Solid-waste contracting-out, competition, and bidding practices among Canadian local governments

Canadian Public Administration

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 1-25

  McDavid, James C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039490011     PISSN: 00084840     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1754-7121.2001.tb02041.x     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. A great deal of the research on the consequences of privatizing local government services has been summarized in E.S. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1987). With respect to waste collection, for example, he summarizes nine studies, including my earlier research [J.C. McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review 45, no. 5 (September/October 1985), pp. 602-608]. Another comprehensive review of this research is in D. Auld and H. Kitchen, The Key To Better Government (Vancouver, B.C.: The Fraser Institute, 1988).
2. A great deal of the research on the consequences of privatizing local government services has been summarized in E.S. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1987). With respect to waste collection, for example, he summarizes nine studies, including my earlier research [J.C. McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review 45, no. 5 (September/October 1985), pp. 602-608]. Another comprehensive review of this research is in D. Auld and H. Kitchen, The Key To Better Government (Vancouver, B.C.: The Fraser Institute, 1988).
3. A great deal of the research on the consequences of privatizing local government services has been summarized in E.S. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1987). With respect to waste collection, for example, he summarizes nine studies, including my earlier research [J.C. McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review 45, no. 5 (September/October 1985), pp. 602-608]. Another comprehensive review of this research is in D. Auld and H. Kitchen, The Key To Better Government (Vancouver, B.C.: The Fraser Institute, 1988).
4. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
5. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
6. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
7. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
8. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
9. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
10. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
11. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
12. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
13. See H. Kitchen, "A statistical estimation of an operating cost function for municipal refuse collection," Public Finance Quarterly 4, no. 1 (January 1976), pp. 56-76; H. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly 20, no. 1 (January 1992), pp. 114-28; McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review; J.C. McDavid and G.K. Schick, "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987), pp. 472-88; G. Tickner and J.C. McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid-waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly 14, no. 4 (October 1986), pp. 371-93; J.C. McDavid and E.G. Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 38, no. 2 (Summer 1995), pp. 177-93; V. Ostrom, C. Teibout and R. Warren, "The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry," American Political Science Review 55, no. 3 (September 1961), pp. 831-42; R.L. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1971); E.S. Savas, How To Shrink Government: Privatizing The Public Sector (Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, 1982); and Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government.
14. Bish, The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas.
15. E. Berenyi and B.J. Stevens, "Does privatization work: a study of the delivery of eight local services," State and Local Government Review 20, no. 1 (1988), pp. 11-21.
16. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government; Berenyi and Stevens, "Does privatization work: a study of the delivery of eight local services," State and Local Government Review; McDavid and Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.
17. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government; Berenyi and Stevens, "Does privatization work: a study of the delivery of eight local services," State and Local Government Review; McDavid and Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.
18. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government; Berenyi and Stevens, "Does privatization work: a study of the delivery of eight local services," State and Local Government Review; McDavid and Clemens, "Contracting out local government services: the B.C. experience," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.
19. H. Crooks, Dirty Business: The Inside Story of the New Garbage Agglomerates (Toronto: James Lorimer & Company, Publishers, 1983).
20. M. Lynch and U. Wright, Providing Municipal Services - Methods, Costs and Trade Offs (Toronto: Bureau of Municipal Research, 1981).
21. E.S. Savas, "Intracity competition between public and private service delivery" Public Administration Review 41, no. 1 (January/February 1981), pp. 46-52.
22. L.L. Martin, Bidding on Service Delivery: Public-Private Competition (Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association, 1993); J.L. Mercer, "Competition vs. privatization," Texas Town and City (14 June 1994), pp. 46-8; A.H. Raphaelson, Restructuring State and Local Services: Ideas, Proposals, and Experiments (Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishers, 1998).
23. L.L. Martin, Bidding on Service Delivery: Public-Private Competition (Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association, 1993); J.L. Mercer, "Competition vs. privatization," Texas Town and City (14 June 1994), pp. 46-8; A.H. Raphaelson, Restructuring State and Local Services: Ideas, Proposals, and Experiments (Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishers, 1998).
24. L.L. Martin, Bidding on Service Delivery: Public-Private Competition (Washington, D.C.: International City/County Management Association, 1993); J.L. Mercer, "Competition vs. privatization," Texas Town and City (14 June 1994), pp. 46-8; A.H. Raphaelson, Restructuring State and Local Services: Ideas, Proposals, and Experiments (Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishers, 1998).
25. Raphaelson, Restructuring State and Local Services: Ideas, Proposals, and Experiments.
26. E.S. Savas, The Organization and Efficiency of Solid Waste Collection (New York: Columbia University/Lexington Books, 1977).
27. B.S. Steel, and C. Long, "The use of agency forces versus contracting out: learning the limitations of privatization," Public Administration Quarterly 22, no. 2 (Summer 1998), pp. 229-51.
28. The surveys are part of the research conducted by the Local Government Institute in the School of Public Administration, University of Victoria.
29. J.C. McDavid and K.A. Eder, "The Efficiency of Residential Solid Waste Collection Services in Canada: The National Survey Report." Local Government Institute, University of Victoria, 1997.
30. McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review.
31. Ibid.
32. Non-recursive causal modelling is one of a class of multivariate methods for estimating the effects of predictors on one or more dependent variables (see E.J. Pedhazur, Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research [Toronto: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997]). Non-recursive models assume that causal relationships are one-way, that is, there are no reciprocal causal linkages among variables included in the estimation process. One advantage of causal models over conventional multiple regression analysis is the capacity to estimate statistical relationships among predictors, as well as relationships between predictors and a dependent variable. Predictor variables can be either directly or indirectly linked to the dependent variable. Those that are directly linked typically are the most important predictors among the ones in a model. The causal modelling procedure used in this analysis is a maximum likelihood estimation program called AMOS (James J. Arbuckle, Amos User's Guide [Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation, 1995]). The program calculates unstandardized as well as standardized path coefficients and critical ratios (partial t values) for each path. In the model estimated in this article, the error terms between "private" and "union" were allowed to correlate (the usual assumption is uncorrelated error terms) because of the strong zero-order correlation between the two variables. The modelling procedure uses an EM algorithm to interpolate missing data in the raw data matrix - the EM maximum likelihood algorithm assumes that the pattern of missing data are random. The overall model has a reasonable fit: it has an adjusted goodness of fit index (GFI) of. 945, a chi square value of 115.243 (significant at the. 000 level) and a root mean square error of. 066 (the 90 per cent confidence interval is. 05 to. 082). There are several ways of representing the results of a causal modelling procedure. Figure 1 lists the five direct predictors of cost per household. The five variables are ranked from most influential to the least influential. All are statistically significant (.10 level or higher).
33. Non-recursive causal modelling is one of a class of multivariate methods for estimating the effects of predictors on one or more dependent variables (see E.J. Pedhazur, Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research [Toronto: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997]). Non-recursive models assume that causal relationships are one-way, that is, there are no reciprocal causal linkages among variables included in the estimation process. One advantage of causal models over conventional multiple regression analysis is the capacity to estimate statistical relationships among predictors, as well as relationships between predictors and a dependent variable. Predictor variables can be either directly or indirectly linked to the dependent variable. Those that are directly linked typically are the most important predictors among the ones in a model. The causal modelling procedure used in this analysis is a maximum likelihood estimation program called AMOS (James J. Arbuckle, Amos User's Guide [Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation, 1995]). The program calculates unstandardized as well as standardized path coefficients and critical ratios (partial t values) for each path. In the model estimated in this article, the error terms between "private" and "union" were allowed to correlate (the usual assumption is uncorrelated error terms) because of the strong zero-order correlation between the two variables. The modelling procedure uses an EM algorithm to interpolate missing data in the raw data matrix - the EM maximum likelihood algorithm assumes that the pattern of missing data are random. The overall model has a reasonable fit: it has an adjusted goodness of fit index (GFI) of. 945, a chi square value of 115.243 (significant at the. 000 level) and a root mean square error of. 066 (the 90 per cent confidence interval is. 05 to. 082). There are several ways of representing the results of a causal modelling procedure. Figure 1 lists the five direct predictors of cost per household. The five variables are ranked from most influential to the least influential. All are statistically significant (.10 level or higher).
34. McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review.
35. Tickner and McDavid, "Effects of scale and market structure on the costs of residential solid waste collection in Canadian cities," Public Finance Quarterly.
36. Berenyi and Stevens, "Does privatization work: a study of the delivery of eight local services," State and Local Government Review.
37. Steel and Long, "The use of agency forces versus contracting out: learning the limitations of privatization," Public Administration Quarterly.
38. Savas, The Organization and Efficiency of Solid Waste Collection.
39. McDavid, "The Canadian experience with privatizing residential solid waste collection services," Public Administration Review.
40. Kitchen, "Urban transit provision in Ontario: a public/private sector cost comparison," Public Finance Quarterly, is an example that moves beyond solid-waste collection.
41. Savas, Privatization: The Key To Better Government, summarizes much of the research up to that point.
42. A national survey of producers of residential recycling services, conducted in 1997-98 by the Local Government Institute shows that when public and private producers are compared, there is very little difference in the net cost per tonne of recyclables collected. See James C. McDavid "Alternative service delivery in Canadian local governments: producing solid waste management services," forthcoming in the Canadian Journal of Regional Sciences.
43. McDavid and Schick "Privatization versus union-management cooperation: the effects of competition on service efficiency in municipalities," CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.
44. Other variables are linked to each other. Unionization, for example, predicts strike days and also predicts overall salary for workers. Being unionized means that workers enjoy an average salary increase of $3,575.14 compared to non-unionized workers. Vehicle capacity is affected by four variables: private producers tend to run vehicles with 4.15 cubic metres more capacity; producers offering more frequent collection tend to use smaller vehicles (doubling collection frequency is associated with using vehicles with 2.42 cubic metres less capacity); producers in our national sample that collect more tonnes per household tend to use smaller vehicles (if tonnes per household increase by one, average capacity decreases by 1.81 cubic metres); and producers paying higher salaries tend to use higher-capacity vehicles (increasing salary by one dollar is associated with an increased capacity of. 0003 cubic metres). Vehicle capacity affects HHtruck. Increasing capacity by one cubic metre increases households served per truck by 49.17. Ontario producers are more likely to be unionized, offer higher salaries and operate with larger crews. They also collect fewer tonnes per household and that link, together with the link to salary, then to vehicle capacity and then to households served per truck, suggests that although Ontario producers operate with several factors that tend to increase costs (unionization and larger crews), they also tend to utilize management strategies that result in mixes of equipment and labour that are relatively efficient. In fact, the direct link between Ontario producers and households served per truck indicates, on average, that Ontario producers serve 520 households per truck more than other producers in Canada. Quebec producers are more likely to be private and tend to offer a higher level of service. Producers offering a higher level of service tend to use larger crews, which in turn increases cost per household. Doubling frequency of collection is associated with adding. 56 persons per crew. Population is associated with private production and with unionization, as well as with frequency of collection and tonnes per household. Because population increments are relatively small (adding one person at a time) the coefficients are printed on Figure 1 as. 000. The signs of the coefficients from population indicate that smaller communities are more likely to have private producers, larger communities are more likely to have more frequent collection, larger communities collect fewer tonnes per household, and larger communities are more likely to be unionized.