Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to analyse Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) in the developing and emerging economies as a multifaceted challenge from viewpoint of the 10 keys ‘for’ and ‘against’ PPPs: feasibility; planning; optimization; modernization and development; financing; project delivery; project operation; supervision; user satisfaction and accounting issues. The conceptual model and the reasons were formulated by the authors some 10 years ago, based on the literature and case-study reviews. Relevance of those reasons was verified in practice. The knowledge and critical perspective on the above-stated reasons are relevant for the implementation of PPP projects in any national economy – developed, emerging or developing, but it is quintessential for the implementation of PPPs in the economies that are at the early stage of implementation of PPPs. Although for the identification of the above-stated reasons, wide comparative literature and case-studies review was conducted, the reasons were verified in practice in Slovenia only. Slovenia is considered as one of the most advanced transition countries of Central Europe and a developed economy. This chapter can improve public policy, teaching, learning and practice of PPP implementation in developing and emerging economies. The value of this chapter is in the approach which goes beyond the usual defending or renouncing of PPPs. This chapter also clearly identifies the importance of a sincere motive for the implementation of PPPs by the government as a prerequisite for the successful implementation of PPPs.

The purpose of this paper is to critically assess some of the micro- and macro-economic reasons for using public finance initiative types of public–private partnerships (PPPs) and how a lack of transparency may result in an “illusion” of making optimal, rational decisions related to them. A series of balances that decision makers need to make in order to choose whether or not to use PPPs are set out, as well as 15 potential “illusions” may affect such decisions.

This paper synthesizes published evidence and develops a framework for analyzing PPPs.

A wide range of factors influence the choice of PPPs, including: budget enlargement; efficiency and value for money; certainty of expenditure and delivery; flexibility; financing costs; risk sharing; procurement process and transaction costs; legacy and public assets; and the wider impacts on the local economy. However, reasons why PPPs can provide improved infrastructure and services may not be realised due to in-built incentives, behavioural biases and implementation shortcomings. Necessary support for PPPs includes strong, robust and transparent regulatory and governance systems, the dissemination of good practice to all partners, consideration of alternative funding models and high-quality advice and training.

The paper sets out a number of reasons for using PPPs, and also assesses potential drawbacks and identifies areas where greater research is required. A number of potential “illusions” are identified, whereby decisions may be affected by factors not explicitly or transparently considered, hence giving the decision an “illusion” being rational.

PPPs are significantly influenced by the socio-economic, legal, legislative and financial system they are embedded in. A clear process for approving projects and recognising all the costs and benefits of PPPs is needed, including developing criteria and instruments to measure each phase of a PPP and its overall value added to the economy and society over its lifetime. Full transparency, having suitable support and explicitly taking account of potential “illusions” affecting decisions, could lead to different decisions, including the decision not to progress the project or to use alternative funding and development methods.

Decisions on PPPs should be based on a clear and transparent long-term basis which includes the perspectives of the full range of stakeholders to help improve the appropriate operation and social sustainability of a PPP.

The paper sets out some key arguments for and against the use of PPPs in different circumstances, including why non-optimal decisions may be made.

The unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has further constrained the budgets of governments worldwide for delivering their much-needed infrastructure. Consequently, public-private partnerships (PPPs), with the private sector's investment and ingenuity, would appear to be an increasingly popular alternative. Value for money (VfM) has become the major criterion for evaluating PPPs against the traditional public sector procurement and, however, is plagued with controversy. Hence, it is important that governments compare and contrast their practice with similar and disparate bodies to engender best practice. This paper, therefore, aims to understand governments' assessment context and provide a cross-continental comparison of their VfM assessment.

Faced with different domestic contexts (e.g. aging infrastructure, population growth, and competing demands on finance), governments tend to place different emphases when undertaking the VfM assessment. In line with the theory of boundary spanning, a cross-continental comparison is conducted between three of the most noticeable PPP markets (i.e. the United Kingdom, Australia and China) about their VfM assessment. The institutional level is interpreted by a social, economic and political framework, and the methodological level is elucidated through a qualitative and quantitative VfM assessment.

There are individual institutional characteristics that have shaped the way each country assesses VfM. For the methodological level, we identify that: (1) these global markets use a public sector comparator as the benchmark in VfM assessment; (2) ambiguous qualitative assessment is conducted only against PPPs to strengthen their policy development; (3) Australia's priority is in service provision whereas that of the UK and China is project finance and production; and (4) all markets are seeking an amelioration of existing controversial VfM assessments so that purported VfM relates to project lifecycles. As such, an option framework is proposed to make headway towards a sensible selection of infrastructure procurement approaches in the post COVID-19 era.

This study addresses a current void of enhancing the decision-making process for using PPPs within today's changing environment and then opens up an avenue for future empirical research to examine the option framework and ensuing VfM decisions. Practically, it presents a holistic VfM landscape for public sector procurers that aim to engage with PPPs for their infrastructure interventions.

The purpose of this paper is to review research investigating the implications of public private partnership (PPP) schemes for public investment, focusing on the role and effects of accounting as it relates to the assessment, management, control, reporting, accountability and policy direction of these arrangements. Based on this review, it aims to offer reflections on future directions for this research agenda.

This paper derives five research themes adapted from the PPP research agenda outlined by Broadbent and Laughlin as a framework to guide a literature‐based analysis and critique of the relevant PPP literature published up to December 2010.

The review highlights the range of interesting contributions that extant accounting‐related research has made to current knowledge about PPP policy and procedure. From this, concentrations of research effort are identified (its largely technical, critical, procurement‐oriented and Anglo‐centric focus), and opportunities for future research are proposed. With regard to the latter, the opportunities proffered have in common a need to question the nature and functioning of PPPs, consider the complexities of PPPs in action, and explore connections between research and practice.

The main contributions this paper makes relate to understanding the “state of the art” of accounting‐related PPP research, the progress this research agenda has made in line with Broadbent and Laughlin's agenda, as well as insights into fruitful directions future research could take.

Launched in the early 1990s in the United Kingdom, Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) induced radical changes in both the public-private boundaries and the production of state-provided services. Such ‘budgetary revolution’ impacted the biggest state spender in capital expenditures, that is, the Ministry of Defence. Today many MoDs are expected to leverage on the British experience and develop their own approach of PPPs to overcome both the ineffectiveness of their defence spending and today’s stalemate in public budgets. This chapter leverages on British experiences over the past two decades to analyse the benefits and limits of PPPs in the realm of defence. Does such contractual arrangement fit defence-related investment? This chapter explores the on-going redefinition of public and private realms in military matters and it puts into relief the key dimensions of PPPs in terms of contractual arrangement.

The past few years have seen some private sector involvement in urban and small-town water provision in Ghana, as the government strives to improve access to water supply services for its citizens in line with millennium development goals. Since 1995, both central and local governments have entered into various forms of public-private partnerships (PPPs) contracts. The paper aims to examine challenges and investment needs of Ghanaian water supply sector that necessitated private sector involvement; trends, and factors that constrain the development and implementation of projects with private sector involvement in the sector.

A research approach integrating multi-stage critical review of relevant related literature and case studies is adopted in this paper. The study is further informed by the authors' experience in the sector and knowledge of PPPs. Analysis of data from different sources, using both approaches, provides both historical and contemporary approach to water management practice in Ghana.

The paper reveals that the Ghanaian water supply sector mirrors the classic challenges of public sector utilities in developing countries. Under-investment by government is the major cause of the ill-performance of the sector, necessitating private sector involvement. Management contract has emerged as a popular form of water supply PPP in Ghana. Further, optimal risk allocation has not been widely adopted in these contracts, and not yet been given much attention by practitioners and researchers in the literature of water management in Ghana.

The paper provides useful insights into the constraints of the water supply sector, development and implementation challenges of PPPs in the sector, and prompts a need for more research on risk allocation in water supply PPP contracts.

This chapter explores the rise of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in global education policy through theories of neoliberal globalization and analyzing the practices of international organizations that help to frame and establish such policies in various countries such as Egypt. PPPs have been a vehicle for promoting the involvement of transnational corporations, especially in the information and communication technology (ICT) sector, in education sector reforms. The chapter examines the case of Egypt and the role of internal and external actors in promoting educational reform, spearheaded by the largest PPP: the Egyptian Education Initiative. The chapter questions the relevance and impact of such education reforms in the unstable political, economic, and social environment of post-revolution Egypt.

Uncertainty, a state of unknowing linked to threats and opportunities, is a key characteristic of megaprojects, making it challenging for government officials and politicians to decide on their initiation. For them, implementation by the private sector adds an extra layer of complexity and uncertainty to megaproject planning. In this context, only a few studies have focussed on governing and the mobilization of uncertainty arguments in communication between government actors and private developers either in favour of or against megaprojects. The purpose of this article is to shed light on how private megaproject proposals progress towards political acceptance or rejection in public decision-making.

This process of public decision-making on private megaproject proposals is examined in the case of the Helsinki–Tallinn undersea rail tunnel. In line with the interpretive research tradition, the authors’ study draws on a qualitative methodology underpinned by social constructionism. The research process can be characterized as abductive.

The authors’ findings suggest that while public decision-making on megaprojects is a conflictual and dynamic process, some types of uncertainty are relatively more important in affecting the perceived feasibility of the projects in the eyes of public sector decision-makers.

This study contributes to the debate on uncertainty management in megaprojects, proposing a new type of uncertainty – uncertainty about privateness – which has not been explicitly visible thus far.