Posts
This paper compares transparency of water utilities regulation in England and Victoria where regulation by agency is employed and Jakarta which uses regulation by contract. Transparency is categorized into active and passive disclosure. The former uses publication of contract, service level/customer service and investment planning as a proxy for transparency whereas the latter measure transparency using the applicability of freedom of information law. The result is that transparency is lacking in Jakarta where regulation by contract is employed. In Jakarta, contracts are not published, service level/customer service information not available to the public and investment planning process only negotiated bilaterally without any public involvement. In terms of passive disclosure rules, the Freedom of Information Law is also not applicable to regulatory body in Jakarta (JWSRB). Conversely, contracts are published in Victoria. In both Victoria and England, service level/customer service information is published as they are part of public document and investment planning process is open and transparent. The Freedom of Information Law is also applicable to regulatory bodies in Victoria (ESC) and England (OFWAT).
Paper saya menguji hipotesis yang menyatakan bawah regulation by contract tidak transparan apabila dibandingkan dengan regulation by agency (Untuk diskusi tipe tipe regulasi, silahkan klik disini). Papernya sedang dimasukkan ke salah satu Jurnal. Apabila diterima, versi Working Papers yang ada di SSRN ini mungkin harus di-remove. Silahkan download apabila tertarik. Klik disini untuk mendownload.
