Does Multiplicity Matter more than Ownership in the Efficiency of Infrastructure Services?

  • Frannie Humplick
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


The services from infrastructure systems have, for historical reasons or as a result of specific local contingencies, been totally state-owned in certain countries, entirely privatized in others, and sometimes provided through a mixture of public, private, and self-help arrangements. Many governments are re-evaluating the manner in which services have been provided in the past, and are searching for ways of increasing the efficiency of service delivery. One of the options considered is privatization, whereby a transfer of ownership of infrastructure assets from the public to the private sector is undertaken as a measure to increase efficiency. Another option is introducing multiplicity in the production of infrastructure services by: introducing competition in and for service production; and devolving responsibilities to regional, state, or local authorities.


Service Quality Service Production Infrastructure Service System Loss Infrastructure Provision 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Besant-Jones, J.E., 1992, “Reforming the Policies for Electric Power in Developing Countries”, Industry and Energy Department, The World Bank.Google Scholar
  2. Bradburd, R., 1992,“Privatization of Natural Monopoly Public Enterprises: The Regulation Issue”, The World Bank, WPS 864.Google Scholar
  3. Chu, X., G.J. Fielding, and B.W. Lamar, 1992,“Measuring Transit Performance Using Data Envelopment Analysis”, Transportation Research A, Vol. 26A, 3:223–230.Google Scholar
  4. Dasgupta, P., 1990,“The State and the Idea of Weil-Being”, Economic Journal, Vol. 100,4: supplement.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Escay, J.R., 1991,“Summary of 1988 Power Data Sheets for 100 Developing Countries”, Energy Series Paper No. 40, Industry and Energy Department, The World Bank.Google Scholar
  6. Gastil, R., 1989, Freedom in the World, Freedom House, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Hatry, H.P., 1980,“Performance Measurement Principles and Techniques: An Overview for Local Government”, Public Productivity Review, 4:312–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Johnson, R.A. and D.W. Wichern, 1988, Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.Google Scholar
  9. Levy, B. and P.T. Spiller, 1993,“Regulations, Institutions and Commitment in Telecommunications: A Comparative Analysis of Five Country Studies”, presented at a seminar on Institutional Foundations of Utility Regulation: Research Results and Their Operational Implications, The World Bank Group, Watergate Hotel, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  10. Nellis, J. and S. Kikeri, 1992,“Privatization: The Lessons of Experience”, The World Bank.Google Scholar
  11. Queiroz, C. and S. Gautam, 1992,“Road Infrastructure and Economic Development: Some Diagnostic Indicators”, Working Paper, The World Bank.Google Scholar
  12. Spulber, D., 1989, The Market and Regulation, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  13. Vickers, J. and G. Yarrow, 1991, Privatization: An Economic Analysis, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  14. World Bank, World Development Report: The Challenge of Development, 1991, Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frannie Humplick
    • 1
  1. 1.The World BankUSA

Personalised recommendations