For much of the 20th Century and in most countries, network utilities—electricity, telecommunications, railroads, water supply, natural gas—were vertically and horizontally integrated state monopolies under ministerial control. Infrastructure’s enormous economic importance, a desire to protect the public interest in industries supplying essential services, and concerns about private monopoly power led governments to conclude that control over these services could not be entrusted to the motivations and penalties of free markets. Governments also believed that, given the large investments involved, public resources were required to increase infrastructure coverage. Accordingly, a single public entity usually controlled every aspect of a utility—facilities, operations, and administration—and determined which services to provide to essentially captive customers.
The past decade has seen dramatic change in views about how network utilities should be owned, organized, and regulated. The new model calls for increased reliance on private infrastructure to improve efficiency, promote innovation, and enhance services. But after a series of financial crises, corporate scandals, and stock market collapses, the California electricity crisis, and blackouts around the world, clear guidance is needed on what should be done for infrastructure—as well as reassurance about (or qualifications of ) earlier, more confident messages. What are the promises and perils of the new model? And what principles should guide future efforts to restructure, regulate, and expand infrastructure?
Bibliography
Theme area
Public-private mix, Resource allocation and health financing
Title of publication Reforming infrastructure: Privatization, regulation,and competition
Date of publication
2004
Publication type
Book
Publication details
A World Bank Policy Research Report pp 43pp
Publication status
Published
Language
English
Keywords
privatization, private infrastructure
Abstract
Country
United States
Publisher
World Bank, Oxford University Pres
URL: