Search results

The use of public-private partnerships (P3s) for infrastructure delivery, particularly for highway projects, has been increasing in the USA. The purpose of this paper is to empirically evaluate the difference of P3s and non-P3 highway projects, in terms of their costs and efficiency.

An empirical model of highway construction costs was estimated using a linear regression model that explicitly accounts for the cost differential between the contracts. The differences between efficiencies was also evaluated through a two-stage analysis, where projects’-specific technical efficiencies were first estimated using stochastic frontier analysis and data envelopment analysis, and then the difference in technical efficiencies between the two groups were evaluated through non-parametric tests of means.

Controlling for various project characteristics, the P3 highway projects in the USA showed higher initial costs than non-P3 projects. However, the efficiency scores showed no significant difference between the two groups. This inconsistency between initial costs and technical efficiency scores suggests the complexity involved in P3 projects, which are not captured in the efficiency analysis.

Limited availability of P3 project data due to their immaturity (in cases of P3 projects that include operation and management) and their complex engineering specifications may have caused biased results. Importantly, the study analyzed project costs as of financial close; post-financial close variations, such as change orders during construction, cost/schedule overruns, and renegotiation of contract terms, are beyond the scope of the analysis in this study.

The present study contributes to the literature as one of the earliest empirical analyses of the performance of highway P3s in the USA. Also, this is one of the first studies to employ frontier analysis methods that focus on the efficiency of highway project delivery.

In this study, the authors revisit Alberta's public-private partnership (P3) program after 20 years of field level experience by retracing its historical emergence and institutional evolution given its political context. Specifically, the authors adopt a path dependence perspective to reconstruct and reexamine Alberta's P3 program emergence, reflect on the successes achieved, and articulate challenges that must be overcome to institutionalize P3s as part of Alberta's infrastructure delivery environment in the future.

Adopting a constructivist approach and a case-based methodology, the authors (re)analyze the activities of governmental agents, private industry, and other actors as part of a new infrastructure policy introduced in 2002 to transform the provincial institutional landscape to accommodate P3.

The authors find Alberta's P3 emergence was driven by the necessity of its infrastructure deficits, political expediency, and resource scarcity. Furthermore, with well-entrenched conservative political actors as gatekeepers, Alberta's P3 implementation demonstrated stability and incremental change simultaneously, consistent with core elements of path dependency. Following the introduction of P3 in Alberta, the province lacked formal institutional structures that would transition its P3 program from good to great and enable it to become firmly embedded in the public infrastructure delivery landscape. With the subsequent absence of P3-convinced (political) leadership and uncertainty about its P3 policy direction, Alberta was unable or unwilling to consolidate the progress made at the start of the program.

Most recently, the emergence of new political leadership in Alberta has (re)catalyzed policy progress, pointing toward a more methodical program approach, and suggesting a rediscovered confidence in P3s in the province with the establishment of a P3 Office (P3O), including nascent formal rules for unsolicited bids. These recent changes in our view make for a much more anchored policy and could lead to program sustainability and eventual institutionalization. Given the unpredictability of the recent political change, a more robust analysis of the relationship between political party control, leadership, and P3 stability is required to anticipate future policy and organizational obstacles.