The paper at hand analyses the principal-agent relationship, where comparative perspective between principals’ (municipalities) and agents’ (public utility providers) in the field of water and wastewater management is scrutinized. The goal of the paper is twofold: firstly, to present empirical results validating principal-agent relationships that emerged due to the reorganization process of public enterprises; secondly, to highlight the similarities and differences between the perspectives of principals and agents regarding motives, advantages and disadvantages, and price-setting in relation to the reorganization process. The empirical research is based on the primary data collected through two self-prepared and structured online questionnaires—one for municipalities, and the other for public utility providers. The results reveal similarities between public enterprises and municipalities in motivating factors for full municipal ownership. However, differences are seen among the advantages of the reorganization process. Price-setting by public utilities is recognized as a motivating mechanism for agents.

1. Amaral, A. L., Martins, R., & Dias, L. C. (2023). Drivers of water utilities’ operational performance – An analysis from the Portuguese case. Journal of Cleaner Production, 389, 136004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136004
2. Blidisel, R.G. (2013). Corporate governance in local public sector. Metalurgia international, 18(3), 224–226.
3. Branston, J. R., Cowling, K., & Sugden, R. (2006). Corporate Governance and the Public Interest. International Review of Applied Economics, 20(2), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/02692170600581110
4. Daiser, P., & Wirtz, B. W. (2019). Strategic corporate governance factors for municipally owned companies: an empirical analysis from a municipal perspective. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 87(1), 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852319845451
5. Domadenik, P. (2016). Renewal of economic aspects of Slovenian healthcare (Slovenian). In: Čok, M., Došenović, P. B. Korže, B., et al. (editors). Sistemska prenova javnih izvajalcev zdravstvenega varstva v Sloveniji. Ljubljana: Ekonomska fakulteta; 2016. pp. 107–121.
6. Dzomira, S. (2020). Corporate Governance and Performance of Audit Committee and Internal Audit Functions in an Emerging Economy’s Public Sector. Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 13(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0974686220923789
7. Ferry, L., & Ahrens, T. (2017). Using management control to understand public sector corporate governance changes. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 13(4), 548–567. https://doi.org/10.1108/jaoc-12-2016-0092
8. Gumanti, T. A., Nastiti, A. S., & Lestari, A. R. (2016). Good corporate governance and earnings management in Indonesian initial public offerings. Corporate Ownership and Control, 13(4), 558–565. Portico. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv13i4c4p5
9. Horan, A., & Mulreany, M. (2020). Corporate governance in the public sector: Reflections on experience in Ireland. Administration, 68(4), 121–144. https://doi.org/10.2478/admin-2020-0027
10. Hung, C., & Berrett, J. (2021). Service Delivery Under Pressure: The Effect of Donor-Imposed Financial Restrictions. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(3), 580–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2021.1916546
11. Järvenpää, A.-T., Larsson, J., & Eriksson, P. E. (2022). How public client’s control systems affect contractors’ innovation possibilities. Construction Innovation, 24(7), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1108/ci-03-2022-0054
12. Jia, N., Huang, K. G., & Man Zhang, C. (2019). Public Governance, Corporate Governance, and Firm Innovation: An Examination of State-Owned Enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 62(1), 220–247. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0543
13. Karanja, E., Grant, D., & Zaveri, J. S. (2021). CIO reporting structure and firm strategic orientation – a content analysis approach. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 23(1), 20–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsit-02-2020-0022
14. Li, D., Su, M., Guo, X., et al. (2022). The Effect of Medical Choice on Health Costs of Middle-Aged and Elderly Patients with Chronic Disease: Based on Principal-Agent Theory. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(13), 7570. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19137570
15. Lin, C., Ma, Y., & Su, D. (2008). Corporate governance and firm efficiency: evidence from China’s publicly listed firms. Managerial and Decision Economics, 30(3), 193–209. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.1447
16. Liu, K. (2018). Government Ownership in Listed Firms Around the World. Studies in Business and Economics, 13(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.2478/sbe-2018-0025
17. Locke, S., & Duppati, G. (2014). Agency costs and corporate governance mechanisms in Indian state-owned companies and privately owned companies—A panel data analysis. Corporate Ownership and Control, 11(4), 8–17. Portico. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv11i4p1
18. Lombardi, D. R., & Laybourn, P. (2012). Redefining Industrial Symbiosis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(1), 28–37. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00444.x
19. Mocholi-Arce, M., Sala-Garrido, R., Molinos-Senante, M., et al. (2022). Performance assessment of the Chilean water sector: A network data envelopment analysis approach. Utilities Policy, 75, 101350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2022.101350
20. Monios, J., & Bergqvist, R. (2015). Intermodal terminal concessions: Lessons from the port sector. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 14, 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2014.09.002
21. Munteanu, I., Grigorescu, A., Condrea, E., et al. (2020). Convergent Insights for Sustainable Development and Ethical Cohesion: An Empirical Study on Corporate Governance in Romanian Public Entities. Sustainability, 12(7), 2990. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072990
22. Papachristou, G., & Papachristou, M. K. (2014). The worthiness of corporate governance in public sector the case of public healthcare sector in Greece. Corporate Ownership and Control, 12(1), 490–501. Portico. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv12i1c5p4
23. Papenfuß, U., van Genugten, M., de Kruijf, J., et al. (2018). Implementation of EU initiatives on gender diversity and executive directors’ pay in municipally-owned enterprises in Germany and The Netherlands. Public Money & Management, 38(2), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2018.1407133
24. Petkovšek, V., Hrovatin, N. & Pevcin, P. (2021). Local Public Services Delivery Mechanisms: A Literature review. Lex Localis, 19(1), 39–64. https://doi.org/10.4335/19.1.39-64(2021)
25. Pevcin, P. (2018). Managerial economics in public and non-profit organisations (Slovenian), 1st ed. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za upravo.
26. Quérou, N., Tomini, A., Costello, C. (2022). Limited‐tenure concessions for collective goods. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2022.104484
27. Romano, G., Salvati, N., & Guerrini, A. (2017). Governance, strategy and efficiency of water utilities: the Italian case. Water Policy, 20(1), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2017.172
28. Scrimgeour, F., & Duppati, G. (2014). Corporate governance in the public sector: Dimensions; guidelines and practice In India and New Zealand. Corporate Ownership and Control, 11(2), 364–377. Portico. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv11i2c4p2
29. Soberón, M., Ezquerra-Lázaro, I., Sánchez-Chaparro, T., et al. (2023). Supporting municipalities to develop collaboration capability to facilitate urban transitions and sustainability: Role of transition intermediaries in Madrid. Journal of Cleaner Production, 426, 138964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138964
30. Tajnikar, M., Aleksić, D., & Došenovič Bonča, P. (2019). Who’s who in Slovenian public health institutions: an analysis of principals and agents (Slovenian). Economic and Business Review, 21(4). https://doi.org/10.15458/2335-4216.1073
31. Uradni list RS. (2012). Decree on the methodology for determining prices of obligatory municipal public services for environmental protection (Slovenian). Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, 87.
32. Wen, X., Chen, X., & Yang, Z. (2023). Subsidization of public transit service under double moral hazard. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 632, 129304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2023.129304