ABSTRACT
This Chapter addresses the first level of analysis of the implications of neo-liberal reform measures on the WSS sector, e.g. the implications on the strategic context. The central research question this Chapters 7 is concerned with is: to what extent can differences in institutions explain differences in the strategic context of WSS providers. An analysis of the regulatory institutions is an essential condition to study strategies of WSS providers. Researchers have noted that different regulation may be conducive to certain strategic actions (Desarbo et al., 2005). Strategic context is interpreted as the managerial discretion of WSS providers to pursue strategies of their choice. It is hypothesised that institutions make a difference for the strategic context of WSS providers. The Chapter is structured in the following manner. A case description is provided from the UK and the Netherlands. The case study is divided in two separated but interrelated parts. The first part describes the current administrative regulatory framework that governs the WSS sector. In this respect the perspective from the regulator is central. In the second part of the case description the perspective shifts towards the regulated. This part tries to identify how the managerial discretion compares of WSS providers subject to the regulatory regimes. The comparison uses the 5 strategic components of Boyne and Walker (2004) to structure the analysis. For every one of the strategic components an analysis is made to what extent the regulatory regimes provide opportunities or set constraints. A case study comparing the impositions and opportunities provided by the regulatory regimes in the UK and the Netherlands is instrumental in that respect. England & Wales was selected as the case to represent the private companies. In England & Wales currently 23 private companies are responsible for WSS service provision, of which ten companies
provide WSS services, while thirteen are Water only Companies (WoCs)43. The comparative case from the Netherlands features as an example of a traditional publicly managed model. In the Netherlands 14 Public Limited Companies assume the responsibility for supplying drinking water services; municipalities handle the sewerage collection services, while the water boards are responsible for the treatment of wastewater. Both countries are relatively homogenous and have comparable economic, social and cultural conditions. The Chapter finally makes some concluding remarks.
