Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assesing the Impact of Quality of Service on the Productivity of Water Industry: a Malmquist-Luenberger Approach for England and Wales

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Assessing productivity change over time and identifying its determinants is a valuable tool for water regulators when setting water tariffs. However, in a price cap regulatory framework such as in England and Wales policy makers should give attention to quality of service issues. Previous studies that assessed the productivity change of the English and Welsh water industry did not include the lack of quality of service to customers as undesirable outputs. To overcome this limitation, and as a pioneering approach, we estimated the Malmquist-Luenberger Productivity Indicator and its components, efficiency and technical change, for the 10 water and sewerage companies and the 12 water only companies over the period 2001–2008. To explore the role of quality of service to customers on the productivity change over time, we contrasted our results with a conventional measure of productivity change namely the Luenberger productivity indicator. The findings suggest that from 2001 to 2004 water companies made significant efforts to improve the quality of the service provided to customers, whereas after 2005 companies’ performance regarding customer services was considered as poor. Results excluding quality of service variables illustrated that productivity declined during all years evaluated. However, when the quality of service was introduced in the assessment, productivity improved by 4.13 % from 2000 to 2004 whereas it declined by 16.96 % in the following years. From a policy perspective, water utility regulators need to pay attention to quality of service issues when assessing companies’ performance and setting water tariffs under comparative yardstick regimes.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The study by Molinos-Senante et al. (2014) provides additional information and details about the drivers of the productivity change when it is computed using the LPI.

References

  • Ali MK, Klein KK (2014) Water use efficiency and productivity of the irrigation districts in southern Alberta. Water Resour Manag 28(10):2751–2766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ananda J, Hampf B (2015) Measuring environmentally sensitive productivity growth: an application to the urban water sector. Ecol Econ 116:211–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arabi B, Munisamy S, Emrouznejad A, Shadman F (2014) Power industry restructuring and eco-efficiency changes: a new slacks-based model in Malmquist-Luenberger index measurement. Energy Policy 68:132–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balk BM (2001) Scale efficiency and productivity change. J Prod Anal 15(3):159–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barros C, Antunes OS (2014) Productivity change in the oil blocks of Angola. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning and Policy 9(4):413–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg S, Lin C (2008) Consistency in performance rankings: the Peru water sector. Appl Econ 40(6):793–805

  • Bottasso A, Conti M (2009) Scale economies, technology and technical change: evidence from the English water only sector. Reg Sci Urban Econ 39(2):138–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boussemart J-P, Briec W, Kerstens K, Poutineau J-C (2003) Luenberger and Malmquist productivity indices: theoretical comparisons and empirical illustration. Bull Econ Res 55(4):391–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho P, Marques RC (2014) Computing economies of vertical integration, economies of scope and economies of scale using partial frontier nonparametric methods. Eur J Oper Res 234(1):292–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CCW (2014). Water Matters: Household customers’ views on their water and sewerage services 2013. Consumer Council for Water, London.

  • Chambers RG, Chung Y, Färe R (1996) Benefit and distance functions. J Econ Theory 70(2):407–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung YH, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1997) Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. J Environ Manag 51(3):229–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Zhu J (2007) Handbook on data envelopment analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, Springer

  • Corton ML, Berg SV (2009) Benchmarking central American water utilities. Util Policy 17(3–4):267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Da Cruz NF, Marques RC, Romano G, Guerrini A (2012) Measuring the efficiency of water utilities: a cross-national comparison between Portugal and Italy. Water Policy 14(5):841–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Witte K, Marques RC (2010) Influential observations in frontier models, a robust non-oriented approach to the water sector. Ann Oper Res 181(1):377–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epure M, Kerstens K, Prior D (2011) Bank productivity and performance groups: a decomposition approach based upon the Luenberger productivity indicator. Eur J Oper Res 211(3):630–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erbetta F, Cave M (2007) Regulation and efficiency incentives: evidence from the England and Wales water and sewerage industry. Rev Netw Econ 6(4):425–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S (2004) Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation: comment. Eur J Oper Res 157(1):242–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK (1994) Production Frontiers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Roos P (1995) Productivity and quality changes in Swedish pharmacies. Int J Prod Econ 39 (1–2), 137–144

  • Goncalves O (2013) Efficiency and productivity of French ski resorts. Tour Manag 36:650–657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerrini A, Romano G, Campedelli B (2013) Economies of scale, scope, and density in the Italian water sector: a two-stage data envelopment analysis approach. Water Resour Manag 27(13):4559–4578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Sancho F, Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R (2011) Techno-economical efficiency and productivity change of wastewater treatment plants: the role of internal and external factors. J Environ Monit 13(12):3448–3459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Sancho F, Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R, Del Saz-Salazar S (2012) Tariffs and efficient performance by water suppliers: an empirical approach. Water Policy 14(5):854–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Managi S (2010) Service quality and performance measurement: evidence from the Indian water sector. Water Resour Dev 26(2):173–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magee A, Counsell M. (2013). Ofwat SIM Survey 2012/13 Annual Report. Report prepared for Ofwat, Birmingham.

  • Marques RC (2008) Comparing private and public performance of Portuguese water services. Water Policy 10(1):25–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marques RC, Simoes P (2008) Does the sunshine regulatory approach work?: governance and regulation model of the urban waste services in Portugal. Resour Conserv Recycl 52(8–9):1040–1049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maziotis A, Saal DS, Thanassoulis E, Molinos-Senante M (2015a) Profit, productivity and price performance changes in the water and sewerage industry: an empirical application for England and Wales. Clean Techn Environ Policy 17(4):1005–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maziotis A, Saal DS, Thanassoulis E, Molinos-Senante M (2015b) Profit change and its drivers in the English and welsh water industry: is output quality important? Water Policy. doi:10.2166/wp.2014.151

    Google Scholar 

  • Mbuvi D, De Witte K, Perelman S (2012) Urban water sector performance in Africa: a step-wise bias-corrected efficiency and effectiveness analysis. Util Policy 22:31–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R (2015) The impact of privatization approaches on the productivity growth of the water industry: a case study of Chile. Environ Sci Pol 50:166–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante M, Maziotis A, Sala-Garrido R (2014) The Luenberger productivity indicator in the water industry: an empirical analysis for England and Wales. Util Policy 30:18–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R, Lafuente M (2015) The role of environmental variables on the efficiency of water and sewerage companies: a case study of Chile. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(13):10242–10253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante M, Maziotis A, Mocholí-Arce M, Sala-Garrido R (2016) Accounting for service quality to customers in the efficiency of water companies: evidence from England and Wales. Water Policy 18(2):513–532

    Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante M, Hernández-Sancho F, Mocholí-Arce M, Sala-Garrido R (2015c) Productivity growth of wastewater treatment plants – accounting for environmental impacts: a Malmquist-Luenberger index approach. Urban Water J 13(5):476–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante, M., Maziotis, A., Sala-Garrido, R. (2016a). Estimating the cost of improving service quality in water supply: a shadow price approach for England and Wales. Sci Total Environ, 539: 470–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinos-Senante M, Maziotis A, Sala-Garrido R (2016b) Assessment of the total factor productivity change in the English and welsh water industry: a fare: Primont productivity index approach. Water Resour Manag. doi:10.1007/s11269-016-1346-2

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell CJ (2014) Econometric estimation of distance functions and associated measures of productivity and efficiency change. J Prod Anal 41(2):187–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2003) Levels of service for the water industry in England & Wales 2002–2003 report. Office of Water Services, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2004) Levels of service for the water industry in England & Wales 2003–2004 report. Office of Water Services, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2005) Levels of service for the water industry in England & Wales 2004–2005 report. Office of Water Services, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2006) Levels of service for the water industry in England & Wales 2005–2006 report. Office of Water Services, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2008) Levels of service for the water industry in England & Wales 2007–2008 report. Office of Water Services, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2009). Future water and sewerage charges 2010–2015; Final determinations, Office of Water Services, Birmingham.

  • Ofwat (2011). Water today, water tomorrow. Available at: http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2015/11/prs_inf_catchment.pdf

  • Ofwat (2012) Service incentive mechanism – guidance for collating customer service information for calculating the SIM score. Water Services Regulation Authority, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofwat (2013) Setting Price Controls for 2015–20 – Final Methodology and Expectations for Companies’ Business Plans. Water Services Regulation Authority, Birmingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Picazo-Tadeo AJ, Sáez-Fernández FJ, González-Gómez F (2008) Does service quality matter in measuring the performance of water utilities? Util Policy 16(1):30–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portela MCAS, Thanassoulis E, Horncastle A, Maugg T (2011) Productivity change in the water industry in England and Wales: application of the meta- Malmquist index. J Oper Res Soc 62(12):2173–2188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saal DS, Parker D (2001) Productivity and price performance in the privatized water and sewerage companies of England and Wales. J Regul Econ 20(1):61–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saal DS, Parker D, Weyman-Jones T (2007) Determining the contribution of technical change, efficiency change and scale change to productivity growth in the privatized English and welsh water and sewerage industry: 1985-2000. J Prod Anal 28(1–2):127–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala-Garrido R, Hernández-Sancho F, Molinos-Senante M (2012) Assessing the efficiency of wastewater treatment plants in an uncertain context: a DEA with tolerances approach. Environ Sci Pol 18:34–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiford LM, Zhu J (2005) A response to comments on modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. Eur J Oper Res 161(2):579–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simoes P, Marques RC (2012) Influence of regulation on the productivity of waste utilities. What can we learn with the Portuguese experience? Waste Manag 32(6):1266–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyteca D (1996) On the measurement of the environmental performance of firms - a literature review and a productive efficiency perspective. J Environ Manag 46(3):281–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthington AC (2014) A review of frontier approaches to efficiency and productivity measurement in urban water utilities. Urban Water J 11(1):55–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu M-M, Hsu S-H, Chang C-C, Lee D-H (2008) Productivity growth of Taiwan’s major domestic airports in the presence of aircraft noise. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 44(3):543–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou P, Zhou X, Fan LW (2014) On estimating shadow prices of undesirable outputs with efficiency models: a literature review. Appl Energy 130:799–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Foundazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Isola di San Giorgio Maggiore 8, Venice, Italy

    Alexandros Maziotis

  2. Departamento de Ingeniería Hidráulica y Ambiental, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna, 4860, Santiago, Chile

    María Molinos-Senante

  3. Facultad de Arquitectura e Instituto de Estudios Urbanos, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, El Comendador, 1916, Santiago, Chile

    María Molinos-Senante

  4. Centro de Desarrollo Urbano Sustentable CONICYT/FONDAP/15110020, Av. Vicuña Mackenna, 4860, Santiago, Chile

    María Molinos-Senante

  5. Department of Mathematics for Economics, University of Valencia, Avda. Tarongers S/N, Valencia, Spain

    Ramon Sala-Garrido

Authors
  1. Alexandros Maziotis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. María Molinos-Senante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ramon Sala-Garrido
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to María Molinos-Senante.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maziotis, A., Molinos-Senante, M. & Sala-Garrido, R. Assesing the Impact of Quality of Service on the Productivity of Water Industry: a Malmquist-Luenberger Approach for England and Wales. Water Resour Manage 31, 2407–2427 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1395-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1395-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation