Publications by Mildred Warner on Decentralization, Privatization, Free Trade

From here, you can also look for papers on specific topics or of a specific type, or view all papers by Professor Warner.

• Bel, Germà and Mildred Warner 2009 "Managing Competition in City Services: The Case of Barcelona," Journal of Urban Affairs, 31(5). 
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  "Clean and safe" strategies are part of urban regeneration in the entrepreneurial city. These strategies are often characterized by privatization and public-private partnerships which enhance investment and create a city space more amenable to tourists and consumers. While such approaches promote increased investment, and differentiate services by district, they raise challenges of competition, cost escalation and public participation. Barcelona’s solid waste management strategy is presented to show the importance of a strong public coordination role when using competition to promote technological innovation and improved quality in city service delivery.
• Warner, Mildred E. 2009. "Civic Government or Market-Based Governance? The Limits of Privatization for Rural Local Governments," Agriculture and Human Values 26(1):133-143.
   Show Abstract 
  Thomas Lyson argued that civic markets were possible and could have positive impacts on rural development. Increasingly local governments are being forced into market-based governance regimes of privatization, decentralization and free trade. This article explores the impacts of these trends on rural local governments in the U.S. These market trends can erode civic foundations, but recent data show local governments are balancing markets with civic concerns and giving increased attention to citizen interests in the service delivery process.
• Warner, M.E. and A. Hefetz 2009. Trends in Public and Contracted Government Services: 2002-2007, Reason Foundation Policy Brief #80, Los Angeles, CA: Reason Foundation.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  In this article we look at trends from 2002-2007 with special focus on differences in service delivery patterns by metro status. With the Reinventing Government reforms of the 1990s we saw a rise in for profit contracting among all governments from 1992 to 1997. In the 2007 survey we see a different story emerging. For profit contracting rates of suburbs increase slightly, but rural use of for profit contracting increases dramatically – almost back to the peak levels in 1997. Metro use of privatization, by contrast, falls. This article seeks to understand these trends. We believe that the rural resurgence reflects a diffusion of the innovation process where rural areas catch up with contracting – especially for relatively easy to contract services. The metro decline reflects a different kind of managerial learning where services that we earlier thought should be easy to contract have proven difficult to contract and monitor. In some cases these services have come back to public delivery and in other cases inter-governmental contracting has grown. Intergovernmental contracting enables local governments to share expertise and equipment, reach economies of scale in service delivery and promote regional coordination while maintaining familiar avenues for citizen input and accountability. Contract monitoring among local governments is low – and such low rates of external monitoring may lead governments to prefer contracting alternatives that keep the service in the public sector.
• Warner, M.E. and Amir Hefetz 2009. Cooperative Competition: Alternative Service Delivery, 2002-2007 in The Municipal Year Book 2009. Washington, DC: International City County Management Association.
   Show Abstract 
  ICMA has been tracking local government use of alterative service delivery mechanisms since 1982. In prior surveys, for profit contracting was typically one or two percentage points higher than intergovernmental contracting, but in the 2007 survey this is no longer the case. Learning from their experience with for profit and mixed contracting, local governments are now using intergovernmental contracting as the preferred contracting alternative. The 2007 survey shows direct public delivery and mixed public-private delivery have fallen back to their 1997 levels and for profit privatization and non profit contracting are flat. What has grown is inter-governmental contracting. However, lack of sufficient private competition remains a problem, and monitoring service quality and citizen satisfaction is getting less attention than in 2002. Failure to adequately monitor contracts typically leads to reductions in future contracting.
• Warner, Mildred E. 2008. Local Government Infrastructure – and the False Promise of Privatization. New York: Century Foundation, forthcoming.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Public infrastructure is largely managed in America by state and local governments, which also provide most of the financing.  In fact, local government has more fiscal responsibility in the U.S. than do local governments in any other nation in the developed world, says Cornell professor Mildred Warner.   One popular answer to more effective use of funds has been to bring market and business principles to such services, and in particular to privatize them.  But Warner, based on her own comprehensive empirical studies, says the experiment in privatization at the state and local level has not been satisfactory. State and local governments thus need substantially more federal financial support.  She provides guidelines as to how and when privatization can be valuable and when it will fail.
• Warner, M.E. 2008. "Reversing Privatization, Rebalancing Government Reform: Markets, Deliberation and Planning," Policy and Society, 27(2): 163-174.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  The last decades of the 20th century witnessed a profound experiment to increase the role of markets in local government service delivery. However, that experiment has failed to deliver adequately on efficiency, equity or voice criteria. This has led to reversals. But this reverse privatization process is not a return to the direct public monopoly delivery model of old. Instead it heralds the emergence of a new balanced position which combines use of markets, deliberation and planning to reach decisions which may be both efficient and more socially optimal.
• Bel, Germà  and M. E. Warner 2008. "Challenging Issues in Local Privatization," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, forthcoming, editorial overview to special issue.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Local government privatization has not delivered as expected on cost savings. Using empirical studies from North America and Europe, we show that local governments are pragmatic managers who must manage costs, markets and political interests simultaneously. Using a theoretical framework of actors, interests and incentives, we explain the lack of cost savings and demonstrate the importance of alternative management approaches. We argue analyses of local government contracting must address the dynamics of market management and do so in a comprehensive framework that includes both public and private actors and interests.
• Warner, Mildred E. and Germà Bel 2008. "Competition or Monopoly? Comparing US and Spanish Privatization," Public Administration: An International Quarterly, 86(3): 723-736. 
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Differences in national traditions of public intervention, institutional arrangements and public service markets make local public services an area of great diversity. In this paper we undertake a comparative study of how local governments arrange for delivery of water and waste services in the US and Spain. We find levels of privatization are higher in Spain than in the US. We review organizational reform in the two contexts and compare service delivery data using national surveys from each country. We find lower and less stable privatization in the US stems in part from adherence to public choice emphasis on the benefits of market competition over public monopoly. By contrast, Spanish municipalities reflect an industrial organization approach, and create hybrid public/private firms which benefit from both market engagement and economies of scale available under monopoly production. We conclude that managing monopoly may be more important than competition in local service delivery.
• Warner, M.E. 2007. Reversing Privatization, Rebalancing Government Reform: Markets, Deliberation and Planning, Paper presented at international conference, Reasserting the Public in Delivery of Public Services, organized by M. Ramesh, National University of Singapore, Sept 2007.
   View Online   Show Abstract 

  The last decades of the 20^th century witnessed a profound experiment to increase the role of markets in local government service delivery. However, that experiment has failed to deliver adequately on efficiency, equity or voice criteria. This has led to reversals. But this de-privatization process is not a return to the direct public monopoly delivery model of old. Instead it heralds the emergence of a new balanced position which combines use of markets, deliberation and planning to reach decisions which may be both efficient and more socially optimal.

• Germà Bel  and Mildred Warner 2007. "Local Privatization and Costs: A Review of Empirical Evidence,"  Working Paper.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Cost reduction was the key benefit claimed by privatization. We conduct a meta analysis of all published econometric studies of water and waste production in cities since 1965. Little support is found for a link between privatization and cost savings. Cost savings are not found in water delivery and are not systematic in solid waste collection. Theoretical expectations for cost savings arise from the benefits of competition and the incentives of private ownership. However, empirical results show the importance of market structure, industrial organization of the service sector, and government management, oversight and regulation.
• Warner, Mildred E. and Amir Hefetz 2007. "Managing Markets for Public Service: The Role of Mixed Public/Private Delivery of City Services," Public Administration Review, forthcoming March/April 2007.
   View Online   Show Abstract 

  The privatization experience of U.S. municipalities shows declining use of complete contracts and a dramatic rise in mixed public/private delivery (joint contracting) of city services. Our analysis shows city managers have recognized the need to move beyond a simple dichotomy between market delivery and public planning to an approach that balances concerns with efficiency, market management and citizen satisfaction. New public management stresses the importance of competition and efficiency, transaction costs economics emphasizes the challenges of contract management, and new public service gives primary concern to citizen engagement; but city managers see the need to balance all three. We use probit and generalized estimation models to analyze International City County Management Association (ICMA) data for 1992, 1997 and 2002, and show the evolution of a middle position where city managers integrate markets with public delivery and give greater attention to citizen satisfaction in the service delivery process.

• Gerbasi, Jennifer and M.E. Warner 2007. "Privatization, Public Goods and the Ironic Challenge of Free Trade Agreements," Administration and Society, 39(2):127-149.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Use of quasi-markets for provision of public goods requires clear property rights, a predictable adjudication process and low transaction costs. These may be undermined by new restrictions on government action found in the new generation of free trade agreements. These trade agreements privilege foreign over domestic investors, replace public courts with private arbitration, supplant traditional standards for legislation by requirements to be "least trade restrictive," and forward a new definition of "takings" that requires governmental compensation for lost potential profits from regulatory action. These features undermine the governance structure necessary to reduce transaction costs of delivering complex public services.
• Hefetz, Amir and Mildred E. Warner. 2007. "Beyond the Market vs. Planning Dichotomy: Understanding Privatisation and its Reverse in US Cities," Local Government Studies, 33(4).
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  City service delivery requires planners and city managers to move beyond the public-private dichotomy and explore the benefits of interaction between markets and planning. Using International City County Management survey data on U.S. local governments from 1992, 1997 and 2002, we find a shift where reverse contracting (reinternalisation) now exceeds the level of new contracting out (privatisation). We model how a theoretical shift from New Public Management to New Public Service in public administration mirrors a behavioral shift among city managers.  Results confirm the need to balance economic concerns with political engagement of citizens and lend empirical support to a theory of Social Choice that links Communicative Planning with market management.
• Bel, Germà, Robert Hebdon, and M. E. Warner, 2007. "Local Government Reform: Privatization and Its Alternatives," Local Government Studies, 33(4) forthcoming, editorial overview to special issue.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Privatization is only one of several alternatives for local government reform. Problems with lack of cost savings and the challenges of contract management have led local government reformers to explore other alternatives including municipal corporations, relational contracting and dynamic market management. Empirical analysis shows concerns with fiscal stress, efficiency, and managing political and citizen interests drive the reform process more than ideology. We argue a more comprehensive framework is needed that gives attention to a wider array of alternatives for institutional reform.
• Hipp, Magdalena and Mildred Warner 2007. "Market Forces for the Unemployed? Training Vouchers in Germany and the U.S." Social Policy and Administration, forthcoming.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Vouchers are meant to increase competition and consumer choice in public service markets. Using the example of training vouchers for the unemployed in the U.S. and Germany, we show, however, that deficits, both on the demand and the supply side of the market, create problems with preference alignment and market formation. Information asymmetries undermine choice by the unemployed and reduce government control over the training system. Ironically, restrictions meant to compensate for these information deficits further inhibit competitive market formation. Evaluation data on training vouchers from both countries show that voucher systems do not increase choice, but weaken the partnerships public employment agencies previously had with training providers, and may lead to a shortage of high quality and specialized training as well as creaming in the selection of training participants. Theoretical justification for vouchers is based on the notion of choice and consumer sovereignty. Using this framework to analyze the changed relationship between government, private training providers, and jobseekers we challenge the efficacy of vouchers as a delivery mechanism in complex public service markets such as job training.
• Warner, Mildred E. and Germà Bel 2007. "Competition or Monopoly? Comparing US and Spanish Privatization," forthcoming, Public Administration: An International Quarterly.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Differences in national traditions of public intervention, institutional arrangements, and public service markets make local public services an area of great diversity. Our objective in this paper is to undertake a comparative study of how local governments arrange for delivery of water and waste services in the U.S. and Spain. We find that levels of privatization are higher in Spain than in the U.S. We review organizational reform in the two contexts and compare service delivery data using national surveys from each country. We conclude that lower and less stable privatization in the U.S. stems in part from adherence to public choice emphasis on the benefits of market competition over public monopoly. By contrast, the Spanish municipalities reflect more of an industrial organization approach, and create hybrid public/private firms which benefit from both market engagement and economies of scale available under monopoly production.
• Bellettini, Orazio J., Paul Carrillo, Wladymir Brborich, Mildred Warner, Laura Timme, Elizabeth Coombs. August 2006. "Stay Public or Go Private: A Comparative Analysis of Water Services Between Quito and Guayaquil," Grupo FARO – Fundación para el Avance de las Reformas y las Oportunidades, for Inter-American Development Bank.
   View Online   Show Abstract 

