DRAFT report prepared for The Future is Public Conference

ISSUE BRIEF | February 2016

THE FUTURE IS

TOWARDS DEMOCRATIC OWNERSHIP
OF PUBLIC SERVICESDECEMBER 2019

This report is presented as a draft at the Future is Public conference(December 2019) to invite feedback and strengthen our analysis. Your views
are important and welcome. This report and 15 working papers together form
the conference resources. The Transnational Institute and co-publishers planto publish the improved report and final papers as a book in 2020.
To access the conference resources: https://futureispublic.org/

AUTHORS: Satoko Kishimoto, Lavinia Steinfort, Olivier Petitjean

DATA ANALYSIS: Laura Stegemann

RESEARCHERS: Alexander Panez Pinto (Latin America), Bjørn Pettersen/Kristen Dalby(Norway), Blanca Bayas/Míriam Planas/Arnau Piqué/Manuel Fontaíña (Spain), Dania
Putri, Eirin Sundby, Laura Stegemann, Lavinia Steinfort, Marie Therese Kane (USAtelecom), Mary Ann Manahan (Southeast Asia), Mary Grant (USA-water), Meryl Goeke,
Olivier Petitjean, Per Brøgger/Maibrit Georg (Denmark), Renata C. Boulos (Brazil),
Robert Ramsay/Karin Jordan/Kimalee Philip (Canada) and Satoko Kishimoto.

THANKS TO Asima Shaikh, Philip Glanville, Rebecca Rennison, Ellen Lees, Thomas Hanna,

the Community Broadband Networks Initiative/the Institute for Local Self-Reliance(ILSR), Jan Winde en Fred Peeters (FNV), Rick van der Zwet (Wireless Leiden), thePlatform for the Remunicipalisation of public services in Madrid, Alicia Sanchez, Olga
Zhankevich and Vera Weghmann.
INFOGRAPHICS AND DESIGN: Karen Paalman
COVER PAGE IMAGE DESIGN: Evan Clayburg

CONTACT:

Your feedback on this report is very welcome! Requests for printed copies, andinitiatives to translate the report into your language are also welcome. Contact Satoko
Kishimoto (satoko@tni.org) or Lavinia Steinfort (l.steinfort@tni.org) at Transnational
Institute.
2 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Fighting privatisation of public services
The neoliberal current is powerful ...
Private Finance Initiatives (PFI)

Public asset saleCompetitive tenders

Public-private-parnerships (PPP)

Corporatisation
Outsourcing

Liberalised market competition

De-privatisation/Reclaiming public services
924
Remunicipalisations• Termination/non-renewal of private contracts• Public acquisition• Insourcing/bringing services back in house

484
Municipalisations/
Creation of public services

PUBLIC-PUBLIC PARTNERSHIPS• new municipal companies• new public service programmesIntermunicipal, peer to peer

PUBLIC-COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
local, not-for-profit organisations

PUBLIC-COMMONS PARTNERSHIPS

UK
94

Norway18

USco-ownership, diversified public
ownership, co-productionof services

France
19

109

141

Chile
40

Philippines

21

Critical mass of local changes inspires country-wide democratic public ownership

Introduction
The future is public. Across the world, people are building better, more democratic and inclusive public
services. In a context of climate emergency, mounting inequalities and growing democratic unrest,
public services are more important than ever. But as this report shows, another world is possible—
what’s more, we’ve started building it, together.
This report is a new stage in a long journey. Many of us first joined forces several years ago to oppose
the tide of water privatisation that was sweeping the world and support the resistance that private
corporations were encountering everywhere. This opposition to privatisation has quickly turned into analliance for a positive cause, that of remunicipalisation. This term captures the idea of not only reversing
privatisation, but developing new public services that can help us meet the social, ecological anddemocratic challenges of our time. Our 2017 publication Reclaiming Public Services1 featured more than
800 (re)municipalisations across all sectors and on every continent. But we knew this was likely just the
tip of the iceberg.
This report builds on our initial research. We have now identified more than 1,400 cases of
remunicipalisation or municipalisation (the creation of new public services), involving more than 2,400
cities in 58 countries. The data and case studies illustrate the diversity of remunicipalisation efforts,taking us to new countries and new sectors with their specific challenges, such as the waste sectorin Africa. Our research also shows that the pressures against remunicipalisation have not abated.
Privatisation is still high on the agenda for private corporations and financial markets, as well as formany national governments and international institutions. There are many forms of privatisation andnames that disguise it, including “public-private partnerships” or PPPs, “private finance initiative” or PFI,
outsourcing, corporatisation, “right to choice,” forced competition and market liberalisation. Given the
powerful forces lined up against remunicipalisation, it’s all the more remarkable that so many services
and facilities are being returned to public ownership and control. It shows that people embrace thevalue of public services, and highlights the determination of communities and elected officials to defend
public services.
3 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

1408 (Re)municipalisationsof public services
Sweden Finland

110 UK

51
Canada230 USA

156

Norway 42

Portugal

119 Spain

4

Denmark Germany

Netherlands
Belgium
Luxembourg
France
4

8

25
4 1

35

1

2

Russia411

Lithuania
Czech Republic
2
3 Ukraine
10 4
Hungary

Austria
Italy 51112Montenegro Greece
Albania3

Kazakhstan
1

Bulgaria
4 Turkey

South Korea

Uzbekistan

1 Lebanon

Egypt

3
1

8

India

Honduras
1 Nicaragua
2

Venezuela

1

GuineaColombia 3

1

Bolivia16

1 Uganda

3

Indonesia

1 Tanzania

BrazilPeru

2

4

Mozambique2

1 Paraguay

6

9Argentina
44

Australia

3South Africa

1

Uruguay

BETWEEN 2000 AND 2019, MORE THAN 2,400 CITIES IN 58 COUNTRIESBROUGHT PUBLIC SERVICES UNDER PUBLIC CONTROL(Re)municipalisation sectors
311

Water

NºcasesFranceUS
Spain
Germany
CanadaArgentina
Philippines
Italy
HungarySouth Africa
MéxicoKazakhstan
Indonesia
Colombia
Venezuela
UkraineUK
TurkeyMozambique
Malaysia
India
BrazilBolivia
Uzbekistan
Uruguay
UgandaTanzania
SwedenRussiaPortugal
LebanonGuineaEcuadorCentral African Republic
Belgium
Albania

109
71
38
17
8
8
7
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

EnergyLocal government
Housing 31
Food and catering 28
Public (green) space maintenance 22
Security and emergency services 17
Parking 15
Building cleaning and maintenance 14
Sports 12
Cultural activities 9
IT 7
Construction 7
Prison 5
Funeral services 47563138 Health care + Social services

374

223

Country

Philippines

21

Malaysia

1

Central African Republic

Ecuador 1

Chile

Japan

3 Nepal4

Mexico18

5CountryNºcasesUK
Spain
Germany
FranceCanadaDenmark
Netherlands
Austria
Philippines
NorwaySouth Korea
Chile
Finland
Australia
Malaysia
India
Italy
New ZealandTurkey
US

55
40
34
21
15
12
8
7
6
5
5
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

CountryNºcasesGermany
Spain
UK
US
Japan
Netherlands
Australia
Belgium
Denmark
FranceGreeceIndia
Argentinia
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Honduras
Lithuania
Philippines
Ukraine

305
18
13
11
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Human resources 3

192

Other 49

Telecommunications
CountryNºcasesUS
Germany
Netherlands
CanadaMalaysia

145
35
7
3
1

4 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Education 38
CountryNºcasesJapan
Malaysia
Germany
UK
Philippines
CanadaSpain
BrazilChile
India
Nicaragua

12
6
5
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
1

Transport
Country

FranceUK
Austria
Netherlands
CanadaPortugal
Czech Republic
India
Malaysia
Turkey

21
12
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1

47

Nºcases

CountryNºcases

Chile
NorwayCanadaSpain
UK
Denmark
SwedenPhilippines
Malaysia
Nepal
Australia
GermanyJapan
US
BelgiumBrazilFinland
India
Luxembourg
Montenegro
Portugal
Russia

40
18
14
14
10
8
7
4
4
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

85

Waste
CountryNºcases

NorwayUK
Denmark
Germany
CanadaSpain
Egypt
FranceNetherlands
Paraguay
Peru

19
15
13
13
7
6
4
3
3
1
1

New

Our research shows that remunicipalisation is still going strong in sectors like energy and water. We also
found vibrant remunicipalisation and municipalisation trends in sectors where we had not anticipated
it such as telecommunications, which was outside the scope of our previous publications. High speed
internet access is essential to modern life, for households and businesses. We found regional andmunicipal governments are stepping in to bridge the digital divide by offering affordable high speed
internet service, ensuring accessibility and revitalizing local economies in small towns and rural areas
where private telecom companies are reluctant to invest because it is not profitable. The UK Labour
Party has taken this trend a step further in its 2019 election manifesto with a plan to partially nationalise
British Telecom and offer free, universal broadband. Even an economic sector usually seen as thedomain of corporate giants can be transformed to deliver a universal public service.
While this report showcases the many examples of (re)municipalisation of public services—touchingvirtually every country and every sector—new cases of privatisation also continue to emerge. This report
is about more than just the numbers. It’s about a growing movement. In many ways, privatisation isthe easy option for local and national authorities: it is pushed by powerful players, comes with plentyof international funding, is enabled by favourable legal conditions, and politicians see it as a way towash their hands of problems. Remunicipalisation is fuelled by the aspiration of communities and local
governments to reclaim democratic control over public services and local resources, in order to protect
their common future. And, as this report shows, that aspiration is strong enough that it has led to 924
successful (re)municipalisations.
This wave of (re)municipalisations is taking place at a critical moment. Far-right political movements
seek to capitalise on people’s insecurity and anger, and are using racism, facism and xenophobia tofurther divide us. Progressive forces need to offer solidarity and concrete solutions–decent jobs, public
services for all, and resilient local economies. We must provide viable public alternatives that strengthencommunities and the democratic fabric of society.

Reclaiming and creating public services:(Re)municipalisation
Remunicipalisation

Municipalisation

924

484

218

energy55

health care and social services

190

local government

4

telecommunications

46

transport

CITIES OR REGIONSREVERSENEW PUBLIC SERVICESS
156 energy

PRIVATISATION

cit

iz

w
en a n d o r ker

-le

3

waste

9

water

34 local government
81 health care & social services

82

waste

303 water

CITIESOR REGIONSCOOPERATIVESREVERSEPRIVATISATION

12 education
187 telecommunications
2

5 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

SUPPORT

educationd

26

CITIESIT OR REGIONSCREATEtransport

COOPERATIVES
TO CREATE NEW
PUBLIC SERVICESCountry profiles

CANADA OF CASES 51
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 34
Municipalisation 17

Transport

Waste

Telecommunications

2

7

3

Health care &social services

Water

Education8

2

14
Local government

Housing 1

15

Food and catering 1
Parking 3
Sports and cultural activities 2
Financing and maintenance 6
Other 2Highlights• Since 2017, there have been more than 20 new cases of (re)municipalisationin water, waste, transport, telecommunications and health care sectors.
• The 15 remunicipalisations in local government include housing, parking,security, police station construction and recreation services.
• Interesting remunicipalisation cases include solid waste (Winnipeg,
Manitoba) and waste water (Taber, Alberta and Owen Sound, Ontario).
• Reclaiming public services leads to more economically efficient and better
quality services.

CHILE OF CASES 44
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 2
Municipalisation 42

Health care &social services

40
Education

1

Local government

3

Building cleaning and maintenance 2
Housing 1

Highlights• Between 2015 and 2018, 40 new public pharmacies have been created andthe “Chilean Association of Popular Pharmacies” brings thesemunicipalities (80 in total) together.
• They follow the public pharmacy model of the local government of Recoleta,
where some residents are now spending 70% less on medication permonth.
• In 2018, the local government created the Open University of Recoleta.
• Today it provides 150 courses in the areas of arts, science, humanities,
social science and technology. In total, 3,300 students have taken one ormore courses at the Open University.

6 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

DENMARK OF CASES 35
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 29
Municipalisation 6

Health care &social services

8

Waste

Energy132Highlights

Local government

12

Building cleaning and maintenance 7
Construction 1
Human resources 3
Other 1• Privatisation in the elderly care sector, imposed by flawed "free choice"policies, has proved uneconomical, with 54 cases of bankruptcy of private
providers since 2013.
• The municipality of Frederiksberg (part of Copenhagen) saved even moremoney than it expected when it decided to collect and manage its waste
through its own, employee-led company in 2011.
• Several examples of remunicipalisation and insourcing of cleaning services
by local goverments and hospitals because of quality problems and labour
standards.

FRANCE OF CASES 156
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 155
Municipalisation 1

Transport

Waste

21

3

Energy

Water

2

109

Local government

21

Highlights

Food and catering 4
Sports 1
Parking 3

7 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services• Around 70% of all cases took place in the water sector, which has seen awave of remunicipalisation since 2000, including large cities such as Paris,
Rennes, Grenoble, Nice and Montpellier.
• Paris is a significant model for remunicipalisation, with the introductionof groundbreaking democratic accountability mechanisms, an emphasison access to water for all, including homeless people and migrants, andadaptation to climate change - while keeping prices lower than they were
before remunicipalisation.
• Access to organic, local food in school restaurants and childcare is anothersector where progressive cities and local authorities are reinventing public
services, with the creation of municipal farms and innovative procurement
policies.
• Several cities like Paris and Rennes have introduced innovative partnerships
with the farming sector to protect water catchments, encourage a shift toorganic production and create new markets for them through procurement
and public labels.

GERMANY OF CASES 411
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 255
Municipalisation 156

Health care &social services

Waste

Telecommunications

12

35

EnergyWater

Education

305

18

5

2

Local government

Housing 4

34

Food and catering 2
Public (green) space maintenance 3
Security and emergency services 11
Building cleaning and maintenance 6
Sports 5
Cultural activities 3

Highlights• With financial support from the federal government, new municipal andintermunicipal partnerships have provided broadband services in more than
200 municipalities over the last ten years.
• As part of the German Energiewende (energy transition), municipalities
reclaimed more than 300 energy services and networks.
• The local government Berlin-Friedrichshain brought back apartment blocks
in an attempt to prevent rising rents in 2018. In Berlin-Spandau, the local
government bought back 6,000 formerly privatized apartments in 2019.

MALAYSIA OF CASES 16
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 1
Municipalisation 15

Health care &social services

Telecommunications

4

1

Transport

Water

Highlights

1

2• The state of Selangor successfully remunicipalised water services in 2018
after a 20-year-long costly conflict.
• The state of Selangor’s People’s Care Initiative (IPR) started in 2008, as anintegrated social protection program which covers education, health care,housing and food. They focus on low income families being able to access
all these services.
• Free water (20 cubic meters/a month/a family), free bus transportation and
300 free internet Wifi spots are also part of the program.

Local government2

Education

6

Housing 1
Food and catering 1

8 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

NORWAY OF CASES 42
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 39
Municipalisation 3

Health care &social services

Waste

19

18

Highlights

Local government

5

Building cleaning and maintenance 4
Security and emergency services 1• In 2017, more than 100 municipalities took public control over their waste
collection after RenoNorden's bankruptcy.
• Merging small towns into one municipality provided an opportunity for intermunicipal remunicipalisation or creation of an integrated municipal company
with public sector solidarity and capacity building.
• Remunicipalisation of care services (nursing homes, elderly care) and local
government services (staffing agency) are significant.
• Strong and strategic role of workers' unions in the process of remunicipalisation.

PHILIPPINES OF CASES 21
TOTAL NUMBER

Municipalisation 21

Health care &social services

4
Education

3

Energy1
Local government

6

Public (green) space maintenance 1
Food and catering 4
Security and emergency services 1

Water

7

Highlights• Philippine municipalities are creating new public services to increase welfare-based social protection.
• Binalonan started delivering effective health care services to residents, including care centres andfinancial support for health services. The municipality reduced chronic child malnutrition by 17% andincreased use of contraceptives by 51%.
• The municipality of Cainta Rizal launched its “One Cainta” program in 2016, providing free education
through the establishment of a college, enrolling 800 students per year, and additional health carefacilities, improving access to medical services for economically disadvantaged groups.
• Philippine municipalities are taking on an important role in increasing the country’s climate resilience,by establishing integrative approaches to farming and fishing, ecosystem protection, and energy
generation (Del Carmen and Lanuza).

9 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

SPAIN OF CASES 119
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 105
Municipalisation 14

Health care &social services

Waste

6

14
EnergyWater

Education

18

38

2

Local government

41

Housing 2
Food and catering 1

Public (green) space maintenance 12
Parking 6
Building cleaning and maintenance 10
Sports 2
Cultural activities 2
Construction 1
Funeral services 2

Highlights• The number of (re)municipalisations has more than doubled since 2017.
• A very strong social and municipalist movement has pushed for the 38
water remunicipalisations.
• Water remunicipalisation in Terrassa is leading to new forms of democratic
decision-making. With the support of civil society, the city created a Water
Observatory so users can participate in public management.
• Valladolid has saved €13.3 million since water remunicipalisation in 2017,
almost 4% of the municipal budget for 2018.
• In total, 41 local government services were remunicipalised, such as school
canteens, green spaces, parking, cleaning and funeral services.

Other 3

USA OF CASES 230
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 81
Municipalisation 149

Energy11
Health care &social services

2
Local government

1

Telecommunications

145
Water

Highlights

71• A total of 11 energy (re)municipalisations occurred, aimed at tackling theclimate crisis, building community wealth and increasing democratic (user)
control.
• Since 2002, there have been 71 water remunicipalisations. The busiest year
was 2010, with 10 reclaimed water services, leading to reduced user fees.
• Flagship water remunicipalisations took place in Atlanta, Missoula, Montara
and Pittsburgh.
• At least 141 new public telecommunication services were created to
improve access and democratic control, to deliver jobs and stimulate
economic activity (Tullahoma and Chattanooga), improve quality of life andto advance health and education (EC Fiber in Vermont).
• Interesting public-public partnership models involving local authorities
in Washington State (Northwest Open Access Network), Skagit County andThomasville.

Prison 1

10 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

UK OF CASES 110
TOTAL NUMBER

Remunicipalisation 96
Municipalisation 14

Health care &social services

Waste

Transport

15

12EnergyWater

Education

13

2

4

9

Local government

55

Housing 18
Food and catering 3
Public (green) space maintenance 4
Security and emergency services 1
Parking 1

Building cleaning and maintenance 9
Sports 2
Cultural activities 1
IT 7
Construction 3
Prison 1
Human resources 2
Other 3

11 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Highlights• Two major PFI companies went bankrupt in 2018 and 2019.
(Re)municipalisation cases increased from 64 in 2017 to 108 in 2019.
• Strong trend to reverse outsourcing to insourcing since 2008 acrossall sectors and foremost in local government (IT, housing, cleaning andmaintenance), as well as waste and transport.
• Public ownership of water, energy, rail, mail and NHS enjoys public support.
For example, 83% support public water.
• Remunicipalisation, insourcing and new public service experiences fuel thegrowing national demand for democratic public ownership.

Key findings
1. Remunicipalisation and municipalisation are redefining public ownership
Our research highlights how remunicipalisation and municipalisation are redefining public ownershipand advancing a twenty-first century vision that centers on democratic participation and control. A
growing network of progressive green municipalities is tackling climate change and rising inequality
using strategies that that feature (re)municipalisation. Cities are well positioned to explore direct
democracy, and advance innovative economic models that build community wealth and create decent
jobs. Motivations for remunicipalisation are diverse, but often involve a failed privatisation. This report
foregrounds our emerging findings as well as the many positive changes already resulting from (re)municipalisation.

(Re)municipalisations strive for

297

INCREASED LOCAL CAPACITY FOR

188

WORKING

CONDITIONS

9

209

27

THAT BENEFIT PEOPLE AND PLANETBANKRUPTCY

PUBLIC INVESTMENTFOR QUALITY SERVICES

245

DEMOCRATIC CONTROLAND PUBLIC OWNERSHIPLOWER FEES

ACHIEVING POLICY GOALSINCREASED

IMPROVEDBETTERFOR RESIDENTS

COMMUNITY WEALTH BUILDING

264

158

149

A FEMINIST APPROACH
to public services

142 ENHANCED

PUBLIC HEALTH AND
HARM REDUCTIONRESPONDING TO PRIVATE SECTOR

BETWEEN
USERS, WORKERS OR
76 PARTNERSHIPSCOMMUNITIES AND
PUBLIC AUTHORITIESBETTER VALUEFOR MONEY AND
PUBLIC SECTOR SAVINGS

138

UNIVERSAL ACCESSTO PROTECT HUMAN
AND SOCIAL RIGHTS

119
MEASURES TO TACKLE
THE CLIMATE CRISIS

Together, these are key elements for reclaiming and expanding a 21st century definition of public
ownership.

2. Remunicipalisation reduces costs and improves services
Cost is not the only consideration when deciding to remunicipalise a public service, but it is obviously
one of the most important factors. Public services provide the best value for money, in contrast to
the neoliberal claims that privatisation, PPP and outsourcing cost the public treasury less. In 2014, theAuditor General in the province of Ontario, Canada reviewed 74 PPP projects and concluded they cost
12 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

the public $8 billion more than if the province had used public procurement. Similarly in 2014, theprovincial Auditor General in British Columbia, Canada reviewed 16 PPP projects and reported that theprovince paid approximately twice as much for private sector financing as it would if it had borrowed
the money itself2. In the UK, a 2018 National Audit Office report found that the cost of privately financing
public projects can be 40 per cent higher than relying solely on government borrowing.3 A 2018 reportby the UK Treasury Committee estimated that a privately financed hospital would cost 70 per cent morethan a publicly financed one.4
There are five main reasons why privatised services generally cost more:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Corporations must generate profits and pay dividends to their shareholders and any parent
companies.
Privatisation brings extra layers of complexity and cost, including paying high fees to theconsultants and lawyers who design the contracts.
Public authorities lose control over the costs of running the service (private operators tend tooutsource some of the work to other companies, often at high cost).
Private operators lack of long-term vision when it comes to financial management.
Public bodies typically pay lower interest rates than private entities.

There is solid evidence that privatisation costs more. Stories of remunicipalisation help build ourcollective case that it makes good economic sense to have services which are publicly owned and directly
provided by public sector workers. In our study, we found at least 245 cases where (re)municipalisation
either aim or already managed to reduce the cost of providing services. Furthermore, in at least 264
cases, municipal companies foresee or already managed to increase public investment in services andinfrastructure. When services return to public ownership, tax revenues and any revenue generated fromuser fees can be invested directly in improving services and ensuring their sustainability.

Case study A- Valladolid, Spain: Water supply
In 2016, the Valladolid City Council decided to remunicipalise the water supply in the metropolitan
area as its contract with a private provider was due to expire in July 2017. The private company
had raised the consumer price by 37.28 per cent over the previous 20 years, a price hike that had
made the supply of drinking water almost unaffordable for poorer households, especially after the
2008-2009 economic crisis. An additional problem under private ownership had been the lack ofinvestment in the water network, while the company had consistently reaped high profits.
In 2015, municipal elections brought a new government and an opportunity to terminate
the private water management. An absolute majority in the City Council approved the
remunicipalisation in December 2016, and the newly established public water company Aquavall
continued to employ the entire workforce of the previously private business. After the second
year in operation, Aquavall had already saved the city 13.3 million Euros, equalling 4 per cent of
its total budget in 2018 (€337.2 million). Furthermore, the new public company has so far had
a total turnover of €26.4 million. Much of the profits can be now used to maintain and improve
the sanitation and distribution grids, which has helped to stabilise any maintenance fees paidby the consumers. Other than that, the revenue is building community wealth via investment inphotovoltaic panels that are expected to lower the cost of electricity production in the future.

3. Private management and ownership of public services risks bankruptcy
Remunicipalisations are often stories of residents, workers and public officials achieving social andenvironmental objectives by taking back control of public services. But they are also stories of failed
privatisations. When compiling our (re)municipalisation survey, we counted at least 26 cases involving
13 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

bankruptcies of private operators. The 2018 collapse of Carillion, a UK company specialising inoutsourcing contracts and privatised infrastructure, jeopardised 420 PFI projects as well as the future of
18,000 employees. In Denmark, “free choice” policies introduced mandatory competition in elderly care,
but a large number of private companies collapsed. In Norway, the bankruptcy of waste managementcompany RenoNorden would have stranded more 137 municipalities if the union had not anticipated its
economic difficulties and worked with local officials to be ready to remunicipalise the services.
Bankruptcies and corporate collapses reveal the truth behind privatisation’s false promises of efficiency
and innovation: many privatisation deals are economically unviable. Many outsourcing contracts andpublic-private partnerships are designed to prioritise profits and dividends over service quality. Whenthe profits dry up or fail to materialise, corporations and investors walk away, abandoning the service,
the workers and the people who rely on the service. Another illustration of privatisation’s economic
failures is the unwillingness of private operators to deliver services in areas, communities or user groups
that are not profitable enough, cannot afford to pay or are more expensive to serve. For example,
in the US, major telecommunications companies were not interested in serving rural areas, smaller
municipalities, and low-income communities. Local governments and community-owned companies
stepped in and developed high-speed broadband internet infrastructure in many areas where
corporations were not interested in operating.
In Africa, private waste operators only operate in the wealthiest neighbourhoods of large cities,
excluding the vast majority of the country. In Dar es Salaam, Tanzania the privatisation of waste services
has led to uniqual waste service coverage, with good service in the affluent city area, while poorer
neighbourhoods are left out. Consequently, 70 percent of Dar es Salaam waste is either disposed
informally or illegally dumped into waterways, fields, or burned5.

Case study B - Kragerø, Norway: Waste management
In Kragerø, employees and the works council of private waste collection company RenoNorden
alerted the municipal administration in 2017 that the firm was no longer fulfilling its duties
properly. Following a thorough analysis, the municipality agreed and decided to bring waste
collection back in-house, managing to end the contract with RenoNorden before the company
went bankrupt but keeping its employees. As a consequence, the waste collection fee for residents
has been reduced by 14 percent, wages and pensions for the employees have increased. The
municipality continues to save money by avoiding expensive tendering processes and benefits fromthe increase in full-time staff, who are able to help out with other municipal services, if needed.
In addition to better pay, former RenoNorden employees who now work for the municipality
also report other improvements: workers without formal vocational training are being offerededucational support to obtain official diplomas, and more workers are getting permanent contracts
with more hours or full-time positions.

Case study C - Region of Southern Denmark: Ambulance services
Until the summer of 2016, the Region of Southern Denmark used to outsource its ambulanceservice to private companies. Soon after winning the last public tender, however, the Danish armof Dutch ambulance company BIOS struggled to recruit enough drivers. After failing to reimburse
an accidental double payment made by the Region, the private company went bankrupt in July
2016. The Region quickly remunicipalised the rescue service, taking over 657 employees and hiring
an additional 100 Emergency Medical Technicians. Compared to the operational costs under its
predecessor FALCK, the region managed to reduce the cost of the service by 15 per cent, while
simultaneously improving its quality through extra staff. A political majority in the Region of
14 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Southern Denmark has since decided to prevent private companies from handling ambulance
operations in Southern Jutland and on the island of Funen.

4. Remunicipalisation helps uphold and promote human and social rights
The 2018 report of the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights6 says thatwidespread privatisation of public services and infrastructure is systematically eliminating human rights
protections and further marginalising people who are living in poverty. The report looks at the humanrights implications of privatisation in the criminal justice system, social services, water, sanitation,
electricity, health care, transportation and education. Special Rapporteur Philip Alston criticises thelack of any human rights criteria in most privatisation agreements, which rarely include monitoring theimpact privatisation has on poor people.
Remunicipalisation is an antidote to this erosion of human rights. In this study we found 138 cases
where defending social and human rights was a clear policy objective of (re)municipalisation, with many
examples of concrete measures to achieve this goal. The Paris public water company Eau de Paris says
its mission goes beyond a pipe connection. The company was established in 2010, ending a long periodof privatisation that began in the mid-1980s. Eau de Paris is committed to defending the human rightto water for all people in Paris, regardless of their legal status. Eau de Paris maintains and is expanding
a network of public water fountains across the city that provide water access for the most vulnerable
population.This is an essential service for the refugees who are arriving in the city every day, and forpeople experiencing homelessness who are living on the streets.

Case study D - Selangor state, Malaysia: Health and social care
Following a change of government in 2008, Selangor introduced an integrated social protection
program called Inisiatif Peduli Rakyat (IPR, People’s Care Initiative). Funded by state revenues, theprogram aims to improve the welfare of various vulnerable groups in the areas of education, healthcare, water provision, transportation, housing, and food. Improving health care plays an especially
important role in this initiative: since 2008, the Skim Mesra Usia Emas Scheme has been offering
a funeral payment of RM2,500 (€538) for registered senior citizens looking to help relatives cover
their burial expenses. Launched in 2010, the Women’s Health Scheme, provides free mammograms
to women aged 35 and above. Another initiative started in 2017 subsidises primary health careprovision for low-income households - the state provides RM500 (equivalent to €108) per year for
medical expenses.7

Case study E - Berlin, Germany: Housing
The German capital Berlin has seen average rent price double in just five years. Local governments
have responded to residents’ outcries with decisive measures, such as the public acquisition ofprivatised housing units and a policy to halt rising rents. In Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg, for example,
the district senate has supported residents in stopping the sale of 670 apartments to real estateholding Deutsche Wohnen. Affected tenants had feared disproportionate rent rises due tounnecessary renovation projects imposed by the company. The Federal State of Berlin called upon
the district court to prevent the sales, but had its request rejected in 2018. Circumventing legal
restrictions, the senate enabled tenants to make use of their pre-emption right by means of aso-called ‘stretched acquisition’: tenants could ‘buy’ the apartments and then sell them on to the
public Berlin Housing Association. In late 2019, the Housing Association further repurchased 6000

15 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

apartments in the districts Spandau and Reinickendorf - the largest act of remunicipalisation inGerman history. In October 2019, the Berlin state passed a rent control law, which freezes rents at
the June 2019 level for the next five years, while also capping rental payments at a set maximum.8
Tenants of 1.5 million homes are going to benefit from these changes. Against the backdrop ofthese municipal actions, the tenant movement is growing fast: demands for a referendum on thetransfer into public ownership of around 240,000 apartments currently in the hands of Deutsche
Wohnen is gaining traction.

5. (Re)municipalisation stops precarious work
Privatisation, outsourcing, PPPs, austerity measures and similar policies are often justified with claims
the private sector is more efficient and will save public funds. In reality, when private operators do
reduce costs, they often do so at the expense of public service workers. By cutting jobs, eroding working
conditions and undermining collective bargaining, privatisation is a powerful driver of precarious work.
This is a problem not only for workers, their families and local communities, but also for users as service
quality and access decline.
In contrast, there are many examples of remunicipalisation and insourcing where local councils havesaved money while improving working conditions and/or pay. Since 2011, London’s Islington council
has taken back contracts worth about £380 million in cleaning, building and grounds maintenance, andwaste management services. The move has meant better pay and working conditions for 1,200 frontline
employees, and generated savings of about £14 million. In Kragerø, Norway, remunicipalisation of waste
management led to a 14 per cent reduction in fees for residents, while delivering an increase in workers’
wages and pensions.
This report documents at least 158 cases of municipalisation and remunicipalisation which improved
conditions for workers, including pay, occupational health and safety, freedom of association andcollective bargaining, freedom of speech and worker participation in decision-making.These 158 cases
demonstrate that providing quality employment and improving workers’ conditions while valuing theirknowledge and experience about how service should be organised and operated go hand-in-hand withbuilding economically efficient public services that are accessible to all. It is no coincidence that workers
and their unions are often at the forefront of remunicipalisation efforts.

Case study F - Seoul, South Korea: Cleaning in urban transport
A capital of nearly 10 million residents, Seoul has undergone a comprehensive labour policy
reform under the leadership of the current mayor Park Won-soon. Between 2013 and 2017, thecity regularised the employment status of 7,296 workers in the public sector, of which 70 per centare cleaners. Many of them are now directly employed by the two new public corporations Seoul
Metro Environment and Seoul Urban Rail Green Environment, after they had previously worked for
subcontractors which provided no social or health protection and did not pay them properly. Theirsalaries have since gone up by an average of 7.3 per cent, and their welfare rights have become
standardised. Despite increased labour costs, the city’s balance sheet has improved, too, as theelimination of management fees and 10 per cent VAT payments to subcontractors have significantly
reduced operational costs.

6. Remunicipalisation can improve public health
The health care sector is facing ever-growing privatisation pressure, including from outsourcing andcompetitive tenders. Profit-making service providers and facilities are enjoying a growing market thanks
to liberalisation driven largely by international trade and investment agreements.
16 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Remunicipalisation and municipalisation in the health sector is benefitting public health, especially forthe most vulnerable families. Examples include public clinics in Delhi, India, a regional hospital complex
in Helsinki, Finland and new public pharmacies in 40 Chilean municipalities. These cases highlight how
public authorities have established solid commitments to protect public health by investing in anddirectly providing services.

Case study G - Recoleta (Santiago Metropolitan Region), Chile: Access to medicines
In a country where neoliberalism is deeply embedded, the commune of Recoleta has beenswimming against the current. In this commune in the North of Santiago,13.86 per cent of the
population live in poverty; that is more than double the average poverty rate of the Region. Mayor
Daniel Jadue, who won the 2012 elections, has begun to recover public ownership of healthcare, and has created new public services in education and housing to better support the local
residents. Many Chileans still depend on privately owned pharmacies to receive their medication
and are vulnerable to unregulated price-setting, which is exacerbated by the monopoly of justthree companies operating 90 per cent of all dispensaries. With the aim of providing affordable
medicines for the population, the local government of Recoleta created the country’s first “popular
pharmacy” in 2015. Recovering the role of the state as a direct supplier of goods, this model has
also revived the solidarity aspect of social security by facilitating equal access through subsidies for
those with lower incomes. Now in its fifth year of operation, the model has proven very effective
too: Calculations by the municipality show a significant cut in the cost of medicine for residents;
some people’s monthly medical bills have seen reductions of up to 70 per cent.9

Case study H - São Paulo, Brazil: Harm reduction
For the last 20 years, the São Paulo neighbourhood of Luz has been known for its high share ofresidents struggling with homelessness and an addiction to crack cocaine. Many public initiatives
tried to address this issue during the 1990s and 2000s, but a focus on neighbourhood security
and the criminalisation of addicts. In January 2014, then mayor Fernando Haddad worked with
community leaders and local NGOs to negotiate the removal of 147 tents and to start a dialogue
with crack cocaine users. In particular, the publicly funded Open Arms project reached out todrug users to offer accommodation, three meals a day, a job at the municipality and access tohealth services, while not requiring their clients to stop using drugs. Since this new public service
programme was created, 73 per cent of people who were helped by Open Arms stopping using
crack cocaine, with the new programme saving the state R$68 million during the same period.

7. Remunicipalisation helps build democratic public ownership
Public ownership is not always democratic and efficient. The public sector can be captured bybureaucracy and inefficiency, but also by vested interests, corruption and authoritarian rulers. However,the same problems can similarly affect private sector companies and organisations.
Building strong, high-quality public services requires new forms of public ownership where residents candirectly and indirectly participate in democratic decision-making. Many forms exist. A (re)municipalisedor new municipal company can democratise its governance by ensuring that user representatives areon the board, as is the case for water services in Grenoble and Paris. In Denmark, the law enables publiccompanies to reserve one third of the seats on their boards for worker representatives.
Our research identified clear references to improved democratic control and public ownership as aresult of remunicipalisation in at least 149 cases. The Mexican city of Ramos Arizpe stopped a PPP for

17 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

water services and successfully remunicipalised the service in 2014. The mayor announced that the new
public company, COMPARA would open up participation in order to transform the relationship between
the service provider and users. The Technical Council, one of the company’s main governance bodies, iscomposed of the mayor, two representatives from the state government water operator, the manager of
the COMPARA, experts from a research centre, and activists from the users’ association.10
Changes brought about by (re)municipalisation range from increased accountability and transparency
mechanisms and information disclosure to establishing participatory governance in public corporations.
Representatives of workers and users sitting on the decision-making body of a public entity is oneof the most innovative ways to improve governance and expand the meaning of public ownership.
This representation is enhanced by creating a wider space for users such as peoples’ observatories
and assemblies. Cities such as Paris, Barcelona, and Terrassa, Spain, include worker and citizen
representatives on the advisory boards of their public utilities.
Public ownership can take the form of collaboration with grassroots citizen and worker cooperatives,
or of co-ownership shared between a public authority and a not-for-profit association. In Wolfhagen,Germany the cooperative that helped fund the town’s wind turbines owns a quarter of the public energy
company, with two seats on the board. This co-ownership, which happened after the local electricity grid
was remunicipalised, resulted in lower power bills, investments in its kindergarten and almost doubling
the number of staff.
Interestingly, collaborations and partnerships with community based organisations tend to reinvent theculture of public institutions and encourage deeper democratic practice. There are many examples ofpublic authorities working with nonprofits and cooperatives. For example, various Dutch municipalities
support the non-profit association Wireless Leiden to provide free internet in some parts of the City of
Leiden and surrounding towns. Across Spain, proactive cities are choosing cooperative energy retailers
such as Som Energia, GoiEner and EnergÉtica over large private companies.

Case study I - Terrassa, Spain: Water supply
In Catalonia’s third largest city Terrassa, citizen platform Taula de l’Aigua de Terrassa began to
campaign for a return to public water management in 2014. Their Social Pact for Public Water,which aims to ensure the public, integrated and participatory management of the entire water
cycle, gained support from candidates of the municipal election 2015. The newly elected City
Council in 2015 passed a motion in favour of direct water management in 2016. Taigua waseventually born as a public enterprise in 2018 and new regulations were approved to establish
the Terrassa Water Observatory (Observatorio del Agua de Terrassa - OAT). This observatory is anindependent organisation abides by the Social Pact for Public Water and has the decision-making
power to influence the public water management. Designed to facilitate citizen participationand strategic decisions for the water supply service, the highest governing body of the OAT iscomposed of a representative of each political group, the municipal government, technical service
staff, businesses, community groups, unions and research groups from the local university. As it
has taken up the challenge to govern and co-produce water services together with its users, theOAT has become a point of reference as new, collaborative public water model for many othermunicipalities in Catalonia and Spain11.

18 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Case study J - Plymouth, UK: Energy transition
In 2013, the City of Plymouth and its residents established the Plymouth Energy Community (PEC), a
member-owned community benefit organization, whose profits are reinvested into the community.
The city provided a grant, loans and staff expertise to the organisation to boost local capacities to“create a fair, affordable, low-carbon energy system with local people at its heart”. In 2014, the PEC
developed its own green energy arm, PEC Renewables, which funds, installs and manages local
schemes to generate renewable energy. By 2019, PEC has already supported more than 20,000
households in saving over £1 million on their energy bills, clearing a total of over £26,000 in small
debts. PEC has also built a solar farm on a plot of contaminated land, which combined with therooftop panels on schools and community buildings, has enabled the city to produce enough clean
electricity to supply 2,000 homes. The revenue is expected to amount up to £1.5 million over the
20 years of the project’s lifetime, and will be reinvested in projects to reduce carbon and energy
poverty in Plymouth. As the municipality continues to work alongside PEC, this public-community
partnership has become the democratic driving force of Plymouth’s localised energy transition.

8. Remunicipalisation must engage and learn from workers
Alliances of trade unions and civil society organisations have led numerous fights against privatisation
to victory. In Lagos, Nigeria a unions-communities-NGOs alliance built a citizens’ vision and strategies
to reform the state water company, as an alternative to privatisation. Public Services International(PSI) with its members has identified lessons about how to prepare for upcoming public services
remunicipalisation12.
Remunicipalisation of public services involves and affects workers, who are the people operating theservice and entrenched in its fabric. A transition from a private to public entity is a complex processwith every case unique due to local and national regulations that affect workers’ pay and entitlements,
job descriptions and career development paths. Service continuation during a transition from private to
public is a high priority and poses an enormous challenge. The national federation can provide strategic
advice and other support to local branches. Based on the experiences of union members, PSI argues
that reciprocal links between the national federation and local branches is critically important during thevulnerable transition time.
The Norwegian municipal workers’ union demonstrated successful union strategies following themassive bankruptcy of RenoNorden, which affected 137 municipalities’ waste collection services.13 The
national head office and local branch teamed up to influence city councils of the affected municipalities
to vote against the new tender and bring waste services back in-house instead. The Norwegian public
services union Fagforbundet’s Oslo branch turned a vulnerable transition period into an opportunity
by growing its membership with their inclusive recruitment strategies. The Fagforbundet teams
recruited workers of the private company - many of them migrants with temporary contacts - prior to
remunicipalisation. They successfully built up solidarity with non-union workers during the transition.
One example of the role workers can play comes from Norway, where local tripartite cooperation is
exercised in more than half of the municipalities. Politicians, administrative leaders and trade unions
work constructively to create a culture of cooperation that promotes finding the best local solutions
to the specific challenges facing the municipality. By creating a forum to share ideas and suggestions,employee and other voices normally not heard by the management of the municipality are given aplatform and handled systematically. Fagforbundet argues that tripartite cooperation is a useful tool toimprove services from workers’ point of view after remunicipalisation and also helps to counter further
outsourcing and privatisation forces in the public sector.

19 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

9. Transforming public ownership for ecofeminist public services
Ecofeminist public services put people and the planet at the centre, not private profit. Having a feminist
approach to public services, in order to build ecofeminist public services, requires a transformation of
how public services are owned and organised which go beyond mere representation.
Privatisation, public-private partnerships and outsourcing are focused on short-term financial gain.Thesemodels of service delivery tend to worsen already existing injustices and harm vulnerable residents thatare more reliant on public services, a disproportionate number of whom are women. The pursuit ofprofit often leads to rate hikes, compromising access to services.
When austerity measures and privatisations cut subsidies and make child, elderly and other types ofcare unaffordable, this unpaid labour tends to fall to women because of a gendered division of labour.
In addition, there’s a high concentration of women working in the public care, cleaning and education
sectors, who bear the brunt when these sectors are privatised. Together, the impacts of privatisation
hit already marginalised groups hardest, especially those who face discrimination on the labour market
and have lower incomes. As a result, women of colour, indigenous women, migrant women, LGBTQI+
persons, among others, pay the highest price for privatisation. Privatisations and gender justice are
therefore fundamentally opposed. However, while reversing privatisation and rebuilding public services
increases accessibility, public ownership is no guarantee of gender justice.
While it’s very important that women are equally represented in leadership positions, this alone won’t
ensure that a public service is meeting the essential needs of poorer women. A feminist approach would
enable deeper levels of democratisation where public services are run from the bottom up.This requires
new mechanisms through which marginalised groups, including indigenous communities, have thedecision-making power to ensure that a public service is prioritising the needs of the many instead ofthe elite few.
Some Philippine cities are at the forefront of providing women-focused services.The Bagong Silang
Cooperative, located in Caloocan (Philippines), was created by the women of this poor urban community
to supply its members with bulk water. Profits are paid back to its members and reinvested inpublic services, such as child care. As of 2019, it is serving 742 households. In another example, themunicipality of Binalonan in the Philippines has been providing child care, financial assistance towomen and children, single parents and senior citizens, and free primary health care since 2015. The
surfing town of Lanuza has created a Disaster Risk Reduction and Rehabilitation unit to improve theresiliency of the municipality in the face of a worsening climate crisis. As the local economy is highly
dependent on its forests, watersheds and mangroves, it is using a comprehensive framework that takes
the interdependence between people’s livelihoods and the whole ecosystem into account. In order toenhance the resiliency of the town, the unit is particularly prioritising the needs of women, children, theelderly and people with disabilities.

10. Remunicipalisation can strengthen community wealth and local economies
Reclaiming and creating publicly owned services such as waste collection, food services, cleaning andtelecommunications can transform entire communities. When a utility company is democraticallycontrolled, it is far more likely to reinvest its profits back into the community and localise the economy.
Community wealth building, a term coined by the US-based Democracy Collaborative, refers to engaging
anchor institutions whose procurement, employment and investment decisions can bring ecological andequitable economic development.
Anchor institutions, ranging from the municipality itself to public telecom companies and communityowned waste facilities, are locally rooted and have the capacity to improve people’s quality of life. For

20 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

example, local governments are using public procurement to contract with worker cooperatives tokeep their cities clean (for example, in Valparaíso, Chile) or partnering with local farmers to protect
groundwater and sell organic food to school restaurants (as is the case in Rennes, France). Localising the
economy can also take the form of municipalities taking public services out of the market and reducing
any user fees. For example, in 2011, Islington council (UK) brought 35,000 council homes back in house.
Six years later, the municipality created the new public energy company Angelic Energy. It aims to focus
on fair gas and power prices, in particular for lower-income households.
Our research counts 297 (re)municipalisations that contribute to community wealth building andhelp sustain a resilient local economy. Some of these examples involve using locally abundantnatural resources more wisely, while others create meaningful jobs for residents in the area and newsustainable business activities. The preservation and build up of local ecological knowledge and practices
are pivotal to building future-proof public services.

Case study K - Cities across the United States: Telecommunication
A total of 141 new public telecommunication services have been created by local authorities in
the United States during the past few years. Aimed at improving access and democratic control,
municipalities have come up with schemes to deliver jobs and increase economic activity(Tullahoma, Chattanooga and Thomasville, Tennessee), improve the quality of life (Wilson, North
Carolina and Mount Washington, Massachusetts), and advance access to health care and education(EC Fiber in Vermont). In Thomasville, Georgia, the publicly owned Community Network Services(CNS) have been credited with helping to support small businesses and a thriving downtown area.
The local government of Scott County, Minnesota, created a public fiber network by first connecting
anchor institutions, such as school and municipal facilities. The network has created more than
1,000 jobs and has tremendously improved the internet access for schools in the area. Public
ownership has also resulted in major savings for the local school district, whose telecom expenses
went down from $58 to $7 per megabit. In Morristown, Tennessee, the newly created and publicly
owned fiber network, FiberNET does not only provide excellent and affordable internet services tofamilies, businesses and public institutions. It has also delivered major savings, job growth and has
prompted companies to relocate to Morristown due to the faster internet speed14.

Case study L - Zabbaleen Community in Cairo, Egypt: Waste management
The Zabaleen community consists of around 70,000 residents and has traditionally been sorting
about two thirds of Cairo’s mostly organic waste - up to 15,000 tons every day. Their door-to-door
waste collection and management system has enabled recycling rates of 85 per cent and relies
heavily on pigs, which feed on the food waste.
After Cairo’s waste management was privatised in early 2000, the private companies that took
over only achieved recycling rates of around 25 per cent. They even failed to collect the waste fromcertain parts of the city, as they required residents to bring their rubbish to central collection points
themselves, while charging people for this poor service via their electricity bills. Zabaleen workers
who had been recruited to help the companies with the sorting now earned 75 per cent less than
before. After hundreds of lawsuits over the inclusion of waste management costs on electricity bills,
the Cairo government in 2017 decided to remunicipalise the system and again partner with theZabaleen community. The Zabaleen waste management system demonstrates that it is possible tocreate a circular economy even in mega cities like Cairo, which is home to 18 million inhabitants15.

21 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

11. (Re)municipalisation is a strategy to tackle the climate emergency
It will be impossible to tackle the climate crisis as long as private operators are running energy services
and infrastructure for profit. Maximising sales and a return on investment are at odds with energy
conservation, which is a key to achieving an energy transition. Municipalities and public authorities are
better positioned to prioritise long-term ecological concerns over short-term financial considerations.
Our research found out that tackling the climate crisis, for example by switching to renewable energy
and reducing CO2 emissions, was a key reason to (re)municipalise a public service in at least 119 cases.
The majority of these cases are in the energy sector. The number of energy (re)municipalisations
increased by almost 20 percent to 371 between 2017 and 2019.
In many countries a small number of large private corporations monopolize the market. Despite
decades long pressure from civil society, most energy corporations continue to extract ever more fossil
fuels. This is a key reason for communities and cities to reverse energy privatisation or, like Nottingham
in the UK, create a new municipal energy company. In a liberalised energy market, where competition
favours the big players, most municipalities do not have the ability to expropriate a private company.
However, they may be able to create a new public energy company that invests in renewable energy
and energy efficiency projects, and generates solar and wind energy locally. By retrofitting public andresidential buildings, municipalities can significantly reduce their energy use, and make energy more
affordable for everyone.
In 2018, the Bulgarian city of Dobrich remunicipalised its street lighting. As of late 2019, the city has
replaced 1,500 old light bulbs with energy efficient LED units. This has cut electricity use for street
lighting by 47 per cent. The city also retrofitted 71 municipal building and 41 residential apartment
blocks, leading to heating bills that were between 30 and 60 per cent lower for thousands of families.
Ending privatisation allows municipalities to coordinate public policy in order to meet today’s biggest
challenges, including the climate crisis and poverty rates. Our research identified at least 209 (re)municipalisations that strive for better policy coordination to improve equality, sustainability and social
cohesion, for example, by interlinking emissions reductions and energy poverty. While privatised powercompanies not only tend to continue to rely on fossil fuels, their price hikes can also leave residents inthe cold and heat16.
Reclaiming transport and waste services and encouraging local organic food provision can also help
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, the recent remunicipalisation of public transport in the
Dutch cities of Rotterdam and Den Haag has enabled both cities to partially replace the fleet with electricbuses. In another case, when the French city of Briançon remunicipalised its waste services in 2013 it
committed to achieving ‘zero waste,’ and reduced the amount of waste produced by 33 per cent.

