Luis A. Andres , Juliana Garrido , Julio Gonzalez , Rui Cunha Marques
{"title":"Assessing regulatory governance for the water and sanitation Agencies in Brazil","authors":"Luis A. Andres , Juliana Garrido , Julio Gonzalez , Rui Cunha Marques","doi":"10.1016/j.jup.2024.101802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper focuses on evaluating and benchmarking the governance of regulatory agencies in Brazil's water and sanitation sector. Using a unique database obtained through the application of a questionnaire, we developed an index of regulatory governance and ranked all the agencies in Brazil that participated in the study. The index is an aggregate number of the evaluation of four key governance characteristics: Autonomy, Transparency, Accountability, and Tools & Capacity, including not only formal aspects of regulation but also indicators related to actual implementation. Based on 18 different indices, we analyze the positions of agencies with regard to different aspects of their regulatory governance, considering not only performance in each variable but also scores in the different components of each category. This evaluation identifies particular agency shortcomings regarding governance and indicates needed improvements. Although Brazil has strived to consolidate the governance design of its regulatory agencies, implementing the independent regulator model still faces several challenges. Various aspects of governance can be improved to pursue greater efficiency and quality in providing services, particularly in Accountability and Political Autonomy, where the country shows the largest number of regulatory agencies with the lowest scores. Conversely, almost half of the participating agencies show optimal scores in the Regulatory Autonomy aspect of governance. The results, for the most part, corroborate the institutional theory, in which the role of institutions is paramount for greater efficiency in providing public services, as it reduces information asymmetries and transaction costs and maximizes economic incentives.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23554,"journal":{"name":"Utilities Policy","volume":"90 ","pages":"Article 101802"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095717872400095X/pdfft?md5=42bf4ca6e834e812098d8aac61f84b94&pid=1-s2.0-S095717872400095X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utilities Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095717872400095X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper focuses on evaluating and benchmarking the governance of regulatory agencies in Brazil's water and sanitation sector. Using a unique database obtained through the application of a questionnaire, we developed an index of regulatory governance and ranked all the agencies in Brazil that participated in the study. The index is an aggregate number of the evaluation of four key governance characteristics: Autonomy, Transparency, Accountability, and Tools & Capacity, including not only formal aspects of regulation but also indicators related to actual implementation. Based on 18 different indices, we analyze the positions of agencies with regard to different aspects of their regulatory governance, considering not only performance in each variable but also scores in the different components of each category. This evaluation identifies particular agency shortcomings regarding governance and indicates needed improvements. Although Brazil has strived to consolidate the governance design of its regulatory agencies, implementing the independent regulator model still faces several challenges. Various aspects of governance can be improved to pursue greater efficiency and quality in providing services, particularly in Accountability and Political Autonomy, where the country shows the largest number of regulatory agencies with the lowest scores. Conversely, almost half of the participating agencies show optimal scores in the Regulatory Autonomy aspect of governance. The results, for the most part, corroborate the institutional theory, in which the role of institutions is paramount for greater efficiency in providing public services, as it reduces information asymmetries and transaction costs and maximizes economic incentives.
期刊介绍:
Utilities Policy is deliberately international, interdisciplinary, and intersectoral. Articles address utility trends and issues in both developed and developing economies. Authors and reviewers come from various disciplines, including economics, political science, sociology, law, finance, accounting, management, and engineering. Areas of focus include the utility and network industries providing essential electricity, natural gas, water and wastewater, solid waste, communications, broadband, postal, and public transportation services.
Utilities Policy invites submissions that apply various quantitative and qualitative methods. Contributions are welcome from both established and emerging scholars as well as accomplished practitioners. Interdisciplinary, comparative, and applied works are encouraged. Submissions to the journal should have a clear focus on governance, performance, and/or analysis of public utilities with an aim toward informing the policymaking process and providing recommendations as appropriate. Relevant topics and issues include but are not limited to industry structures and ownership, market design and dynamics, economic development, resource planning, system modeling, accounting and finance, infrastructure investment, supply and demand efficiency, strategic management and productivity, network operations and integration, supply chains, adaptation and flexibility, service-quality standards, benchmarking and metrics, benefit-cost analysis, behavior and incentives, pricing and demand response, economic and environmental regulation, regulatory performance and impact, restructuring and deregulation, and policy institutions.