The price of public services
Local procurement costs change greatly depending on the scale, the country, the existence of local markets and the capacity of local governments to find good providers. But we have wonder many times: what is the price of this particular public service?
This guideline wants to bring some examples of what local governments are paying for infrastructure, goods, and services. We present here a series of infographics that bring specific examples of how much some cities pay for certain services. The prices depend on each of the processes, and they may not be applicable to different parts of the world, or even the same process in the same city but a different time, but they give us a general overview about costs of local services and infrastructure.
The article explores how local governments finance, design, and deliver infrastructure that supports everyday public services delivery. By examining both small prototypes and major investments, it shares some of the costs of deploying basic service delivery at a city level.
Local governments are responsible for public services that keep our cities running:
From collecting waste to providing transport, creating public spaces, or reducing risks before they turn into emergencies. These services shape how safe, clean, and livable a city is and feels.
Public services delivery normally implies contracting out and working closely with the private sector, especially when it comes to building infrastructure, including city roads, bike lanes or bus stops, the maintenance of parks and other public spaces, the deployment of water, gas, or internet networks, etc.
Local infrastructure also contributes to the city’s productivity, which, in turn, creates local jobs and improves living standards. For some experts, investing in local infrastructure is a key driver of local development.
For example, in the United States, a high percentage of the national expenditure on infrastructure comes from state and local governments. In the European Union, local investment focuses on climate adaptation and mitigation, and digital infrastructure. In Latin America and the Caribbean, local and regional governments account for roughly 40–50% of the total investment in public infrastructure.
In Africa, cities are at the frontline of managing rapid urban expansion, making municipal governments key actors in addressing service delivery, risk management, and resilience. Similarly, in South and Southeast Asia, local governments have the primary responsibility for water supply, solid waste management and local mobility, placing municipalities at the center of infrastructure provision that directly affects the daily life of millions of people.
Despite the importance of local infrastructure, it is difficult to understand the real costs of building and maintaining it. It remains distant and hard to understand. Across the world, many local governments face similar challenges: their resources are limited. Insufficient funding is a primary obstacle to service provision. Also, information is fragmented, and sometimes responsibilities are shared across departments that do not always coordinate well among themselves. As a result, problems in delivering basic public services become costly over time for both governments and the communities they serve.
This article does not want to provide an universal price list but wants to show some solutions that may be useful when addressing this issue. For example, small, well-designed local interventions can save time and money. When the information is clear, when costs are visible, and when responsibilities are set, local governments are better equipped to give responses, and residents are better able to understand and engage.
The city cases presented in this article focus on everyday infrastructure challenges. Several of these city projects started small, testing a solution and taking it from there. Others are bigger investments that have involved transformative deployments.
What connects them is not their size, geography, or income level but how they have tried to solve a concrete local problem.
Pasig, Philippines
Bogotá, Colombia
Jalisco, Mexico
Cap-Haïtan, Haiti
Detroit, United States
Fez, Morocco
San Miguelito, Panama
Jalisco, Mexico
Quito, Ecuador
Busanza and Mpazi, Rwanda
What dimensions have been considered in the case studies?
Impact of the service in the lives of people
- What is the problem that is being addressed?
- Who are the beneficiaries?
- What is the impact?
Structure of the costs
- What are the main cost components (civil works, equipment, design, supervision, land acquisition, training)?
- What is the cost per unit (per km, per site, per resident, per beneficiary)?
Equity and inclusion
- Which communities benefit most?
- Does the intervention address underserved or vulnerable population?
Governance and transparency
- Who are the implementing partners and funding sources?
- Is the project disclosed through open contracting or transparency tools?
These questions help unpack infrastructure beyond headline budgets, allowing citizens and policymakers to understand not only how much is spent, but why, for whom, and with long-term implications.
Where have we found the information?
Information about the cost of local infrastructure is difficult to find and many times is not available due to privacy clauses included in contracts. Sharing information about the cost of local infrastructure is a tool for better planning, better coordination, and greater accountability.
By encouraging transparency, participation, and accountability, open local governments to publish information on local infrastructure costs that people can understand, increasing trust. Open data platforms, transparent contracting, and accessible maps make it easier to follow decisions, track spending, and see results.
In our case, most of the information included in the case studies is a result of procurement processes when UNDP has contributed to the project implementation.
Some methodological considerations
It is important to note that cost is highly contextual, and it is difficult to generalize the case’s findings to other locations and scales. Given the cost is so contingent on local context, a local case-study approach for the guideline is used, looking at specific examples from different cities.
Our focus is on the costs local governments face in providing public services and the infrastructure they need to deliver to them, such as roads, bus stations, public transport, and water networks. We do not include the private costs of the services, the efficiency of how infrastructure networks are paid for (e.g., rates, user charges), or the inclusion of non-rate revenue.
Other sources of information on the topic
CoST has developed the Infrastructure Transparency Index (ITI) as a national or subnational assessment instrument to measure levels of infrastructure transparency and the quality of associated processes that enhance participation and accountability. This index helps government, private-sector, and civil-society stakeholders understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of transparency, participation, and accountability within the sector. The instrument was collaboratively designed and is based on international best practices and lessons learned.
The Municipal Green Infrastructure Guide developed by the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP), through its Working Group on Municipal Green Infrastructure of the Local Governments Network +Biodiversidad, is designed to support municipal technical staff and elected officials throughout the different stages of planning, developing, and managing urban and peri-urban green infrastructure strategies. The guide provides practical orientation on the elements that compose green infrastructure, strengthening its multifunctional, multiscale, and multisectoral nature, and offering a framework for defining and implementing actions that enhance territorial resilience and sustainability while optimizing ecosystem services and the life-support benefits provided by nature.
The Urban Infrastructures platform within the Ayuntamiento de Madrid Open Budget portal is an interactive transparency tool that allows users to see how public funds are allocated and spent on urban infrastructure in 2025. It shows what the money is spent on, including investments and urban redevelopment works; who is responsible for the spending, identifying the municipal departments in charge; and the program’s objectives, such as improving public spaces, accessibility, mobility, and overall urban quality.