Case study M - Cities across the Philippines: Local government services
Both the impacts of the climate crisis and municipal responses can differ widely from one
geographical context to another. The Philippines, like so many other countries in the global South,
has already been at the frontline of the climate crisis for a long time. The local governments ofDumangas, Gerona, and Siargao have created climate schools to increase the capacity of farmers
and fishing communities to address the impact extreme weather events and other climate-related
hazards, which are badly impacting their incomes and livelihoods. By learning how to monitor
weather changes and how to adjust agricultural practices accordingly, students of the Dumangas
climate school have managed to improve local rice production.17

22 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Case study N - Rennes, France: Water management, organic agriculture, and quality food for school children
Rennes, in the Brittany region of France, remunicipalised its water service in 2014. In a region
known for its polluting, industrial agriculture, protecting water sources was a key long-term concern
for the remunicipalised operator, alongside related objectives such as promoting local agriculture
and ensuring quality food for children in daycare and school cafeterias. The city launched a
programme called Terre de sources (“land of sources”) in 2015, which has been helping farmers
with the switch to an ecological agricultural production mode free of pesticides, as a way to prevent
pollution at the source. Simultaneously, the initiative has created a local demand for the farmers’
produce by linking up with school canteens in the wider Rennes area and by creating a brand newlabel under the Terre de Sources name that facilitates commercial sales of the local, sustainably
produced foods in supermarkets. Other French cities, including Paris, have developed similar
programmes to protect their catchment areas and avoid expensive water treatment costs.

12. Public-public cooperation can counter corporate power
Remunicipalisation can be a very uneven battle. Local public authorities and communities have far fewer
resources than big corporations. Local, national and international cooperation between public operators
is key to shifting the balance of power. Whether informal or institutionally formalised, this sort of publicpublic cooperation has often been critical to the growth and extension of remunicipalisation. This was
the case in the French water sector, where Suez and Veolia initially controlled all the levers of power –policy, research, technology and advice to local authorities18.
Public-public cooperation remains essential after remunicipalisation, especially when it comes toresearch and development, to solidify a new public service and ensure it can respond to new challenges.
Partnerships between public operators as well as with academic institutions can offer an effective
response. This knowledge creation and management is not done for commercial reasons, with the intent
of developing and selling patented technological solutions, but with the public interest in mind, and in a
way that allows for flexibility in the adaptation of knowledge to local conditions.
Public-public cooperation is also key to extending public services to countries or areas that the private
sector has been unwilling or unable to deal with, such as rural regions, low-income neighbourhoods anddisinvested communities. It was key in extending community-owned broadband internet infrastructure
to small and rural towns in the US. In the water sector, not-for-profit public-public partnerships withestablished operators have helped newly created or fragile operators (for instance in the global South)
to consolidate their operations and become more efficient.
Often, the consolidation of public services in rural regions and urban areas – merging small local
public services into larger ones – is seen as being favourable to privatisation, as it creates larger
markets that are more desirable for private companies. Interestingly, harnessing the force of publicpublic cooperation can turn this situation upside down and make consolidation an opportunity for
remunicipalisation at a larger scale.

Case study O - Nice metropolitan area, France: Water
Councillors from Nice and its surrounding communes announced in 2013 that the city’s water
services would gradually shift towards public management. The private company that had beenin charge of water management in the fifth largest city in France had been in operation ever since
the city’s water system was first set up in 1864. Today, 33 of Nice’s 49 municipalities - roughly 80
per cent of the population - depend on the newly created public company, Eau d’Azur. The main

23 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Servicesreason that the city chose the path of remunicipalisation was its aim to establish a principle of‘territorial solidarity’ across the whole of Nice’s metropolitan area. Nice Côte d’Azur, which was
the first “metropolitan area” created in France in 2012, is unique in its vast extent from the alpine
peaks of the Mercantour National Park all the way to the Mediterranean Sea. A very big majorityof its land is located in rural or mountainous areas. The primary reason for the private-to-public
shift was that the private management had become “unsuitable” for an area of this size and ofsuch varied landscapes. Only public management was seen to be able to promote solidaritybased relationships and the necessary “pooling of resources” between the metropolitan area’s
municipalities. Eau d’Azur is now planning to further standardise the quality of its service and its
water prices throughout the metropolitan area.

Case study P - Nottingham, UK: Energy supply
Robin Hood Energy is a municipal energy supplier (and Living Wage employer) in Nottingham,
where it was created in 2015 to fight energy poverty and challenge the country’s Big Six energy
companies with its guaranteed price transparency and its ban of private shareholders andmanagement bonuses. Today, this not-for-profit company assists and partners with nine otherUK cities that have set up their own “white label” enterprises to offer the same affordable tariff to
all residents. Through these public partnerships, Robin Hood Energy is already serving a total ofover 130,000 users across the country. The company is reinvesting all its surplus (already £200,000
pounds in 2019) in more renewable and affordable energy services, for example, by offering awarm home discount. It also partners with a number of social housing associations and supports
municipalities in the provision of energy efficiency services.19

Conclusion: Moving forward
Remunicipalisation and municipalisation are powerful political strategies to push back against
privatisation and the extractive economy at large. Most national governments are failing to tackle
extreme inequality and the ecological crisis, while at the same time many cities are stepping up to tackle
these challenges and improve the livelihoods of their residents. Residents and workers have much togain from pushing their local governments to reverse privatisation and democratise their public services.
Some of the most progessive municipalities are recentering their policies and public services to prioritiseneeds of the most marginalised people in our society, including migrants, people with disabilities andlow-income families, among others. Fearless municipalities share decision-making powers and open up
ownership models to representatives of users, workers, civil society and research institutions. Public
ownership sometimes has the reputation of being top-down, discarding the realities on the ground. But
many cases presented here demonstrate that the democratic innovation they are delivering put the“public” back into public services and build 21st century public ownership.
Municipalities are on the forefront of building democratic public ownership. These municipal practices
from the participatory mechanisms of citizen observatories, diversified public ownership to worker
engagement can inspire a broader, country-wide vision of democratic public ownership. These collective
bottom-up experiences to build public ownership are not only needed but also a powerful basis to push
for public ownership on all levels.
In the United States, numerous cities are advocating for locally owned and controlled energy andbanking services. Now the youth-led Sunrise Movement, various trade unions and presidential candidate
Bernie Sanders, are calling for a national Green New Deal that centers around public ownership of

24 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

energy and finance. When municipalities team up with social movements, they can reset a country’s
political agenda.
In the face of huge corporate forces that are teaming up for ever more market rule, competition andprivatisations, we have a big battle to fight. The EU Services directive or Bolkestein Directive has pushedliberalisation in a wide range of services already for a decade. In 2018, powerful services businesslobbies that want even more hard-core libelarisation nearly managed the EU to pass the Services
Notification Procedure. Thanks to the concerted concerns raised, it is being held at this moment, but itwould mean to erase grey zone of service liberalisation and further to rein in municipal policy space. The
countless trade and investment agreements that provide transnational corporations with the legal tools
to sue national governments for hundreds of millions to billions of dollars, when democratic decisionsof municipalities may curb future profits. As long as municipal and cooperative enterprises will haveto compete with the big business, the majority of small-scale solutions will have a hard time surviving.
The many Danish and some German energy cooperatives that have disappeared because of increased
competition is the painful proof of this.
When social movements act together in demanding democratic public ownership on the regional andcountry level, we could actually change the design of how our economy and public services are run.
More bold proposals, like the alliance in South Africa calling for transforming Eskom, one of the biggest
electricity companies in the world, into a fully public and people-serving utility.20 The 2019 UK Labour
platform is a good example of the type of national support and policy framework that allows local
governments to reclaim public services and rebuild their capacity to directly provide local services.
Since austerity measures following the 2008 financial crisis have slashed municipal public sector
budgets, it’s of utmost importance to transform how public resources are spent. In the current model
public finance is used to absorb risk by guaranteeing the profits of private investors - at a high publiccost. As Thomas Marois points out, worldwide, public finance institutions have US$73 trillion in assets,with over half in the hands of public banks.21 This is equivalent to 93 percent of global Gross Domestic
Product. Hence, it would be much more effective if national and municipal governments would cut out
the big private middle men and invest these public funds directly into society. Combining direct public
investments with much needed progressive tax system could nurture territorial solidarity by writing
universal public services into reality.
Our research demonstrates that when public services are publicly owned and democratically organised
they can effectively strengthen community wealth and local economy. Let’s extend the demand for
democratic public ownership on all levels and start calling for universal access on the country scale sothat all residents can lead dignified and prosperous lives. As racism, facism and the far right are on therise, offering viable systemic solutions that work for people and planet can again build common groundwhere no one is left behind. Our public future lies in the hands of communities – not corporations.

AppendixResearch methodology
The remunicipalisation and municipalisation data that has been gathered is the result of the concerted
efforts of several citizen organisations, researchers and trade unions. Seventeen organisations22 worked
jointly and collected data. Twenty two researchers did desktop research to verify the collected data.
Data collection for this report took place over a period from mid-2015 to late 2016 (phase1) and fromthe beginning 2018 to mid-2019 (phase 2). The information is based on a participatory survey that asked
participants to identify cases of (re)municipalisation in their jurisdictions (phase1). Questionnaires were25 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

distributed in trade union and civil society networks, as well as to organisations working in the fieldof public services. We asked respondents to elaborate on the reasons for (re)municipalisation and to
explain why the service is now in public hands.
Our survey focused on essential services, including water, energy, transport, waste management,
recycling, health and social work, and education. We also included a catch-all category for ‘local
government services,’ which include building and cleaning, security and emergency, public (green) space,housing, school catering, sports, cultural activities, funeral services, construction and repair, humanresources, IT and other. In the second phase of our research, we added telecommunication/internet
services as a new category.
Due to limited time and resources, the list of survey recipients is far from comprehensive, withnotable gaps in particularly Africa and Australia. There is no doubt that many more cases remain to bediscovered. The current survey does not include cases where a service has been remunicipalised andthen privatised again, or where the contract simply shifts from one private provider to another. These
cases are obviously outside of our research scope. The following data were collected:
Year of decision and implementation of remunicipalisation and municipalisation, Previous private
operator, Name of remunicipalised new operator, Ownership structure after (re)municipalisation, Howde-privatisation happened (E: Contract expired, not renewed and remunicipalised, S: Shares sold byprivate operator, contract remunicipalised, T: Contract terminated, and remunicipalised, W: Private
operator withdrew (from management) contract, contract remunicipalised, P: Public acquisition, D:
Decision to remunicipalise, not implemented yet), Level of taking back control (Municipal, Intermunicipal,
State/ province/ regional), Types of actions (A1. Remunicipalisation including through public-public
partnerships (typically inter-municipal cooperation), A2. Partnerships between public authorities andcitizen/worker cooperatives taking over from profit-driven commercial services providers, A3. Worker
and/or citizen-led cooperatives taking over from profit-driven commercial services providers, B1.
Creation of new public companies (typically municipally-owned) and/or services by local authority,
B2. Creation of new public companies and/or services and/or infrastructure by local authority incollaboration with cooperatives or civil society.
In the second phase, we worked to capture impacts and outcomes of remunicipalisation andmunicipalisation, In many cases, the examples are new and it is too early to draw conclusions. In manyother cases, we simply could not access detailed information. Researchers focused on cases where theprovision of public services was based on clear public objectives and a certain degree of democratic
control by people using the service. These public objectives include transparency, equity, universal
access, affordability, environmental sustainability, service quality, control over the local economy andresources, and fair pay for workers. Democratic control refers to participation and accountability on
the part of elected officials and/or users. Based on the information collected by researchers and theparticipatory survey, we coded the identified outcomes when we could find clear references, using thesecategories:
1

Better value for money and public sector savings

2

Lower fees for residents

3

Better working conditions

4

Increased public investment for quality services

5

Responding to private sector bankruptcy

6

Increased local capacity for community wealth building

7

Achieving policy goals that benefit people and planet

8

Measures to tackle the climate crisis

26 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

9

Improved democratic control and public ownership

10

Users, workers or communities partner with public authority

11

Universal access to protect human and social rights

12

Enhancing public health and harm reduction

13

A feminist approach to public services

Finally, this report is extensively supported by fifteen essays written by Bjørn Pettersen/Nina Monsen,
Benjamin Gestin/Eric Pfliegersdoerfer, Robert Ramsay, Thomas Enghausen, Vera Weghmann, MaryAnn Manahan/Laura Stegemann, Alexander Panez Pinto, Thomas Hanna/Christopher Mitchell, Olivier
Petitjean, Daria Cibrario, Milo Fiasconaro, Míriam Planas/Juan Martínez, Lavinia Steinfort, David Halland Hilary Wainwright. These essays provide the insights of remunicipalisation in the authors’ countries
and sectors as well as cross sectoral thematic issues. All essays are presented as working papers at the
Future is Public Conference (Dec. 4-5th 2019) and will be published as a book in 2020 (working title:‘Remunicipalisation - Democratic Public Ownership of the Commons’).

Additional infographics

How de-privatisation happened
586

197

40

34

contracts
expiredcontracts
terminatedshares sold byprivate operators

decisions
to remunicipalise

33

19 ?
N/A

15

private operators
withdrew

publicacquisition

Level of taking back control
Municipal
922

27 | The Future is Public: Towards Democratic Ownership of Public Services

Intermunicipal
331

Regional
155

Endnotes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8
9
10
11
12

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

https://www.tni.org/en/publication/reclaiming-public-services
See the working paper 3 ‘Canada: local insourcing in face of national privatization push’ by Robert Ramsay
https://www.nao.org.uk/report/pfi-and-pf2/
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/PFI-and-PF2.pdf
See the working paper 5 ‘Africa: Private waste service failure & alternative vision’ by Vera Weghmannhttps://undocs.org/A/73/396
Maryannchapter, Portal Rasmi Kerajaan Negeri Selangor, “Inisiatif Peduki Rakyat”, Available athttps://www.selangor.gov.my.index.php/pages/view/2534
Also see the working paper 6 ‘Putting the ‘public’ in public services: (Re)Municipalisation cases in Malaysia
and the Philippines by Mary Ann Manahan and Laura Stegemann)
https://stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/wohnen/wohnraum/mietendeckel/
See working paper 7 ‘ Rebuilding public ownership in Chile: The social practices of the Recoleta commune
and the challenges to overcoming neoliberalism by Alexander Panez Pinto
http://www.remunicipalisation.org/#case_Ramos%20Arizpe
See the working paper 12 ‘Spain/Catalonia: can Terrassa’s new public water service be a model?’ by Míriam
Planas and Juan Martínez
See the working paper 10 ‘The labour dimension of remunicipalisation: public service workers and tradeunions in transition’ by Public Services International and the working paper 4 ‘Outsourcing - problems without benefits?’ by Thomas Enghausen
See the working paper 1 ‘Norway: Bankruptcy sparks more than 100 cases of remunicipalisation’ by Nina
Monsen and Bjørn Pettersen
See the working paper 8 ‘USA: communities providing affordable, fast broadband internet’ by Thomas M.
Hanna and Christopher Mitchell
See the working pape 5 ‘ Africa: Private waste service failure & alternative vision’ by Vera Weghmann
See the working paper 13 ‘ Building democratic energy economies to avert the climate breakdown’ by
Lavinia Steinfort
http://resilient-cities.iclei.org/fileadmin/sites/resilient-cities/files/Images_and_logos/dumangas_climate_field_
school.pdf
See the working paper 9 ‘The Empire Strikes Back: Corporate Responses to Remunicipalisation’ by Olivier
Petitjeanhttps://www.cn2019.org/fileadmin/inhalte/Presentations/WS4_The_city_as_an_energy_services_provider.pdf
https://www.new-eskom.org/
https://www.tni.org/en/publicfinanceTransnational Institute (TNI), Multinational Observatory, Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), PublicServices International (PSI), Austrian Federal Chamber of Labours (AK), Ingeniería Sin Fronteras CATALUÑA
(ISF), Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU), We Own It (UK), University of Glasgow (Scotland),Norwegian Union of Municipal and General Employees (Fagforbundet), Democracy Collaborative (USA), MODATIMA (movement of defence of water, land and environment-Chile), Aqua Publica Europea, Danish Union
of Public Employees (FOA), Municipal Services Project (MSP-Canada), EPSU (European Federation of PublicService Unions) and the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV)

This report is presented as a draft at the Future is Public conference (December2019) to invite feedback and strengthen our analysis. Your views are important
and welcome. This report and 15 working papers together form the conference
resources. The Transnational Institute and co-publishers plan to publish the
improved report and final papers as a book in 2020.
To access the conference resources: https://futureispublic.org/