  Many Latin American countries face similar water problems: deteriorating systems and networks, lack of access to water and sewage for many of the populations’ poorest and governments without the resources or expertise to invest in change. Unfortunately, there is little consensus on how to improve. Many countries, including Ecuador, have embarked on various forms of privatization to increase investment in infrastructure and improve service provision and water quality. In light of contradictory evidence on effects of privatization, we look at water providers in two cities in Ecuador, Guayaquil which privatized and Quito which implemented reforms but maintained public delivery.  In this study, we measure several indicators of water coverage, quality, and prices in both cities, both before and after privatization of water services in Guayaquil. We then compare changes in these indicators (before and after privatization) between the two cities to establish an association between differences and the privatization of water services. Our data allow us to control for income and, thus, evaluate how these indicators have changed, particularly, among the poor.

• Warner, Mildred. E. 2006. "Market-Based Governance and the Challenge for Rural Governments: U.S. Trends" Social Policy and Administration: An International Journal of Policy and Research 40(6):612-631.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Privatization and decentralization represent market-based approaches to government.  Designed to increase efficiency and responsiveness of government, these approaches also limit the potential for redistribution.  A key question is how will rural governments compete in such a market based system?  Will they be favored, as their reliance on market provision for public goods is higher due to the smaller number of services provided by government?  Or will they be less able to compete due to the costs of sparsity which may make them less attractive to market suppliers?  Data from the United States covering the period 1992-2002, show that rural areas are not favored by either of these trends – privatization or decentralization.  Managerial weakness does not explain the shortfall.  Rural areas are not as attractive to market suppliers and thus are disadvantaged under market based service delivery approaches. Although national policy continues to advance a privatization agenda, policymakers should be concerned about the uneven impacts of such market based approaches.
• Warner, M.E. and James E. Pratt, 2005. "Spatial Diversity in Local Government Revenue Effort Under Decentralization: A Neural Network Approach," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 23(5): 657-677.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Decentralization reflects a global trend to increase the responsiveness of state and local governments to economic forces, but it raises the challenge of how to secure redistributive goals. Theoretically, as the equalizing impact of federal aid declines under devolution, we expect subnational state-level government policy to become more important, and geographic diversity in local govern- ments' efforts to raise revenue to increase. In this paper we explore the impact of state fiscal centralization and intergovernmental aid on local revenue effort with the aid of Census of Govern- ments data for county areas from 1987 for the Mid-Atlantic and East North Central region of the United States, with particular attention paid to rural counties. The 1987 period was chosen because it is the first year in which state policy trends diverged from federal decentralization trends and both state aid and state centralization increased while federal aid to localities continued to decline. Using a neural-network approach, we explore the spatially differentiated impact of state policy and find complementary responses in effort among some localities and substitution responses among others. Classification-tree analysis of this diversity suggests that decentralization and the competitive government it promotes are likely to exacerbate inequality among local governments.
• Gerbasi, Jennifer and Mildred Warner. 2004, "Is There a Democratic Deficit in the Free Trade Agreements? What Local Governments Should Know," Public Management 86:2 (16-21).
   View Online 
• Hefetz, Amir and M. Warner, 2004. "Privatization and Its Reverse: Explaining the Dynamics of the Government Contracting Process," Journal of Public Administration, Research and Theory, 14(2): 171-190.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Empirical evidence shows local government contracting is a dynamic process that includes movements from public delivery to markets, and from market contracts back to in-house delivery. This "reverse contracting" reflects the complexity of public service provision in a world where market alternatives are used along with public delivery.  We develop a methodology to link responses to national surveys and create a longitudinal data set that captures the dynamics of the contracting process.  We present a framework that incorporates principal agent problems, government management, monitoring and citizen concerns, and market structure.  Our statistical analysis finds government management, monitoring and principal agent problems to be most important in explaining both new contracting out and contracting back-in.  Professional managers recognize the importance of monitoring and the need for public engagement in the service delivery process.  The results support the new public service that argues public managers do more than steer a market process, they balance technical and political concerns to secure public value.
• Warner, M.E. and Jennifer Gerbasi. 2004. "Rescaling and Reforming the State under NAFTA: Implications for Subnational Authority." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(4): 853-73.
   View Online   Show Abstract 

