• español 
    • español
    • English
    • français
  • FacebookPinterestTwitter
  • español
  • English
  • français
Ver ítem 
  •   DIGIBUG Principal
  • 1.-Investigación
  • Departamentos, Grupos de Investigación e Institutos
  • Departamento de Economía Aplicada
  • DEA - Informes
  • Ver ítem
  •   DIGIBUG Principal
  • 1.-Investigación
  • Departamentos, Grupos de Investigación e Institutos
  • Departamento de Economía Aplicada
  • DEA - Informes
  • Ver ítem
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Performance and ownership in the governance of urban water

[PDF] FEGWP309.pdf (126.6Kb)
Identificadores
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10481/29180
Exportar
RISRefworksMendeleyBibtex
Estadísticas
Ver Estadísticas de uso
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítem
Autor
García Rubio, Miguel Ángel; González Gómez, Francisco José; Guardiola, Jorge
Editorial
Universidad de Granada. Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales
Materia
Water supply
 
Management
 
Local government
 
Fecha
2009
Referencia bibliográfica
García Rubio, M.A.; González Gómez, F.; Guardiola, J. Performance and ownership in the governance of urban water. Universidad de Granada, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales (2009). (FEG-WP; 3/09). [http://hdl.handle.net/10481/29180]
Resumen
In this paper the differences in terms of performance between public and the private governance in urban water management are investigated. A statistical ranking is implemented to determine programmatic efficiency differences in DEA, using an incomplete panel data that gathers information on 20 water utilities in Andalusia, in Southern Spain. In the model, labour and operational costs are considered as inputs. The volume of revenue water, the number of connections and the network length are used as outputs. The analysis indicates that private management is more efficient. The efficiency indicators adjusted by a variable related to quality are estimated and demonstrate that privatization of the service does not mean any loss in terms of quality. However, there are no significant differences between both types of management including as a desirable input hydraulic yield as a proxy of the degree of network renovation. A lower hydraulic efficiency in private management would suggest that the need to make significant investments could be an important factor when making the decision to privatize the management of the urban water service.
Colecciones
  • DEA - Informes

Mi cuenta

AccederRegistro

Listar

Todo DIGIBUGComunidades y ColeccionesPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresTítulosMateriaFinanciaciónPerfil de autor UGREsta colecciónPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresTítulosMateriaFinanciación

Estadísticas

Ver Estadísticas de uso

Servicios

Pasos para autoarchivoAyudaLicencias Creative CommonsSHERPA/RoMEODulcinea Biblioteca UniversitariaNos puedes encontrar a través deCondiciones legales

Contacto | Sugerencias