Skip to main content

Cost Savings of Contracting Out Refuse Collection in The Netherlands

  • Chapter
The Waste Market

Abstract

This chapter discusses the possible cost savings of contracting out refuse collection in the Netherlands. Our findings indicate that similar to foreign econometric studies cost savings of approximately 15–20% apply to the Netherlands. Moreover, compared with the existing literature we show that different production technologies apply to internal municipal waste collection units and external refuse collection firms. Different cost functions have to be estimated for the sub-samples. Though significant cost savings exist on contracting out waste collection, households will not experience these cost savings on a one to one basis. Private refuse collection firms must pay VAT while public entities are exempted. Thus, the fiscal system hinders a more pronounced role for private refuse collection firms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References List

  • Apergis, N., Papanastasiou, J., & Velentzas K (1997). The credibility of policy announcements: Greek evidence. Applied Economics, 29, 699–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. B., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1980). Lectures on public economics. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosch, N., Predaja, F., & Suárez-Pandiello, J. (2000). Measuring the efficiency of Spanish municipal refuse collection services. Local Government Studies, 26, 71–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Chow, G. C. (1960). Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions. Econometrica, 28, 591–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J. N., & Downes, B. T. (1977). The effects of size on the provision of public services: The case of solid waste collection in smaller cities. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 12, 333–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cubbin, J., Domberger, S., Meadowcroft, S. (1987). Competitive tendering and refuse collection: Identifying the sources of efficiency gains. Fiscal Studies, 8, 49–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diewert, W. E. (1987). Cost functions. In: J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, & P. Newman (Eds.), The new Palgrave, a dictionary of economics(pp. 690–696). London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domberger, S., & Jensen, P. (1997). Contracting out by the public sector: theory, evidence and prospects. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 4, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domberger, S., Meadowcroft, S., & Thompson, D. (1986). Competitive tendering and efficiency: The case of refuse collection. Fiscal Studies, 7, 69–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domberger, S., Meadowcroft, S., & Thompson, D. (1988) Competition and efficiency in refuse collection: A reply. Fiscal Studies, 9, 86–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, F. M. (1970). Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions: An expository note. Econometrica, 38, 361–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganley, J., & Grahl, J. (1988). Competition and efficiency in refuse collection: A critical comment. Fiscal Studies, 9, 80–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, W. Z. (1965, February) Cost functions of an urban government service: refuse collection. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchen, H. M. (1976). A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection. Public Finance Quarterly, 4, 43–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, C. C. (1994) Market structure and inter-industry profit differences in Taiwan. Pakistan Development Review, 33, 147–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J. B. (1989). Test-retest reliability of the contingent valuation method: A comparison of general population and visitor responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71, 76–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDavid, J. (1985, Sept/Oct). The Canadian experience with privatising residential solid waste collection services. Public Administration Review, 45, 602–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlsson, H. (1998). Ownership and Production Costs: Choosing between Public Production and Contracting Out. Uppsala University working paper 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pindyck, R. S., & Rubinfeld, D. L. (1991). Econometric models & economic forecasts. New-York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pommorehne, W. W., & Frey, B. S. (1977). Public versus private production efficiency in Switserland: A theoretical and empirical comparison. Urban Affairs Annual Review, 12, 221–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, E., & Barrow, M. (2000). The impact of contracting out on the costs of refuse collection services: The case of Ireland. Economic and Social Review, 31, 129–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savas, E. (1977). Policy analysis for local government: Public vs. private refuse collection. Policy Analysis, 3, 49–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savas, E. (1981). Intracity competition between public and private delivery. Public Administration Review, 41, 46–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, P., & Sickles, R. (1977). Some further evidence on the use of the Chow test under heteroscedasticity. Econometrica, 45, 1293–1298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, B. J. (1978). Scale, market structure and the cost of refuse collection. Review of Economics and Statistics, 60, 438–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, S., & Wilkins, S. (1993). Cheap rubbish? Competitive tendering and contracting out in refuse collection – 1981–1988. Fiscal Studies, 14, 109–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, S. (1996). The impact of compulsory competitive tendering on refuse collection services. Fiscal Studies, 17, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J. G. (1992). A comparison of several exact and approximate tests for structural shift under heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics, 53, 363–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toyoda, T. (1974). Use of the Chow test under heteroscedasticity. Econometrica, 42, 601–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wassenaar, M. C., & Gradus, R. H. J. M. (2001). Contracting out: the importance of a level playing field (Research Memorandum 0108). Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dijkgraaf, E., Gradus, R. (2008). Cost Savings of Contracting Out Refuse Collection in The Netherlands. In: Dijkgraaf, E., Gradus, R. (eds) The Waste Market. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8711-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics