Equity tension and new public management policy development and implementation in the water industry

Christopher John Hunt, John Staunton, Keitha Dunstan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose - Within the new public management (NPM) context, this paper aims to examine the inclusion of equity issues in pricing policy development and implementation in the water industry in Australia.

Design/methodology/approach - A review of literature relevant to the pricing of water shows equity issues have four dimensions which tend to be, at best, only implicitly considered. An empirical illustration employing a transaction cost framework is provided of a case in which change in pricing mechanisms was strongly suggested.

Findings - An equity paradox emerges as an explanation of why 63.7 per cent of Queensland urban water entities chose not to adopt the user-pays pricing mechanism for water. This suggests that the balance between "equity" and "efficiency" continues to be required in policy development for water pricing. Equity of access and that of distribution continue to be significant factors. As well, equity of interest and of return must be considered, especially under a user-pays pricing mechanism.

Practical implications - In respect of NPM considerations, it is argued that consideration of the four dimensions of equity in the implementation of a water pricing policy will resolve contradictions with, and paradoxes met in dealing with efficiency.

Originality/value - The argument used in the paper is interdisciplinary. References and terms used include those which are social, economic, and environmental from an accounting and management perspective.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1342-1377
Number of pages36
JournalAccounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal
Volume26
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Equity
Water industry
New public management
Policy development
Policy implementation
Water
Pricing mechanism
Water pricing
Paradox
Pricing policy
Equity issues
Inclusion
Transaction costs
Pricing
Design methodology
Queensland
Factors

Cite this

@article{7ddc2edc5df4444d924cfd537bc4435c,
title = "Equity tension and new public management policy development and implementation in the water industry",
abstract = "Purpose - Within the new public management (NPM) context, this paper aims to examine the inclusion of equity issues in pricing policy development and implementation in the water industry in Australia.Design/methodology/approach - A review of literature relevant to the pricing of water shows equity issues have four dimensions which tend to be, at best, only implicitly considered. An empirical illustration employing a transaction cost framework is provided of a case in which change in pricing mechanisms was strongly suggested.Findings - An equity paradox emerges as an explanation of why 63.7 per cent of Queensland urban water entities chose not to adopt the user-pays pricing mechanism for water. This suggests that the balance between {"}equity{"} and {"}efficiency{"} continues to be required in policy development for water pricing. Equity of access and that of distribution continue to be significant factors. As well, equity of interest and of return must be considered, especially under a user-pays pricing mechanism.Practical implications - In respect of NPM considerations, it is argued that consideration of the four dimensions of equity in the implementation of a water pricing policy will resolve contradictions with, and paradoxes met in dealing with efficiency.Originality/value - The argument used in the paper is interdisciplinary. References and terms used include those which are social, economic, and environmental from an accounting and management perspective.",
author = "Hunt, {Christopher John} and John Staunton and Keitha Dunstan",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1108/AAAJ-02-2012-00947",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "1342--1377",
journal = "Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal",
issn = "0951-3574",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "8",

}

Equity tension and new public management policy development and implementation in the water industry. / Hunt, Christopher John; Staunton, John; Dunstan, Keitha.

In: Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 26, No. 8, 2013, p. 1342-1377.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Equity tension and new public management policy development and implementation in the water industry

AU - Hunt, Christopher John

AU - Staunton, John

AU - Dunstan, Keitha

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Purpose - Within the new public management (NPM) context, this paper aims to examine the inclusion of equity issues in pricing policy development and implementation in the water industry in Australia.Design/methodology/approach - A review of literature relevant to the pricing of water shows equity issues have four dimensions which tend to be, at best, only implicitly considered. An empirical illustration employing a transaction cost framework is provided of a case in which change in pricing mechanisms was strongly suggested.Findings - An equity paradox emerges as an explanation of why 63.7 per cent of Queensland urban water entities chose not to adopt the user-pays pricing mechanism for water. This suggests that the balance between "equity" and "efficiency" continues to be required in policy development for water pricing. Equity of access and that of distribution continue to be significant factors. As well, equity of interest and of return must be considered, especially under a user-pays pricing mechanism.Practical implications - In respect of NPM considerations, it is argued that consideration of the four dimensions of equity in the implementation of a water pricing policy will resolve contradictions with, and paradoxes met in dealing with efficiency.Originality/value - The argument used in the paper is interdisciplinary. References and terms used include those which are social, economic, and environmental from an accounting and management perspective.

AB - Purpose - Within the new public management (NPM) context, this paper aims to examine the inclusion of equity issues in pricing policy development and implementation in the water industry in Australia.Design/methodology/approach - A review of literature relevant to the pricing of water shows equity issues have four dimensions which tend to be, at best, only implicitly considered. An empirical illustration employing a transaction cost framework is provided of a case in which change in pricing mechanisms was strongly suggested.Findings - An equity paradox emerges as an explanation of why 63.7 per cent of Queensland urban water entities chose not to adopt the user-pays pricing mechanism for water. This suggests that the balance between "equity" and "efficiency" continues to be required in policy development for water pricing. Equity of access and that of distribution continue to be significant factors. As well, equity of interest and of return must be considered, especially under a user-pays pricing mechanism.Practical implications - In respect of NPM considerations, it is argued that consideration of the four dimensions of equity in the implementation of a water pricing policy will resolve contradictions with, and paradoxes met in dealing with efficiency.Originality/value - The argument used in the paper is interdisciplinary. References and terms used include those which are social, economic, and environmental from an accounting and management perspective.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885042842&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/AAAJ-02-2012-00947

DO - 10.1108/AAAJ-02-2012-00947

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 1342

EP - 1377

JO - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

JF - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

SN - 0951-3574

IS - 8

ER -