Privatization and inter-municipal cooperation in local stormwater planning and management

Governance Arrangements for Water Reuse: Assessing Emerging Trends for Inter-Municipal Cooperation through a Literature Review

“…However, articles dealing with the service efficiency dimension concluded differently. A series of studies cast doubt on the benefits of IMC, claiming that the benefits and impacts of IMC are unclear and must be explored and tested [11,[21][22][23]. For instance, Zafra-Gómez et al, (2020) [53] conclude that IMC is not necessarily cost-efficient compared with direct public provision.…”

“…[13,52,59] -IMC requires an establishment of: a strong leadership and communication, accompanied by ensuring the stakeholder's engagement, which is shaped based on citizen perception, conflict solution, and problem solving [13,58]; an acknowledgement of risks including risks about institutional uncertainties (allocation of responsibility), transaction costs, and political costs for individual [59]; a high level of knowledge, competence, and commitment of those engaged in the process of delivering and regulating drinking water [59] addressing the challenges of local government such as the small size of municipalities and fiscal shortages [47]; enhancing political willingness to take actions in wastewater treatment introduces cooperative models as a reliable alternative [47] -IMC brings effective use of land for water management, in terms of locating plants and transport [47] -The water system and urban structure are important for choosing a service delivery model (IMC or privatisation) [52]; Service efficiency -IMC is beneficial in terms of administrative, and economic factors; IMC introduces an efficient model to address the local government problems (e.g., waste transportation costs, unclear and unfair pricing formation, etc.) [55] -To define joint goals and well-established institutional settings leading to better results in services provision [54] -To check the quality of services based on citizen perceptions [60] -To consider the size of the municipality population as a determinant factor for the success of the cooperation as it is more preferable for smaller municipalities [53,61]; -To explore and evaluate (viability, cost-efficiency) of different arrangements for public service provisions, regarding the contextual conditions [21,56] -To understand costs and prices of water in different arrangements [62] -To understand the economic and political factors of IA for public services [63];…”

“…IMC emerged to cope with territorial boundary obstacles or to achieve joint objectives, governance or institutional structure, or cost and economic efficiency [18][19][20]. It provides a platform for city staff to share experiences, exchange information about regulatory requirements, and identify collaborative opportunities [21]. Even though the concept of IMC and its benefits and limits have been widely explored as a governance solution, little is known about the appropriateness and suitability of IMC arrangements to incorporate WCE.…”

“…Even though the concept of IMC and its benefits and limits have been widely explored as a governance solution, little is known about the appropriateness and suitability of IMC arrangements to incorporate WCE. However, IMC is not a panacea, and the cooperative governance model raises the need to study its concerns and to check its benefits and impacts [11,[21][22][23].…”