Country, sector and method effects in studying remunicipalization: a meta-analysis

Abstract

A growing literature demonstrates increasing remunicipalization of local public services. Yet, while this literature is becoming extensive, many debates still exist about remunicipalization’s causes. This article reports the findings of a meta-analysis of the remunicipalization literature, focusing on the question: how do country, sector and method effects affect the findings of remunicipalization studies? I include articles on remunicipalization under different terms (‘remunicipalization’, ‘reverse privatization’, ‘insourcing’ and ‘contracting in’), using a large range of methods (case studies, surveys and document analysis) and covering a large period (1995–2019). I find 30 causes of remunicipalization that are considered and found in the literature. Political and pragmatic factors appear to be most frequently considered and found as causes of remunicipalization in the literature; environmental factors are less often considered but seem highly relevant. Moreover, I uncover large differences between the qualitative and quantitative literatures. I offer a research agenda to allow greater future synthesis in the remunicipalization literature. Points for practitioners: The literature on remunicipalization is highly fragmented and remunicipalization can have many different causes. Remunicipalization appears to be both a political and a pragmatic trend, but the literature is still too fragmented to know for sure. Be aware of the potential biases and limitations in current research on (causes of) remunicipalization.