Eva Lieberherr

TOWARDS LEGITIMATE WATER GOVERNANCE? The partially privatized Berlin waterworks

Abstract This article addresses how and to what extent a governance mode can legitimately provide public services. A single case study of the partially privatized Berlin Waterworks is used to analyse the level of input and output legitimacy as well as potential trade-offs between the criteria emerging in a public–private partnership (PPP) in the water supply and sanitation sectors. While the Berlin Waterworks as a PPP leads to a lower level of resource protection and public acceptance, it leads to a higher level of efficiency and profitability than under the previous public model.

Torn between state and market: Private policy implementation and conflicting institutional logics

Abstract Policy implementation by private actors constitutes a “missing link” for understanding the implications of private governance. This paper proposes and assesses an institutional logics framework that combines a top-down, policy design approach with a bottom-up, implementation perspective on discretion. We argue that the conflicting institutional logics of the state and the market, in combination with differing degrees of goal ambiguity, accountability and hybridity play a crucial role for output performance. These arguments are analyzed based on a secondary analysis of seven case studies of private and hybrid policy implementation in diverging contexts. We find that aligning private output performance with public interests is at least partly a question of policy design congruence: private implementing actors tend to perform deficiently when the conflicting logics of the state and the market combine with weak accountability mechanisms.

Trade-Offs And Synergies: Horizontalization and Legitimacy in the Swiss Wastewater Sector

Abstract Recent public sector reforms have led to horizontalization, where public service providers have increased autonomy from the state. Such changes lead to queries about democratic responsiveness (input legitimacy), democratic procedures and efficacy (throughput legitimacy) and effectiveness (output legitimacy). The following question thus emerges: how and why does horizontalization affect input, output and throughput legitimacy? This inquiry is addressed by analysing two Swiss wastewater service providers with differing degrees of horizontalization. The analysis indicates that horizontalization leads to more synergies than trade-offs between the legitimacy dimensions. Particularly, input and throughput legitimacy can play a pivotal role in attaining citizens’ acceptance.

Water Provision in France, Germany and Switzerland: Convergence and Divergence

This chapter provides a comparative analysis of local water provision reforms in France, Germany and Switzerland. We assess the main trends in institutional reforms of water provision from the nineteenth century until today. The three countries converge and diverge in their institutional reforms and demonstrate historical path dependency, as early models of water provision are mirrored in later reforms. France historically outsourced operating tasks to private players under a public ownership scheme. This model remains dominant despite cases of remunicipalisation since the start of the twenty-first century. Germany experienced modest market liberalisation reforms and greater public scepticism about privatisation than in France. Switzerland has the strongest municipal control and public criticism of privatisation, which has remained robust since the end of the nineteenth century.

Neoliberalism and sustainable urban water sectors: A critical reflection of sector characteristics and empirical evidence

Urban water sectors in industrialised countries are increasingly facing a diverse range of challenges. Aging assets, environmental concerns and economic issues put pressure on the current governance and organisation of these sectors. In recent years, a plethora of neoliberal reforms have been initiated in various countries as efforts to counteract these developments. While rather successful in infrastructure sectors, such as energy or telecommunication, neoliberal reforms have proven difficult in many industrialised, urban water sectors. The article argues that this is related to distinct characteristics of the water sectors. Specificities include large-scale technologies, high externalities and the nature of the good. This article analyses these key characteristics of urban water sectors and shows their implications and challenges for neoliberal reforms by drawing on the privatisation of the English water sectors. The results show key trade-offs between economic and environmental issues, and less with social goals.

Exploring the Democratic Legitimacy of Privatization in the Water Sector: Two Cases in Switzerland

This chapter assesses water privatization and democratic legitimacy with a focus on Switzerland. First, I review different forms of water privatization across Europe: the transfer of assets from public to private actors; various forms of outsourcing to the private sector; and formal privatization. Then I address privatization reforms (or the lack thereof) in the Swiss water sectors. To provide insight into how privatization may impact democratic legitimacy, I present a comparative analysis: a public operator (Zurich) is contrasted with a formally privatized operator (Berne). I find that (formal) privatization does not per se decrease democratic legitimacy, but that such a reform can increase democratic legitimacy in specific ways, such as giving certain actors a voting right.

Autonomy in Public Service Provision and the Challenge of Accountability: Insights from German Policy Fields: insights from German policy fields

The creation of “autonomous operative” organizations – either by privatization or devolution – is a dominant trend of recent public governance reforms. While privatization and devolution affect traditional accountability arrangements based on democratic procedures quite considerably, this is not because the intensity of regulatory mechanisms is decreasing. New market-based accountability mechanisms such as competition, price, and performance are often layered upon existing regulatory regimes, such as organizational boards with elected representatives of the public. The paper contributes to the understanding of the relationship between conflicting principles of procedural and performance accountability by exploring the accountability regimes of autonomous operative organizations: What activities and strategies are applied by differing actors to manage the interface between the organization and their political and social stakeholders? To what extent can differing accountability mechanisms ensure that common good goals are achieved? These questions are addressed by conducting a comparative case study analysis of such salient policy fields as water supply and public housing in two federal states of Germany. Jerusalem Papers in Regulation & Governance