in England and Wales: a translog cost function model. Manag Decis Econ 21(6):253–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Saal D, Parker D, Weyman-Jones T (2007) Determining the contribution of technical efficiency and scale change to productivity growth in the privatized English and Welsh water and sewerage industry: 1985–2000. J Prod Anal 28:127–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Saal D, Arocena P, Maziotis A, Triebs T (2013) Scale and scope economies and the efficient vertical and horizontal configuration of the water industry: a survey of the literature. Rev Netw Econ 12(1):93–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Sauer J (2005) Economies of scale and firm size optimum in rural water supply. Water Resour Res 41:1–13Google Scholar
  90. Seroa da Motta R, Moreira A (2006) Efficiency and regulation in the sanitation sector in Brazil. Utilities Policy 14(3):185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sexton TR, Sleeper S, Taggart RE Jr (1994) Improving pupil transportation in North Carolina. Interfaces 24:87–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Shaoul J (1997) A critical financial analysis of the performance of privatize industries: the case of the water industry in England and Wales. Crit Perspect Account 8:479–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Shih JS, Harrington W, Pizer WA, Gillingham K (2006) Economies of scale in community water systems. J Am Water Works Assoc 98(9):100–108Google Scholar
  94. Shleifer A, Vishny RW (1994) Politicians and Firms. Quart J Econ 109:995–1025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Shleifer A (1998) State versus private ownership. J Econ Perspect 12:133–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Simar L, Wilson PW (2004) Performance of the bootstrap for DEA estimators and iterating the principle. In: Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Zhu J (eds) Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp 265–298 (Chapter 10)Google Scholar
  97. Simar L, Wilson PW (2007) Estimation and inference in two-sage semi-parametric models of production processes. J Econometrics 136:31–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Sørensen RJ (2007) Does dispersed ownership impair efficiency? The case of refuse collection in Norway. Public Adm 85(4):1045–1058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Stanton KR (2002) Trends in relationship lending and factors affecting relationship lending efficiency. J Bank Financ 26:127–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Stone, Webster Consultants for OFWAT (2004) Investigation into evidence for economies of scale in the water and sewerage industry in England and Wales. Final reportGoogle Scholar
  101. Torres M, Morrison-Paul CJ (2006) Driving forces for consolidation or fragmentation of the US water utility industry: a cost function approach with endogenous output. J Urban Econ 59:104–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Tupper H, Resende M (2004) Efficiency and regulatory issues in the Brazilian water and sewerage sector: an empirical study. Utilities Policy 12:29–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Tynan N, Kingdom B (2005) Optimal size for utilities? Public policy for the private sector, World Bank Note 283Google Scholar
  104. Vinnari EM, Hukka JJ (2007) Great expectations, tiny benefits e Decision-making in the privatization of Tallinn water. Utilities Policy 15:78–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Yamout G, Jamali D (2007) A critical assessment of a proposed public private partnership (PPP) for the management of water services in Lebanon. Water Resour Manage 21(3):6CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ManagementUniversity of VeronaVeronaItaly
  2. 2.Economics and ManagementUniversity of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations