Fixing big government or feeding private contractors? Empirical evidence from the case of municipal solid waste management

IF 2.1 4区管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Australian Journal of Public Administration Pub Date : 2023-02-11 DOI:10.1111/1467-8500.12579

Seejeen Park, M. Jae Moon

{"title":"Fixing big government or feeding private contractors? Empirical evidence from the case of municipal solid waste management","authors":"Seejeen Park, M. Jae Moon","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>The assumption of new public management (NPM) that governments can lower costs and improve service quality through a market mechanism, such as competition, has been under debate over several decades. To test the NPM assumption, this study investigates the effects of contracting out on cost savings by analysing municipal solid waste management data collected in 25 local governments in the Republic of Korea over a period of 14 years. Contrary to the NPM assumption, this study suggests that contracting out does not necessarily result in cost savings but rather causes additional financial burden on citizens.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Government officials are strongly encouraged to critically review market-based managerial reforms.</li>\n \n <li>Government officials need to assess both benefits and costs of contracting-out practices prior to any outsourcing or privatisation decisions.</li>\n \n <li>Government officials need to make evidence-based policy decisions and long-term financial implications from the perspective of citizens.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8500.12579","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

The assumption of new public management (NPM) that governments can lower costs and improve service quality through a market mechanism, such as competition, has been under debate over several decades. To test the NPM assumption, this study investigates the effects of contracting out on cost savings by analysing municipal solid waste management data collected in 25 local governments in the Republic of Korea over a period of 14 years. Contrary to the NPM assumption, this study suggests that contracting out does not necessarily result in cost savings but rather causes additional financial burden on citizens.

Points for practitioners

Government officials are strongly encouraged to critically review market-based managerial reforms.
Government officials need to assess both benefits and costs of contracting-out practices prior to any outsourcing or privatisation decisions.
Government officials need to make evidence-based policy decisions and long-term financial implications from the perspective of citizens.

查看原文本刊更多论文

整顿大政府还是给私人承包商提供资金?城市固体废物管理案例的经验证据

新公共管理(NPM)的假设认为政府可以通过市场机制(如竞争)降低成本并提高服务质量，这一假设已经争论了几十年。为了检验NPM假设，本研究通过分析韩国25个地方政府在14年期间收集的城市固体废物管理数据，调查了外包对成本节约的影响。与NPM假设相反，这项研究表明，外包不一定会节省成本，反而会给公民带来额外的经济负担。大力鼓励政府官员严格审查以市场为基础的管理改革。在做出任何外包或私有化决定之前，政府官员需要评估外包做法的收益和成本。政府官员需要从公民的角度做出基于证据的政策决定和长期财政影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Australian Journal of Public Administration PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-

CiteScore

4.40

自引率

9.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.