评估巴西水和卫生机构的监管治理情况

IF 3.8 3区 经济学 Q3 ENERGY & FUELS
Luis A. Andres , Juliana Garrido , Julio Gonzalez , Rui Cunha Marques
{"title":"评估巴西水和卫生机构的监管治理情况","authors":"Luis A. Andres ,&nbsp;Juliana Garrido ,&nbsp;Julio Gonzalez ,&nbsp;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 &amp; 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":"{\"title\":\"Assessing regulatory governance for the water and sanitation Agencies in Brazil\",\"authors\":\"Luis A. Andres ,&nbsp;Juliana Garrido ,&nbsp;Julio Gonzalez ,&nbsp;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 &amp; 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}","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

摘要

本文主要对巴西水和卫生部门监管机构的治理情况进行评估和基准设定。利用通过问卷调查获得的独特数据库,我们制定了监管治理指数,并对巴西所有参与研究的机构进行了排名。该指数是对四个关键治理特征评估的总和:自主性、透明度、问责性和工具&;能力,不仅包括监管的正式方面,还包括与实际执行相关的指标。根据 18 种不同的指数,我们分析了各机构在监管治理不同方面的状况,不仅考虑了每个变量的表现,还考虑了每个类别不同组成部分的得分。这项评估指出了各机构在管理方面的不足,并指出了需要改进的地方。虽然巴西一直在努力巩固其监管机构的治理设计,但独立监管机构模式的实施仍面临一些挑战。管理的各个方面都可以改进,以提高提供服务的效率和质量,特别是在问责制和政治自治方面,巴西的监管机构数量最多,但得分最低。相反,几乎一半的参与机构在治理的监管自主性方面得分最优。这些结果在很大程度上证实了机构理论,即机构的作用对于提高公共服务的效率至关重要,因为它可以减少信息不对称和交易成本,最大限度地提高经济激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing regulatory governance for the water and sanitation Agencies in Brazil

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Utilities Policy
Utilities Policy ENERGY & FUELS-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
66 days
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信