  The new free trade agreements are rescaling governance in ways that have critical implications for subnational governments.   The nation state is not simply being hollowed out, rather a new governance nexus is forming – of nation states, multinational corporations and international agreements - which explicitly excludes subnational and local government voice.  This paper describes the new governance features of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and illustrates how they work out at the national, subnational and local scales using cases from the United States and Mexico.  NAFTA provides the template for other free trade agreements including the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and a growing number of bilateral agreements.  We show how NAFTA’s governance structure is undermining subnational and local government authority in legislative and judicial arenas.  Designed to advance privatization of public services, these agreements undermine the very ability of local governments to use markets for public goods by defining traditional state and local governance mechanisms as ‘non-tariff barriers to trade.’  Contradictions between private profit and public interest appear at the subnational level but their resolution is engaged at the global level between private investors and the nation state. Recognition of this rescaling requires attention to the reforming state and its implications for subnational authority and democratic representation and voice.

  Note for PDF file: This is an electronic version of an article published in International Journal of Urban and Regional Research: complete citation information for the final version of the paper, as published in the print edition of International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, is available on the Blackwell Synergy online delivery service, accessible via the journal'ss website at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ijurr or http://www.blackwell-synergy.com.

• Warner, M.E. and Amir Hefetz 2004.  "Pragmatism over Politics: Alternative Service Delivery in Local Government, 1992-2002," pp 8-16 in The Municipal Year Book 2004. Washington, DC: International City County Management Association.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  In response to increased interest in privatization, ICMA has been tracking local governments’ use of alternative service delivery approaches since 1982.  What is interesting about the trends is how little they have changed over these years.  Almost all governments responding to the ICMA surveys use at least one form of alternative service delivery.  However, despite strong political support for privatization and a reduction in opposition, direct public delivery is still the most common form of service delivery. For profit privatization and inter-governmental contracting are the most common alternatives and their usage has ranged from 15-20 percent of services over the period with a slight drop from 1997 to 2002.  Use of non-profit contracting has been stable at less than half the rate of for profit privatization.  What has risen most dramatically over the 1992-2002 time period is the use of mixed public/private provision.  These data suggest local governments are mature and experienced in their use of alternative service delivery.  The 2002 survey results show lack of competitive markets and problems with contractor performance as explanations for the relative flatness of the trends.  
• Warner, M. and Ben Kohl. 2004. "Introduction to Symposium: Scales of Neoliberalism" International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. December 2004 28(4)
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Note for PDF file: This is an electronic version of an article published in International Journal of Urban and Regional Research: complete citation information for the final version of the paper, as published in the print edition of International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, is available on the Blackwell Synergy online delivery service, accessible via the journal'ss website at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ijurr or http://www.blackwell-synergy.com.
  
• Gerbasi, Jennifer and M. Warner, 2003. "The Impact of International Trade on State and Local Government Authority."
   View Online 
• Gerbasi, Jennifer and M.E. Warner, June 2003. "The Impact of International Trade on State and Local Government Authority," Dept. of City and Regional Planning Working Papers #204. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
   View Online 
• Warner, M.E. with Mike Ballard and Amir Hefetz, 2003. "Contracting Back In - When Privatization fails," chapter 4, pp. 30-36 in The Municipal Year Book 2003. Washington, DC: International City County Management Association.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Between 1992 and 1997, the most common forms of alternative service delivery (privatization to for profits and non profits and inter-municipal cooperation) increased only slightly. Service delivery by public employees remained dominant.  The stability in these trends belies a more dynamic process of contracting out and back in which reflects the key market structuring role played by local governments.  During this period, 96% of responding governments newly contracted out at least one service and 88% brought at least one contracted-out service back in house. The reasons for contracting back in include lack of a competitive market of alternative suppliers, difficulties with contract specification, and the high costs of monitoring.
• Warner, M.E., 2003. "Competition, Cooperation and Local Governance," chapter 19 pp 252-262 in Challenges for Rural America in the Twenty First Century, edited by David Brown and Louis Swanson, University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.
   Show Abstract 

  Privatization, decentralization and civic participation are common themes characterizing the changing structure and organization of local governments.    Privatization and decentralization are based on the positive power of competition to ensure governmental efficiency and responsiveness to citizen voice.

  These trends represent important innovations but they also bring new challenges. Successful decentralization requires administrative and financial capacity and effective citizen participation, but many rural governments lack an adequate revenue base or sufficient professional management capacity.  Rural residents have relied more on private markets than government for many services; however, rural areas have also suffered from under development due in part to uneven markets. 

  As we move into the 21st century, government innovation based on competition may give way to innovations based on cooperation.  Cooperation between levels of government and with private sector and civil society actors may offer greater potential for efficiency and equity than competitive markets.  However, cooperation will also bring challenges.  The governance of cooperative networks will require new mechanisms for accountability and voice.   Ensuring equity and participation in these new governance structures will be especially important for rural communities. 

• Warner, M.E. and A. Hefetz, 2003. "Rural-Urban Differences in Privatization: Limits to the Competitive State," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21(5): 703-718.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Despite two decades of experience with privatization, U.S. local government use of contracting in public service delivery remains relatively flat.  Market approaches to public goods provision emphasize the competitive state, and attribute limited privatization to bureaucratic resistance. Rural development theory emphasizes the uneven impact of market solutions in rural communities.  Using national data on U.S. local government service delivery from 1992 and 1997, we analyze differences in local government service delivery patterns by metropolitan status. Discriminant analysis shows that structural features of markets are more important than managerial capacity of government leaders in explaining lower rates of privatization among rural governments.  These structural constraints limit the applicability of competitive approaches to local government service delivery.  Our results suggest cooperation, as an alternative to privatization at the local level and as a source of redistributive aid at the state level, may provide a more equitable alternative for disadvantaged rural communities.
• Gerbasi, Jennifer and M. Warner. 2002. "Why Should State and Local Governments Pay Attention to the New International Treaties?"
   View Online 
• Warner, M.E. and A. Hefetz, 2002. "The Uneven Distribution of Market Solutions for Public Goods," Journal of Urban Affairs, 24(4):445-459.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Using national data on local government service delivery from 1992 and 1997, this article assesses the distribution of privatization and inter-municipal cooperation across localities in the metropolitan region and finds them most common among suburbs. Coasian economics argues market solutions may offer an alternative to regional government in the fragmented metropolitan area. However, our discriminant analysis shows the use of market solutions is highest in suburban communities that also exhibit high income and low poverty.  Thus, market solutions appear to reflect the inequality among municipalities in the metropolitan region. Some system of regional market governance is still needed to internalize the costs arising from regional inequality in public service delivery.
• Warner, M.E. and Jennifer Gerbasi. 2002. "Privatization, Free Trade and the Erosion of Government Authority," CRP Working Paper #203. Presented at American Collegiate Society of Planners Conference, November 2002.
  
• Warner, M.E. and A. Hefetz. 2002. "Applying Market Solutions to Public Services: An Assessment of Efficiency, Equity and Voice," Urban Affairs Review, 38(1): 70-89.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Political fragmentation in metropolitan regions makes equitable and efficient delivery of public services difficult.  Regionalism, although promoted as more equitable and rational, has found limited political support.  Public choice theory argues, against regionalism, that political fragmentation can promote competition and efficiency by creating markets for public services.   We assess the efficacy of market solutions for metropolitan public service provision by comparing privatization with inter-municipal cooperation and evaluating each on efficiency, equity and democracy grounds.  Using probit regression analysis of a national survey of local government service delivery from 1992 and 1997, we find both alternatives promote efficiency, but equity and voice are more associated with inter-municipal cooperation than privatization.
• Warner, M.E. 2001. "State Policy Under Devolution: Redistribution and Centralization," National Tax Journal Vol LIV(3):541-556.
   View Online 
• Warner, M.E. and Amir Hefetz, 2001. "Uneven Markets: Privatization and Public Service Delivery in U.S. Cities." Proceedings of the International Forum for Research and Development, pre conference to U.N. Habitat II New York, NY June 4-6, 2001. Conference Proceedings Vol. 1. no. 6: Privatization of Service Delivery in Mega Cities. Earlier version CRP Working Paper #196.
  
• Warner, M.E. and Amir Hefetz, 2001. "Privatization and the Market Role of Government," Briefing Paper, Economic Policy Institute, Washington, DC.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Using longitudinal data from 1982 to 1997, we show that the local decision to provide public services is complex and dynamic.  Local governments use a range of service restructuring alternatives including privatization, mixed public/private provision and cooperation between governments.  Service delivery is a dynamic process reflecting changing citizen demand for services and new privatization.  The data also show significant instability in contracts, including contracting in - the reverting back to public provision of previously privatized services.   This "reverse privatization" may reflect problems with the contracting process itself, limited efficiency gains, erosion in service quality or concern over the loss of broader community values associated with public service delivery.  Privatization does not imply a retreat of government but rather a more active engagement with the market.  Whether as regulator, contractor or direct service provider, local governments manage markets to create competition and ensure service quality and stability.   This pragmatic market structuring role is critical to ensure that both efficiency and the broader public benefits of service delivery are achieved.
• Warner, M.E. and Robert Hebdon. 2001 "Local Government Restructuring: Privatization and Its Alternatives," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 20(2):315-336. (Earlier version CRP Working Paper #179).
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  Local government restructuring should no longer be viewed as a simple dichotomy between private and public provision. A 1997 survey of chief elected township and county officials in New York shows local governments use both private and public sector mechanisms to structure the market, create competition and attain economies of scale.  In addition to privatization and inter-municipal cooperation, two alternative forms of service delivery not previously researched, reverse privatization and governmental entrepreneurship, are analyzed. Logistic regression on the 201 responding governments differentiates the decision to restructure from the level and complexity of restructuring.  Results confirm that local governments are guided primarily by pragmatic concerns with information, monitoring and service quality.  Political factors are not significant in the restructuring process and unionization is only significant in cases of simple restructuring (privatization or cooperation used alone).   Fiscal stress is not a primary motivator, but debt limits do encourage more complex forms of restructuring. Restructuring service delivery requires capacity to take risks and is more common among experienced local officials in larger, higher income communities.  Restructuring should be viewed as a complex, pragmatic process where governments combine public and private provision with an active role as service provider and market player.
• Warner, M.E. 2000. "Structuring the Market for Service Delivery: A New Role for Local Government." pp 85-104 in Local Government Innovation: Issues and Trends in Privatization and Managed Competition, Robin Johnson and Norman Walzer eds. Westport, CT: Quorum Books. (Earlier version CRP Working Paper #188).
   Show Abstract 
  Case study analysis of reverse privatization among New York State towns and counties shows how governments engage the market to ensure competition, control and attention to community values.  The nature and relative importance of three alternatives to privatization – inter-municipal cooperation, reverse privatization and governmental entrepreneurship are described. 
• Warner, M.E. 2000. "Devolution and the Emerging Structure of Spatial Inequality." Paper presented at the Rural Sociological Society Conference August 2000, Washington DC.
  
• Ballard, Michael J. and M.E. Warner 2000. "Taking the High Road: Local Government Restructuring and the Quest for Quality." Pp 6/1 - 6/53 in Power Tools for Fighting Privatization, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees: Washington DC. Distributed to union locals throughout the nation, Fall 2001. Also available as Working Papers in Planning #194. Department of City and Regional Planning, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
   View Online   Show Abstract 
  All local governments face challenges to improve service delivery.  This report outlines two alternative strategies—the "high road" which uses new management innovations to increase internal productivity, and the "low road" which focuses on downsizing and contracting out.  While other studies have focused on contracting out, this study provides a longitudinal look at contracting and presents detailed case studies of municipalities, which have brought back in house previously privatized services.  These case studies provide empirical evidence on the problems associated with contracting and the potential for internal restructuring as an alternative.
• Ballard, Michael, Kevin Sherper and Mildred Warner, 1999. "Options for County Nursing Homes in New York State," Report presented to the County Nursing Facilities of New York State and the Civil Service Employees Association, May 1999, Department of City and Regional Planning, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
   View Online 
• Warner, M.E., Anna Belajova, Maria Fazikova and Andrea Siebenmanova. 1999. "Local Government and Rural Development in the Visegrad: Challenges and Opportunities," in Rural Development in Central and Eastern Europe, David Brown and Anna Bandlerova eds., proceedings of Research conference Dec 6-9, 1999 Podbanske Slovakia. Slovak Agricultural University, Nitra Slovakia. Earlier version Working Papers in Planning No 191. Department of City and Regional Planning, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
   Show Abstract 

  During the socialist period, rural development was addressed through national planning which located industries in rural areas and forced amalgamation of villages to create larger, more functional centers. As national governments devolve power and responsibility to local governments, the focus on rural development policy also shifts to the local level. Since the local government reforms of 1990 there has been a tremendous resurgence of local governments - especially in rural areas.

  This paper outlines four challenges which rural local governments face in order to become effective economic development actors: autonomy, capacity, market creation and public participation. Autonomy requires political authority to provide services and the fiscal capacity to finance them. Throughout the region there is a mismatch between local competencies and financial resources. Over dependence on politically derived state subsidies or share taxes, limits the autonomy of local governments to select the nature and level of services they provide. The emergence of large numbers of very small municipalities creates capacity constraints in terms of managerial and technical skills as well as the need for functional integration across municipalities to provide services equitably on a regional scale.

  While these patterns of devolution and decentralization are found throughout Europe, the need to simultaneously create markets and avenues for public participation makes the local government transition unique in central and eastern Europe. Western models can not be copied directly on to the region. New models which merge the competitiveness and participation of the west, with attention to local well being and collective action must be devised. Limited taxation powers and limited market penetration in rural areas causes local governments to engage in market activities, but governments must take care to do so in ways which promotes market emergence and don’t stifle it. Public participation helps ensure an accountable state. While electoral participation is high, competition among a diversity of actors - citizens, government, for profit and non profit sectors - is needed. The relative absence of the non-profit sector is especially important in sparsely populated rural areas where returns to economic investment are limited. A research agenda for rural development must include attention to new, more appropriate ways to address these four constraints - autonomy, capacity, markets and public participation - on local government and rural development.

• Burt, M., L. Goldberg, K. Guild and M. Warner. 1999. "Aspiring to Excellence." Colloqui, pp 33-44.Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Earlier version with complete case studies "Aspiring to Excellence: Comparative Case Studies of Public Sector Labor-Management Cooperation in New York State," 1998
   View Online 
• Warner, M.E. 1999. "Local Government Financial Capacity and the Growing Importance of State Aid." Rural Development Perspectives. 13(3) : 27-36.
   View Online 
• Warner, M.E. and R. Hebdon. 1998. "Local Government Restructuring in New York State." NYSAC News 19(9)
   View Online 
• Warner, M. E., 1992. "Poverty Alleviation and Rural Economic Development: The Need for a New Federal Partnership," The Rural Sociologist, Vol 12, No. 3, July 1992 pp. 61-63.
  
• Warner, M.E. and D.L. Brown, 1990. "Rural Development Issues for the Northeast in the 1990's," Food & Life Sciences Quarterly, Vol. 20, Nos. 1 & 2, pp. 2-6, New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
  
• Warner, M. E., 1989. "Why Has Rural Development Become a Priority in the 1980's?" Human Ecology Forum, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 19-22, New York State College of Human Ecology, Ithaca, NY.