ABSTRACT
In this article, we focus on the difficulties in evaluating the performance of so-called services of general interest. These services generally include such services as water and electricity supply, telephony, postal services, and public transport, where providers are subjected to certain universal service obligations. Because of the tensions between European internal market requirements and these universal service obligations, there exists considerable debate on the criteria to be used to evaluate the performance of these services. In addition, the status of these public services as “public” or “essential” services is disputed. Rankings of the performance of these services will always reflect a certain dominant definition of performance. Ranking schemes as a result both reflect and create performance.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Research for this article was funded through grant RES 153-27-0004 from the ESRC Public Service Programme on “Public attitudes towards services of general interest in comparative perspective.” An earlier version of this article was presented at the International Public Management Network Workshop (IPMN) in Oxford, 7–9 August 2007. I would like to thank the participants of this workshop (especially Christopher Hood, Cristopher Ballinas Valdes, and Colin Talbot), as well as Judith Clifton, John Stewart, Peter Behrens, Mike Smith, Barbara Allen, Tony Prosser, and Allison Glazebrook for their comments and for providing me with additional material.