> For natural monopolies, public management seems to work best.
What makes you think so? If the government can't incentivize a private company with a natural monopoly so that it provides an effective service, why would it inherently be easier for it to incentivize public employees to provide an effective service?
It's not like it's immediately obvious from superficial inspection either, it seems to me like there are relative success cases and failure cases of both publicly and privately run natural monopolies. For example, taking rail transport: the UK has privatized it trains and the result is lack-luster, France has a state run railway company which seems to do a pretty good job, and Japan has at least notionally privatized it's railways and provides famously world-class rail service).
What makes you think so? If the government can't incentivize a private company with a natural monopoly so that it provides an effective service, why would it inherently be easier for it to incentivize public employees to provide an effective service?
It's not like it's immediately obvious from superficial inspection either, it seems to me like there are relative success cases and failure cases of both publicly and privately run natural monopolies. For example, taking rail transport: the UK has privatized it trains and the result is lack-luster, France has a state run railway company which seems to do a pretty good job, and Japan has at least notionally privatized it's railways and provides famously world-class rail service).